Tagged: journalism

How Ira Works

I really enjoyed by Radio courses during my degree, and as a radio student I hold This American Life on an incredibly tall pedestal. I really enjoyed a recent interview with Ira Glass on LifeHacker, particularly his general practice and advice to aspiring journalists/writers:

“I learned my technique from a great print editor named Paul Tough, who was at the New York Times Magazine and Harper’s, and worked with our show a lot in the early years. It’s so basic I worry it doesn’t bear going into here, but just in case it’s handy to another writer or editor, here we go:

When I come out of an interview, I jot down the things I remember as being my favorite moments. For an hour-long interview usually it’s just four or five moments, but if out I’m reporting all day, I’ll spend over an hour at night typing out every favorite thing that happened. This is handier than you might think. Often this short list of favorite things will provide the backbone to the structure to my story.

Then I transcribe the tape or have it transcribed by someone. Getting every word right isn’t as important as having something on paper for each sentence that’s been said, because to make radio stories, you edit by the sentence. For some reason in the radio biz we don’t call these transcripts, we call them tape logs.

Then I print out the log and mark it up. Every possible quote I might use, I write a letter next to, A, B, C, etc. As I do this, on a single piece of paper, I make a list for myself of the quotes. So when I’m done, there’s not just the tape log, there’s a piece of paper with tiny handwriting on it, listing the quotes “A – he describes the old house, B – what it was like the moment he came home, C – his sister warned him,” etc. Any quote that’s especially promising gets an asterisk. Any quote I’m sure I cannot tell the story without gets two asterisks.

I'm Ira Glass, Host of This American Life, and This Is How I Work

The point of this is that it gets all this inchoate material—the sound you’ve gathered—into a form where you can see it all on one page. You see all your options. It’s in a form where your brain can start to organize it. Also, writing the list sort of inserts all the quotes into quick-access RAM memory in your head in a helpful way. I find that the important first step to writing anything or editing anything (half of my day each day is editing) is just getting the possible building blocks of the story into your head so you can start thinking about how to manipulate it and cut it and move it.

Listing the quotes this way is also important because a radio story, unlike other kinds of writing and even other kinds of journalism, is usually structured around the quotes. You organize the beats of your plot around the most compelling moments you have on tape. (Though I learned this from a print journalist so I guess it’s applicable there too.)

Next I stare at my one-page list and think about what would be a fun or compelling beginning. (Okay, I’ve been thinking about that since I decided to do the story but now it’s down to brass tacks: what actually works on tape and what are the many things that I tried that failed?) Usually there are two or three decent options for the beginning of the story and one or two obvious possibilities for how to end it. Then I think about what really are my very favorite moments and what doesn’t need to be in the story. And then I sketch a structure based on my letter code: okay, F is the opening beat, then do C and D and then jump to M and N and end on G. And then I write. Usually my list will include a few extra beats that I’m not sure if pacing will permit. When I get to that spot in the writing, I’ll know whether to include them or cut them.

This technique lets you go from many hours of interview tape to a concise, workable structure very quickly. It’s hard to imagine how you could do it more efficiently.2

I'm Ira Glass, Host of This American Life, and This Is How I Work

I’d just say to aspiring journalists or writers—who I meet a lot of—do it now. Don’t wait for permission to make something that’s interesting or amusing to you. Just do it now. Don’t wait. Find a story idea, start making it, give yourself a deadline, show it to people who’ll give you notes to make it better. Don’t wait till you’re older, or in some better job than you have now. Don’t wait for anything. Don’t wait till some magical story idea drops into your lap. That’s not where ideas come from. Go looking for an idea and it’ll show up. Begin now. Be a fucking soldier about it and be tough.”

Breaking news or BREAKING the news?

Lately I’ve been wondering: have we traded accurate news for breaking news?

Thinking about my blog posts for this course, the role of social media in news reporting has constantly been on my mind in one way or another, and I find myself analysing media more than I normally would.

As I watched my Twitter feed a couple of nights ago, suddenly I was hit with an epiphany: in this world driven by ratings, we are constantly competing for breaking news, and are sacrificing accuracy.

Admittedly, it is my (guilty?) pleasure to get my news from Twitter, when I know I should be on the BBC website. Or reading a newspaper – remember those? With the actual hours for a deadline? Where they can actually fact check?

But there’s just something so appealing about finding out what is happening in the world in 140 characters or less. (I feel myself making a mockery of my generation, but I just can’t stop!)

Justin Bieber responds to news he is "dead"

We only have to look at the plethora of celebrity death hoaxes on Twitter to know we can’t believe everything we read. See: Justin Bieber, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Morgan Freeman, Hugh Hefner.

Perhaps more symbolically, blatant spelling and grammar errors are commonly published – something that infuriates me when I read news.com.au, or any news publication with mistakes. It just shouldn’t happen, and it takes me back to a year ago when my News Reporting class mantra was: If the audience can’t trust you on the grammar, how can they trust you to get the facts right?

That saying certainly rings true. If such careless errors are made in spelling and grammar, how credible is the actual reporting?

Obviously, round-the-clock news television and the internet have shortened the news cycle immensely, and created problems for journalists to check facts and have their copy proofread.

Dan Levy of the bleacher report blames Twitter for problems with reporting:

“Twitter has ruined the pastime of patting a reporter on the back for breaking news. If you want to blame anything for how irrationally consumed media insiders have become about who broke a story, that blame goes to Twitter.”

Hip Instagram photo of a rubber ducky courtesy of juanpol via Flickr

Indeed, social media has created an ambiguity that extends beyond the scope of who is breaking the news, and blurs the line of what actually makes a reporter. Anyone can become a citizen journalist on their blog, break stories on Twitter (think the US Airways Hudson plane crash) or become Instagram famous for their kitsch photos.

But on the other end of the scale, without social media and mobile phones, how much would we miss? Amateur footage of an incident that otherwise would have gone unnoticed without a news crew around? The Arab Spring may have never reached the heights it did, and dictators may never have been overthrown without the humble mobile phone and Twitter. And along with that, journalists are using social media to discover stories and find sources.

Rich Brooks put it eloquently in his article for Social Media Examiner:

“We’ve moved from a passive news cycle—in which the journalist finds news, reports it and the audience consumes it—to interactive applications of news.”

Brooks also reported on trends found in the The Pew Research Center’s 2011 Annual Report on American Journalism:

  • In 2010 every news platform saw audience stall or decline… except the web.
  • For the first time ever, more people got their news from the web than newspapers… the gap for TV is closing, too.
  • Newspaper newsrooms are 30% smaller than in 2000.
  • Nearly half of all Americans now get some form of local news on a mobile device.
So what comes next?

How has your news-consumption changed with the rise of social media and online resources? Do you find news sources more or less trustworthy when delivered over social media? Where do you see the future of journalism heading as social media evolves? And have you found the irony in this post as there are bound to be grammatical errors?