"I Can't Hear You When You're Talking!"

We spent a lot of time in class on Monday night discussing ledes. A lede is the all-important first line of a news story. It’s supposed to hook the reader and invite them in for more information. It’ll answer some of the who, what, when, where, why and how questions, while leaving more to be discovered further in the story.

It may seem like an easy thing—writing a sentence to get someone’s attention at the beginning of a news story. I am quickly learning, however, that “easy” does not fit very well into the equation for someone taking her first class on writing for the media. There isn’t really one perfect way to write a lede sentence. It will depend on the story and on what you determine to be the most important elements of that story. My class received a good tip on how to determine the most important points to include in a lede: think about how you would tell the information to a friend right after the event happened. For example, I would be willing to bet that no one summarizing what they’d seen on MTV’s “Video Music Awards” would start with a run down on who won the award for best art direction, best choreography, or even the video of the year. Instead, you would have referred to the most unanticipated and, um, exciting event of the evening: Kanye West’s upstaging of Taylor Swift as she tried to accept her award for best female video.

Of course, how you verbalize or construct your lede may vary. Just as there may be a variety of ways to write a good lede sentence, there are also plenty of ways to screw them up. One that I’d like to discuss briefly is the idea of “burying the lede.” This is what you would have done had you decided to begin your summary of the VMA’s with information about the winner for best choreography instead of mentioning the Kanye-Swift debacle. For some reason this particular mistake really stuck out to me when my professor brought it up. I think it may have something to do with the great visual of an ostrich with its head stuck in the sand that comes immediately to my mind when I hear that phrase. It also brings me back to the title of this blog. I recently overheard an individual that I work with exclaim at one point during a phone conversation, “I can’t hear you when you’re talking!” Although I don’t know for sure what my client meant when she said that, I'm positive that it did not have to do with the volume of her friend's voice as even I could hear that he was speaking. I have a suspicion that she was trying to tell her friend that he was, in a sense, “burying his lede.” Perhaps he was trying to get a point across that was getting lost in a jumble of words or stutters. In a similar way, if the most important information somehow fails to make it into the lede or isn’t mentioned until the end of the sentence… then consider it buried.

The Stockdale Paradox

It pretty much goes without saying that there are a lot of differing opinions floating around the country right now. A lot of opinions... and even more lies, half-truths and overreactions to base the opinions on. If I'm learning nothing else in my classes right now, I have definitely absorbed this: accuracy is key in journalism. This makes sense, of course. We would not want our news to reflect inaccurate information, would we? In the early days of newspapers, editors and printers were often in danger of being thrown into jail for 'seditious libel' if they were thought to have printed something that reflected negatively upon those in power. Could you imagine if such a thing was commonplace today? Particularly in light of the many, many people out there that are sharing their opinions and spreading questionable information on talk shows, publications and blog sites.

I'm appreciative of the emphasis that fact checking has in my classes now, as I am sure that it will help me to develop as a trustworthy source for others in the future. I'd like to be able to say that other people putting forth information, whether on a personal blog or in a very public news program, newspaper or radio talk show, were taking the time to really look at the facts before stating their opinion or passing along their information. However, this is just not the case. When it comes to today's media, we must continue to have faith that the information we are getting is accurate, while at the same time understanding the reality of the times in which we live. The authorities are no longer enforcing things such as 'seditious libel' and we, as consumers, have to accept some responsibility in the fact checking process ourselves. It is my goal to be a journalist that is dependable and able to verify facts that I present in my stories; none-the-less, when it comes to debatable topics, in an age when so many people can so easily pass along second-hand information and opposing viewpoints, I would challenge readers to double check the facts for themselves as well.

I'd like to take a minute here to pull from recent events, both public and private, to demonstrate the importance of personal fact checking. As I mentioned at the beginning of this blog, we are regularly presented with differing opinions and questionable information. Our country feels so divided at times, that it's almost as if we are speaking different languages. So in order to get my point across here, let me use a language I'm sure we can all understand: food. And not just any food: dessert...

I have a friend, Mary-Butler, who decided to celebrate her birthday recently by enjoying some cherry pie. At least--she hoped she would enjoy the pie. See, when MB and her husband, Matt, went to The Fresh Market and picked up the "no sugar added" cherry pie, it resulted in some interesting reactions from the staff. They quickly learned from the three women behind the counter that it was probably not the best choice. At least, in their opinion. After all, THEY certainly wouldn't eat it! Now mind you, although they had baked the pie themselves, none of them had actually TRIED it. The strong reaction they felt was based on the fact that A) it wasn't exactly like the kind they would make at home and B) it had already been the subject of one woman's complaint. She'd apparently returned her pie to the store, complaining loudly that it was too sour and disgusting. And thus the poor pie was labeled so in the minds of these bakers. But it didn't stop there. The same complaint story was told to Matt and MB again by the boy who checked them out. He, too, hadn't actually tried the pie himself, but based on the woman's reaction and subsequent reaction of the bakers, he assured Matt and MB that they could get a full refund if they brought even one piece back because it was so bad.

Well, you can imagine that they were a little bit nervous about trying the pie, what with all the negative publicity that it was getting. None-the-less, they took the pie home and served it up. And I'm here to tell you that it was one DAMN GOOD PIE. I wouldn't have changed a thing about it. Not only is it a healthier version than the sugary, canned filling that many cherry pies are made of, but it really tasted great!

What does this have to do with opinions in the country, accuracy and fact checking, etc., etc.? Well, in case the metaphor wasn't as obvious as I'd hoped, my point is this: there are a lot of opinions out there, most of which are not based on fact, but merely on the views expressed by someone with an agenda. I'm not asking anyone reading this to agree with me on the debatable issues, such as healthcare, that are on the table at the moment. All I'm asking is that, as a nation, we stop getting wrapped up in the hype and other people's opinions and start checking facts for ourselves before jumping the gun on something. Don't pass along an email that you can't verify for sure came from the original source, or was actually stated by the source that the email claims it was stated by. Did you hear it yourself? Did you look at the bill, etc., in question yourself and read through it to find out if the claims people are making are true? How accurate is the news source? What is their reputation when it comes to fact checking? We all know how dangerous it can be to spread water-cooler gossip. Stop to ask yourself what is really important to you and what you feel is important for your fellow man. Then go to the sources for yourself. If you're going to take a stand, know what you're standing on. AND-- know what it is you think you're standing against. Make sure the two really do line up like you think they do.

And maybe what you find yourself really standing on isn't going to be the same platform that is seems like everyone around you is crowded on to. But if you still think that's where you should go, just be sure to take a poll of how many of them have actually taken the time to taste the pie for themselves before you try to squeeze onto the stand with them.

Or better yet, don't take their word for it. Don't take my word for it. Try an honest bite of the truth for yourself and see what you think. Here are some places to start:

http://www.factcheck.org/

http://wordpress.asc.upenn.edu/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/

Illusion of Punctuation

A favorite artist of mine is M.C. Escher. I am a huge fan of his optical-illusionist style. There’s something about the trick of an illusion that many people find appealing, particularly in our image-driven society. For example, take a look at the following image. What do you see?

Some people will immediately see a white vase in the center of a black background. Others will see two shadow profiles looking at one another against a white backdrop. It all depends on what you see as the positive and negative in this picture. So what does this have to do with journalism? In the same way that a play on the positive and negative space of a picture can make an image appear to be something it isn’t, subtle changes in punctuation can make an entire paragraph have completely different meanings. Our professor gave a good example of this in class on Monday night. She presented us with this letter and asked us to fill in the punctuation:


Dear John
I want a man who knows what love is all about you are generous kind thoughtful people who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior you have ruined me for other men I yearn for you I have no feelings whatsoever when we are apart I can be forever happy will you let me be yours
Gloria


I, along with the rest of the class, ended up with something like this:


Dear John,
I want a man who knows what love is all about. You are generous, kind, thoughtful. People who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me for other men. I yearn for you. I have no feelings whatsoever when we are apart. I can be forever happy—will you let me be yours?
Gloria


This version, though possibly leading one to wonder about Gloria’s mental health, is really pretty positive. Who wouldn’t want to be so thoroughly admired?


That’s where the illusion of punctuation comes in. With nothing more than some simple re-placements of periods, commas and the like, you end up with a very different letter:


Dear John,
I want a man who knows what love is. All about you are generous, kind and thoughtful people who are not like you. Admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me. For other men I yearn. For you I have no feelings whatsoever. When we are apart, I can be forever happy. Will you let me be?
Yours, Gloria


Who appears to be the one with the mental issues now? I thought this exercise was very effective in helping to prove the importance of punctuation in writing. Although we’ve developed some pretty good tools for getting a certain tone across in today’s online writing (e.g. use of emoticons, USE OF CAPS LOCK TO SHOUT IT OUT) there is no replacement for good grammar and use of punctuation. Unlike optical illusions, which tend to break the rules of how we process visual information, punctuation serves as a kind of boundary for our mind to make sense of what would otherwise be a confusing, jumbled mess. However…dun jst tAk my wrd 4 it. Try sndN n somTIN lIk DIS 4 yor college entrance essay, o a job app!