Reporting on Rape Victims

To be sure, reporting on rape victims is one of the touchiest ethical issues in journalism. Society has always seemed to attach a certain stigma to sexual assault victims, a stigma that has unfortunately deterred several rape victims from reporting the incident to law enforcement. A lot of this has to do with news organizations inadvertently identifying them in a story. For example, Gretchen Howard told our class her story of being raped in her apartment during her time as a UF undergraduate. Even though she wasn’t identified by name, the story gave away enough that Howard feared her attacker would come back and assault her again. There are countless analysts and journalism ethicists who have expounded upon the best way to report on rape, and there has never been an agreed upon consensus. Of course, the big question here: should a rape victim be identified, whether by name or inadvertently though some other characteristic? I believe journalists should always allow rape victims the choice of being identified.

I have heard of journalists who have blindly identified rape victims merely after getting a “yes” from the victim in question. Even if the rape victim isn’t a minor and expressively gives a reporter permission to identify them in a story he or she is writing, the reporter shouldn’t go ahead and publish the victim’s name based on that permission alone. It would be important to examine some other issues, like finding out how much crisis counseling the victim received before deciding to go public. It would also be important to know if he or she had obtained professional mental help in dealing with their trauma. It would be crucial to get a sense of just how much guidance he or she received that allowed them to make such an important decision. If it isn’t clear that the victim gave extensive thought to whether or not to give his or her name, I don’t think it would be ethical to go ahead and use it in a story.

Stories about rape touch on the most upsetting and difficult aspects of people’s personal lives. As journalists, we have a duty to determine exactly how vulnerable these individuals are and write our stories accordingly. Rape stories shouldn’t be treated with flippancy. Although we may move on after writing a story about a rape, those affected to it surely won’t. They will always remember the tragedy and be deeply connected to it. It’s therefore important to exercise care and caution when writing about sexual assault victims. Reporters shouldn’t stop their questioning and analyzing as soon as they’ve gotten that “yes” from a rape victim.

Week 8 Abstracts

STYLE WARS IN CYBERSPACE

Copy editors are probably the most underappreciated, unrecognized members of any newsroom, but their jobs are – ironically – the most important as a last line of defense against fact, style and grammatical errors. It makes sense, then, that these disgruntled grammarians are taking to the blogosphere to try to debate and even correct some common usage concerns.

Coral Davenport’s look into the growing world of copy blogs is interesting because it delves into how the exploding blogging phenomenon has reached the seemingly far-off realm of slots and rims. Online forums and message boards provide the perfect environment for discussions about all the issues that plague copy – other editors can leave instantaneous feedback and can easily provide links to back up their style and grammar claims. Even more importantly, the vast breadth of the online world also opens up copy discussion to non-editors, such as English teachers, linguists and writers of all types.

Copy editors, understandably, feel they have little influence on correcting the mistakes of their reporters as most of their work goes on behind the scenes. If they do receive any feedback, it’s usually negative. (i.e. “You screwed up my story!”).  It was only a matter of time before the industry’s cantankerous copy editors took to the Web to try to save the lost arts of proper grammar and style. I think the more people we have researching and debating topics like style, use and grammar, the better off the industry will be. Editors should never be too proud to admit or mistakes and learn from them. Similarly, they also shouldn’t be embarrassed or miffed by other editors’ online diatribes, as most are good-intentioned efforts to improve our copy and journalism’s reputation.

I checked out a couple of the copy blogs that the AJR mentions in this piece, but I have to say my favorite was on the Web site of Raleigh’s News & Observer, where features copy editor Pam Nelson rails against clichés, delves into the nuances of word orders and looks up etymologies (www.blogs.newsobserver.com/grammar). She provides a ton of helpful examples of errors and misusage, but she never takes a condescending tone and seems to genuinely have a passion for her craft.

BOB RICHTER: PARDON THE PUNS: E-N HEADLINE WRITERS TOLD TO PLAY IT STRAIGHT

Here, Bob Richter of The San Antonio Express-News tackles the oft debated subject of headline writing and examines the paper’s policy on pun headlines. Essentially, the paper’s editor, Robert Rivard, decided to put a moratorium on pun heds after receiving tons of e-mails from readers who were furious with a so-called “serious” paper’s lame attempts at being creative. Despite a few anomalies, I have to say that very few pun headlines are actually what we could call zingers. The danger with writing these types of heds is that there’s never a mediocre pun. Most are either downright corny or impressively creative. Rivard brings up a good point when he explains that some headline writers “seem more focused on peer approval than on producing a quality newspaper for the community.” I agree. So many copy editors get obsessed with trying to humorously one-up their colleagues. This kind of immaturity just makes a reporter’s work look bad.

The two puns that  did it were “Old well ends well: River Walk threat wiped out”  and “Mumps outbreak swells.”  I don’t have too much of  a problem with the first one, albeit if there wasn’t ANY other alternative. The second is just pathetic, and sadly, a kind of hed that I’ve seen frequently in The Gainesville Sun. An obvious pun like that is just corny and doesn’t shed any kind of specific light on the problem. The headline could have incorporated what officials are attributing the mumps outbreak to, and it would have been much more informative. Plus, I don’t think a serious mumps outbreak belongs with a funny headline. It’s all about making sure the tone and the subject matter agree.

Worse, when you obsess about writing pun headlines, you often highlight something that isn’t even a focus of the story. A headline’s job is to draw readers in and ACCURATELY reflect the story below is about. I think this is the most common headline error copy editors make – misleading headlines that totally miss the mark when it comes to the heart of the story.

Headline writing really is an art, one that is hard to teach or debate with any authority. But I agree that in some cases, newspapers have to enforce rules like the Express-News “pun ban” to save its reputation and credibility with its readership.

NEWSPAPER HEADLINES LOST IN WEB TRANSLATION

Headline writing is hard enough without having to consider the online element. The challenge here, as Elinor Mills suggests, is writing headlines that not only attract online readers ( who are very different beasts than are print readers) but headlines that get you allow you to optimize your search-engine presence. Too often, I see pithy pun headlines in print and boring, uninformative headlines on a newspaper’s Web site. It should be the opposite. An online story gets rid of all the space restrictions that a broadsheet has. You have all this space – why waste it with short, dull, choppy heds? This doesn’t mean that you only strive for cuteness on the Web. It can only get you so far. Online readers who are busy or in a rush want their news now. They don’t have time to wade through cutesy, misleading heds that have absolutely nothing to do with the story. Web headline writing is a science that has to be a perfect balance of the interesting and informative.

Another equally dangerous practice is using identical headlines in print and online. As this CNET News article explains, there are just too many print headlines that don’t translate to the Web particularly well merely because of search engine minutiae.

A headline like “Wall St. lays an egg” used online would guarantee that no one would be able to  find the article. As Spencer points out, “Searchers won’t type in ‘Wall St.'”  I think “Spell it out” should be one of the cardinal rules for headline writing for the Web. I thought it was interesting that Spencer referenced one of the most talked about headlines in journalism: “Ford to city: Drop dead” on   President Ford’s denial of a federal bailout in 1975. A headline like this wouldn’t give you any search engine hits without putting “President Ford” and the more specific “New York City.”

Essentially, I think this article shows that erring on the side of specificity is one of the most important rules for Web headlines.

CASE STUDY FROM ACES BOARD

I read a discussion thread debating the following lede in The Dallas Morning News:

“Every one has had a day where 24 hours just doesn’t seem like enough time. So you rush. First work runs late. Then you realize you are out of dog food and have to run by the store before going home.

For a 42-year-old woman, that busy day was near an end when she stopped to check the mail in her apartment complex. There, a man forced her into the backseat of her car and ordered her to say nothing. Then he raped her.”

Most of the commenters bring up what I consider to be the most important criticism of this lede – using a feature lede about a rape story is just plain wrong. Reporting on a rape is one of the trickiest things to do. You risk stepping over the line of what is pertinent information and what could possibly upset or endanger the victim, especially if the attacker hasn’t been caught. I’m sure the subject of this story would be extremely upset to learn that her ordeal was trivialized like this.

When the copy editor raised her concern, this is the response she got from the metro editor:

“It conveys how an ordinary day can become a major trauma and this is why we want people to be aware of serial rapist.”

While I can understand that the writer’s point was to show how rape can happen to any one at any time, I think the most basic lesson here is that a hard news story deserves a no-nonsense lede that doesn’t try to be poetic. If this was the first time the rape was reported in the paper, I think it deserved a much different lede. If the paper decided to do a follow-up story, then MAYBE the writer could have used this type of feature-y lede.

One of the other commenters brings up the fact that copy editors who work for Gannett papers are told never to change a lead like this one. Basically, the top dogs tell their editors that breaking news gets posted on the Web with a hard news lede and then the next day you print a softer lead that’s supposed to be a sort of folo.

This is just a flawed philosophy. Online readers are usually not going to read the softer version in the next day’s print edition and loyal print readers aren’t necessarily going to be checking the site for breaking news. In almost every case, they’ll read this kind of lead and just find it insensitive.

After reading the full text of the story (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/021708dnmetcollinrape.3233173.html), I realize that the reporter was trying to make the story part of a “bigger picture” look at a series of recent rapes, but I think she could have written a better lede that doesn’t shift the focus away from the subject matter.

STORY IDEA

The Palm Beach Post traveled with deputies who serve foreclosure notices on homeowners. Often the owners leave behind an unimaginable mess either in a fit of rage or just to spite the bank. (Broken doors, soiled carpets, etc.)

I propose doing a similar piece for an Alachua County readership. The reporter could ride-along with a deputy with the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office who is in charge of serving these notices. It would be interesting to see if there considerably more of these homes taking into account Gainesville’s large student population. What about apartment complexes? Does the same problem exist?

For additional sources, I would get in contact with the workers who are subcontracted to help clean out these homes. What are some of the worst things they’ve ever had to clean? I would also talk with realtors who have been hired by the banks to try to sell homes that have been vandalized or dirtied by the foreclosed-upon owners.  How much longer does it take to re-sell these “handyman specials​”?

Story would be 25 inches with pictures of some of the homes (exterior or interior, depending on what we’d be allowed to legally take photos of). Online story could have video interview with deputy and some of the workmen who have to clean up behind the disgruntled owners. Online version could also have a chart comparing the number of foreclosure and eviction notices the sheriff’s office has had to serve over the last three or four years.

Week 7 Abstracts

Laura Wright

kgirl182@ufl.edu

TIMES ISSUES ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR REPORTERS, EDITORS

 It really surprises (and almost disturbs) me that it took The Los Angeles Times  so long to provide a typewritten, comprehensive set of guidelines for its reporters and editos. A detailed ethics codes should be the foundation of every major newspaper, and every paper should have an updated version easily available to each staff member. More importantly, this ethics code should sit right alongside the reporter’s AP Stylebook, dictionary and calculator. Memos and staff meetings aren’t enough when it comes to communicating ethical standards that have the potential to make or destroy the newspaper’s reputation. At nine pages, the Times’s ethics code is definitely shorter than some other newspaper’s, some of which look more like encyclopedias than concise pamphlets of information. I think it’s important that the Times spent more than a year discussing the ethical guidelines to incorporate into the ethics code. Setting the tone for your newspaper’s ethical practices is a big job, and you want to make sure you cover all the bases and possible ethical dilemmas that could arise.

I found it interesting that one of the guideline’s main no-no’s was sportswriters voting for awards and rankings. I usually think of ethics codes in terms of straight, general-assignment reporting, but it does make sense that there be a solid ethical foundation for journalists who cover sports, where it is easy to get caught up in the tit-for-tat, freebie atmosphere. I do agree somewhat with Sports Editor Bill Dwyre when he discusses the risk of just having coaches and fans do the voting. Sportswriters usually have a great deal of experiencing covering and analyzing the game (whatever it is) from every possible angle, so it almost makes me wonder why they shouldn’t be allowed to vote for whomever they think is the best quarterback/pitcher/etc.? I also agree with Carroll that it should be up to the committee who gives out the particular award to ensure that the voting is fair and accurately reflects who the sports world believes is the most deserving of that trophy or Hall of Fame spot.

I find the Times’s policy on anonymous sources a little vague. The standards say that anonymous sources can still be used, but only as a “last resort” to convey important information that cannot be delivered by other means. This isn’t much of a decree on the use of confidential sources. I think it should provided some more “for instance” situations where a reporter might be justified in using an anonymous source as well as those occasions where it should be mandatory to have someone go on the record. I realize that it is hard to come up with a black-and-white way of looking at journalistic ethics, but I do think the Times should have been a bit more detailed when describing one of the trickiest topics in the business.

I do like the fact that the Times included guidelines for clear, concise writing in its ethics code. This is one of the most underemphasized areas of journalism. I think every newspaper should follow suit with frowning upon the use of superlatives. Nowadays, stories are chock full of words like “biggest” and “worst” as adjectives, but if these can’t be backed up, they’re useless and a waste of newsprint.

 WHAT THE F-K ARE THEY DRIVING AT?

 I really enjoyed reading the CJR’s take on expletives in print stories. I’m with the school of thought that by omitting words like “fuck” from quotes for the sake of not offending “family-oriented” readers, you water down the feeling behind a quote, and as Gal Beckerman explains, whittle down rage into mere exasperation. I’m actually quite surprised that The New York Times chose to omit “fucking” from General Franks’s  quote, “I have to deal with the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth almost every day.” This is a fairly safe move from a newspaper that’s gained considerable prestige for taking risks and taking a noticeably liberal tack toward the Iraq war. There mere fact that the Times altered Franks’s quote without letting readers know is in itself problematic. Some may argue that the overall point behind Frank’s quote (that he doesn’t particularly like Feith) is made pretty clear even with “fucking” taken out,  but I believe that instead of shying away from words that are widely used in the English language (much to the dismay of conservatives and linguistic elitists), we should portray people truthfully as they present themselves in an interview. Just as Beckerman notes, leaving the word in would have shown just how unafraid Franks was in letting his hatred for Feith be made public. Our job as journalists is to be truth-tellers. We shouldn’t let political correctness water down our stories and ruin the context of a quote. Omission is just a big a sin in journalism as inaccuracy. If the argument is that children might get a hold of a story with a curse word, let’s be honest with ourselves. The few (if any) young children picking up a newspaper are merely shuffling through to the comics and sports sections.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE WEB LINK

I enjoyed reading this piece because I wasn’t even aware of the hotbed of controversy surrounding deep-linking. I really didn’t even know there was a term for the sort of hypertext roadmap that many sites lay out for readers. The main argument against deep linking is of course a financial one. Bypassing the homepage means missing out on a slew of ads and pop-ups, the lifeblood of most media. While I can understand the reasoning here, I feel it wouldn’t be as big of a debate if the newspaper industry wasn’t in so much financial trouble and didn’t have such a dependent relationship with its advertisers. I don’t think that newspapers should outright prohibit deep linking to their content, like The Dallas Morning News has done. People using the Web do so in the spirit of receiving a variety of content in a free and open exchange. To try to limit the vast universe that is the Internet is an ill-conceived notion and threatening to the online culture that so many newspapers are trying to embrace in an effort to keep up with their demographic. I agree that banning deep-linking to newspaper stories is interfering with readers’ rights to look at whatever content interests them, and,  as other critics claim, is like telling newspaper readers that they can’t read the sports section if they haven’t read the front page first. I don’t think that just because a reader bypasses a newspaper’s home page means that they’re completely lost to the paper’s advertisers. It’s highly likely that once readers are done reading a story on a particular page that they might poke around on the site other content and, of course, advertising.

STORY IDEA

As we’re approaching the the end of February, students are most likely finalizing their Spring Break plans. Often, this includes booking all-inclusive trips to exotic locales like Aruba or Cancun. However, there are almost always “hidden fees” added to these trip packages and according to a UMass study, students may pay up to 40 percent more than the advertised trip price on fliers or in newspaper ads. In addition to the advertised price, such travel companies may require students to pay international, credit card and late-booking fees – sometimes even a $30 fuel surcharge to offset rising gas prices.
The credit card fee can range from $15-25 and may deter students from using the payment method that offers the most protection in legal disputes. Agencies such as Springbreaktravel.com require students to cancel trip arrangements at least 60 days in advance for a full refund, an option not feasible for most students.

I would propose a story on the prevalence of students being taken in by these vacation packages, which are almost always too good to be true. I would take a look at some of the biggest names in Spring Break travel companies and see what lies in the fine print. Sources would be one or two students who’ve been scammed or misled by Spring Break trip companies, a travel expert from UF’s STA Travel office and  maybe an attorney. Online story could have forum where readers could share their experiences with travel companies; links to the Better Business Bureau and Federal Trade Commission; a box with tips on how to choose the right travel agency; and a chart comparing advertised prices for popular Spring Break packages to the actual costs.

 

Week 6 Abstracts

FRANK FEE’S TIPS FOR ACCURACY

UNC’s Frank Fee offers a compilation of some of the most useful tips on preserving accuracy. According to Fee, objective errors are the easiest to control of the six types of news errors. I’m curious to find out what the other five errors are and which he believes to be the hardest to control as a journalist. It’s ironic (and telling) that Fee begins the list of tips with “Always do the math,” being that was the topic of last week’s abstracts. Just as Fee stresses, it’s crucial to make sure the numbers are not only correct but also that they add up. Another insightful point Fee makes is that just because you get some of these numbers from lauded “officials” or “experts” doesn’t mean you should give them the benefit of the doubt. Scientists and doctors are just as capable of human error as reporters and editors, and we shouldn’t treat everything sources say as the gospel truth. Another thing we often take for granted is that a date of birth and a given age are mathematically compatible. Only rarely have I remembered to compare the two in stories that I’ve written or edited.

I can’t agree more with Fee on how crucial it is that one of the first thing a copy editor should do when reading a story is to double check the first reference of people to make sure something in his or her name hasn’t been rearranged or accidentally deleted. I’ve seen how common it is for editors and production staff to hastily cut, copy and paste portions of text while forgetting to double check these types of things. Similarly, accidentally cutting the “S” from “She” can result in a lot of embarrassment for you and your female source. No matter how new to the scene, a reporter or editor should also never be embarrassed or self-conscious in immediately pointing out a mechanical/objective editor to a supervisor. While working at the Gainesville Sun, I’ve seen several mechanical errors in stories I filed that weren’t there prior to being sent to production and copy edited. However, I’ve always been too embarrassed to mention anything to my editors for fear of sounding nit-picky or bitchy. Like Fee explains, this is just acting as an accomplice to the error and freely cooperating in lowering the standards of the newspaper.

What it all boils down to is despite how swamped you might be, taking the time to really concentrate on the copy (everything from spacing to spelling to tone) to make sure nothing is mistakenly dropped into what Fee calls the “funnel” of the editing assembly line. The farther it makes it down the line, the less likely it is to be caught and corrected. Of course, no list of accuracy tips would be complete without the journalistic adage, “Never assume.” I would bet that more than 75 percent of objective and mechanical errors that have made it to the presses were the result of a hasty assumption. We all know that assuming makes … well, you get the point.

WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA CAN LEARN FROM JON STEWART

The American Journalism Review‘s in-depth analysis of the snarky Jon Stewarts’s “The Daily Show” is full of interesting insights into the growing business of fake news and what it can teach us about the ever-evolving world of journalism. I think the most telling thing about shows like Stewart’s is truly how little they need to do to be effective and engaging. Of course, Stewart has a talented staff of writers to help him think up the majority of the show’s comedic quips, but for the most part, the video clips of the politicians he parodies speak for themselves. AJR’s Rachel Smolkin makes a wonderful point by explaining the untapped fact-checking qualities of shows like “The Daily Show.” By giving audiences first-hand evidence of the blatant contradictions that our politicians are guilty of (much like Tim Russert does on “Meet the Press” but without the biting humor), Stewart offers a no-frills and damn-funny brand of watchdog journalism.

What Stewart and his colleagues is something akin to a funny, cable television version of reputable Web sites such as FactCheck,org and PolitiFact.com, and who can argue that there isn’t a demand for such a niche? Why can’t the people who have sites like these bookmarked also subsidize their information with a little sarcasm on the side?s

Of course, there are numerous limitations that come with trying to make the news “funny,” namely presenting your readers with just-the-facts-ma’m coverage. While I do think that today’s journalists shouldn’t be afraid of sticking their necks out and putting a sense of humor into their stories, I also think much of this depends on the type of story and what kind of tone is appropriate. But any journalist that can’t laugh at Stewarts’s mockery of the media simply shouldn’t be in the business. Journalists should be able to laugh at themselves regardless of who’s doing the criticizing. Even though much of the “The Daily Show’s” mockery is done with an admittedly liberal flair, it still can teach us a lot about what NOT to do or say as a member of the press.

Dean Powers’ article in The Nation is an interesting look at the far-reaching influence of the English language on political coverage in the mainstream media. While I sort of question the motivations of an admittedly liberal magazine like The Nation when considering how big a phenomenon of choosing words that favor Republicans, it is an important insight to realize how often the media characterize both liberals and conservatives with language that seems only to describe their lifestyles and personal preferences, not their political ideology. It does seem that our political coverage is slowly becoming one devoid of real substance and instead the careful choosing of particular buzzwords and codewords that either scream liberal or conservative – “fundamentalist Christians,” “the Christian base,” “red state,” “blue state,” “elites,” and of course as Nunberg points out, the discussion of “values,” which is essentially a discussion of how, when it comes to social issues, liberal ideology and thought has left us morally bankrupt.

I agree with people like Sydney Schanberg who believe that these words – while they may be punchy and fun to use in your writing – are examples of loaded language and lazy imprecision. Why say “red state” when you can be cover all the bases and be much more concrete and – most importantly – less misleading? Words like “liberal” and “right-wing” really do carry negative connotations and only make unproductive partisan bickering worse. Any of journalism’s lauded political reporters, David Broder for example, would advise being you can’t be too concrete when it comes to writing about anything in the political arena. I think one of the most important words of advice for a political reporter is to not, as Bob Moore explains, let sources set the standard for the language you use in a story to describe the other side of a particular issue. Loaded words like “illegals” to describe immigrants working in the United States should have no place in journalism, but sadly enough, I’m sure there are more than a handful of reporters who would have no qualms about using the term.

While I have been guilty of this on more than a few occasions, it does no good to look at America’s political landscape strictly in terms of conservative or liberal, especially when most research shows that a number of Americans simply don’t fit in these neat little molds of ideological thought. Let’s face it – most of us are moderates. I think we’d see a much different, more informative political coverage if we gave up the use of “color-coded imagery” and focus on clear, concise and informative writing. Any editor could tell you that he or she prefers writing that is overly concrete over that which relies on connotative generalizations about people and their beliefs.

STORY IDEA

The Gainesville Police Department has been talking with five private companies that install video cameras at intersections to catch red-light runners. Cameras would capture video and still images of intersections, allowing police officers to review the tapes and issue tickets to the owners of vehicles that blow through red lights. According to the attorney general, these tickets would only be admissible as violations of city ordinance, NOT as a moving traffic violation. The Gainesville City Commission will be considering an ordinance that has been drafted that would allow the city to partner with a private company. The fines will range anywhere from $175-$250.

I propose doing a more in-depth article about this proposal. There are eight cities in Florida that have similar ordinances. I’d find out which cities these are, how much they charge in fines and how effective the ordinance has been in reducing accidents. I think it’s also important to talk to someone with GPD and the Gainesville City Commission to see where SPECIFICALLY the money collected from these fines would go. Would they increase with additional infractions? I’d talk to some residents (students and non-students) to get some insight into what people think about the possibility of these cameras being installed. Are the city’s motivations more to do with money than reducing traffic accidents? What statistics and figures can they produce to show that red-light running is the main cause of Gainesville’s major traffic accidents?

Story would run at 20 inches with photo of Archer/34^th Street intersection. Online story could have infographic of Florida map with the cities that already have a red-light ordinance. When you click on the different cities, the map could compare them in terms of fines, number of traffic accidents prevented, etc. Online story could also have a reader poll, video interviews with residents, and maybe a forum where readers could give feedback and keep track of when/where they’ve witnessed someone running a red light.

Week4 Abstracts

Laura Wright

kgirl182@ufl.edu

Week 4 Abstract Package

“20 UNDER 40″

Reading PRESSTIME’s list of the top 20 under 40 opened up my eyes to how much more goes into the newspaper industry than just the jobs of reporter-editor. Going to journalism school, you’re trained to think in terms of graduating and then becoming a copy editor, assignment editor, reporter, or “online person.” The “20 Under 40” show us that circulation, project management, advertising and marketing have had just as big an influence on journalism as we know it to be today. Recently, I’ve had a hard time thinking about journalism in terms of being a business like any other, but it really is. The ideas of customer satisfaction and catering to your audience all sound like mantras you would associate with the white-collar corporate world, or even the service industry, but they are just as important when it comes to the business of information. With that business, you need innovation, fresh-thinking, hard work and a willingness to adapt – all qualities that each of the 20 individuals on PRESSTIME’s Top 20 list seem to embody. The nominees come from a variety of backgrounds – from newspaper giants like The New York Times and USA Today to smaller papers and news outlets like The Tallahassee Democrat and The Norwich Bulletin.

The fact that no one on the Top 20 list is a print reporter demonstrates the industry’s evolution towards stressing new media, different ways of presenting information and providing neatly segmented bits of content for every sort of person on any kind of schedule. Every one of those on the Top 20 list is hard working and dedicated to the business of providing the highest quality of information, but what I see here as the overarching theme (which a majority of them mentioned) is the idea that you should always question the current system, always be willing to change based on what works and what doesn’t. The Top 20 all have something refreshing in common – they aren’t completely gloom-and-doom about the future and direction of the journalism industry. They don’t take the easiest approach of always yearning for “the good old days” of typewriters and stacks of notes. While they are realistic in recognizing the increased emphasis on raising profits, they’re excited and willing to take risks to keep the business Many reporters and editors, understandably so, are having a hard time making the transition from what’s always worked in the past (traditional print journalism that focuses on objectivity, the nitty gritty facts) to what may be ahead, which is a more three-dimensional way of thinking about providing information. Change is always scary, especially with industry like journalism with such a rich and steady history, but we have to learn to embrace it with excitement and a willingness to learn.

Al TOMPKINS’ CRIME STORY RESOURCES

The Poynter Institute’s Al Tompkins gives some unparalleled advice and tips for anyone who wants to go into crime reporting (or who inadvertently does when they find out that’s where most entry level newspaper reporters start out) and who wants to go beyond citing figures, statistics and all the other black-and-white minutiae that seems to be pervade crime stories. Statistics can be misleading. Sure, a 50% rise in the number of sexual assaults in Alachua County in a year may seem like a big deal, but when the number the year before was only 30, this increase isn’t really so newsworthy or indicative of any major shift or trend. We have so many commonly held beliefs when it comes to crimes (burglaries go up around the holidays, rapes are more common at night, etc.). While some of these are true, many are misconstrued. More hard-nosed, innovative crime reporting could help reverse this dangerous trend. Looking beyond the numbers and at the bigger picture is a major part of this, as Tompkins explains.

As for story ideas, Tompkins shares a wealth of them that go beyond the basic murder-arrest-imprisonment angle. The rise in juvenile crime is something that doesn’t receive much coverage, and there is some real opportunity here for examining the larger issues that play into it, like the school system and family life. The bad check story is something I never see covered and wouldn’t have thought of at all. A great story would be how retailers have taken stricter precautions to protect against bad checks, and like Tompkins said, spending a whole afternoon talking to store owners who have to deal with trying to get these “deadbeats” to pony up the cash. This story would be infinitely more interesting than a vanilla story on a local man being arrested for drug-dealing. A great investigative piece Tompkins mentions is examining the worst speedtraps in a city and tracking down what happens to the money obtained from the speeding tickets. Is it donated to some sort of charity for those hurt by a drunk or speeding driver? Does it eventually end up in the pockets of the legal system? The questions here are endless and would make for an interesting series of stories. As Tompkins suggests, far too many news outlets only report on a major prostitute sex sting. Rarely does a reporter examine if and how a city tries to prevent prostitution through drug rehabilitation and other forms of counseling. Much of our hesitancy to delve into these complex issues surrounding crime has to do with being taught to take the “Just the facts, ma’am” approach with newswriting. If we take a second to examine into the institutions and organizations around us, it might be construed as “taking sides” or being “too political.” This is the exact opposite of what should be happening in crime reporting, where there is probably the most potential to expose corruption, shed light on community problems and really change people’s lives for the better.

THAT FIRST INKLING: THE ORIGINS OF ENTERPRISE STORIES

I’ve always been curious as to how The New York Times always manages to have such a variety of extremely in-depth enterprise stories on every subject imaginable. The Times has pretty much set the standard for what it means to hatch a story idea and cover it from every possible angle with the precision and insight that make it the first name in award-winning print journalism. The results of Byron Calame’s survey to the reporters and editors of the Times provides us with a wealth of knowledge about what goes on behind the scenes of a prestigious paper. It’s telling that well over half of the initial ideas for the 23 articles came from the reporter him/herself, with none of the ideas coming from the “big 13” editors named on the paper’s masthead. This is a testament to the fact that most managing/supervising editors should be the ones who help refine or tweak an original idea if needed. The reporter’s curiosity should the first step toward an enterprise package, and like Abramson says, should “bubble up” depending on what’s happening in the community or even on a national level.

The anecdote of Jeffrey Gettleman’s Page 1 article “In Iraqi Divide, Echoes of Bosnia for US Troops” is a great example of fresh-thinking in the drudgery of stories that come out of a long, drawn-out war, where you risk rehashing the same ideas in multiple stories. At least his editors were receptive to the idea of changing the original story to something that focused more on the former Bosnian peacekeeper and how his past was shaping the way he viewed the sectarian tensions in Iraq. Reporters should feel comfortable with coming to their editors with a re-tweaked version of a story if they feel that a different angle would be more appropriate or more interesting. Some reporters may feel afraid to approach an editor with a conflicting idea, especially when the story is the editor’s brainchild, but this shouldn’t be the case.

Often, as Calame’s piece demonstrates, the simplest of actions can result in the hatching of an insightful story idea. Roger Cohen’s trip to a tennis club led to a thoughtful, well-planned story that started with a specific anecdote about Italian architecture and ended up touching on the larger issue of how different countries view change. But, as Calame points out, much of a reporter’s story ideas come from following up on previous articles, even articles written by reporters from other news outlets. Many a time, I’ve read an article in the paper and had questions about it afterward that could have been covered in a follow-up story or simply a better, more comprehensive original story. Often, when interviewing a source for one story, he or she might key you in on a trend that’s more timely and leads to an entirely different story altogether. As Calame’s research shows, story generation can be the result of weeks of thought, simply a little bit of happenstance, or both. Either way, reporters must be innately curious about the world around them and develop a keen eye/ear for what would make for a groundbreaking enterprise piece.

TABOO TOPICS IN JOURNALISM TODAY

Accuracy in Media’s political leanings are obvious, but its mission statement is even more troublesome. It advocates accuracy and objectivity in the media but derides liberals in the process and is clearly partisan in its advice-giving. Despite what Cliff Kincaid and the rest of his team at AIM seem to believe, I really don’t see the supposed liberal bias in the media. In fact, I see a lack of an opinion all around. Of course, there are the cloudy areas like Fox News and CNN, which many call the conservative and liberal forces in cable news, but as far as daily papers go, most are rife with pro-con, let’s-be-politically-correct coverage.

Of course the taboo topics that Kincaid lists are hard to cover with objectivity. No one writing about them can say with absolute honesty that he or she has neutral feelings toward the issues of gun control, homosexuality, abortion and religion. There are exceptions to the rule, but it’s naïve to pretend that even while covering the news, we can totally and completely separate ourselves from the issues. Those writing about abortion shouldn’t have to cite the link between abortion and breast cancer as the sole focus of their stories, especially if the link is based on data that are statistically insignificant. We should always be careful in what angle we take, whether it’s “liberal” or “conservative.” Creationism articles are lacking in the news, but that’s because journalists are supposed to be the watchdogs of government, and we can surely agree that religion and the government should not co-exist. Whether AIM likes it or not, the separation of church and state prevents journalists from covering the theory of intelligent design with any depth or comprehension.

The “demonizing” approach that AIM claims liberal journalists take with the issue of DDT is troubling. While AIM proclaims that journalists are clearly biased and misinformed about issues like Islam, pornography, AIDS and homosexuality, it does not cite any evidence to support its opposing stance. “DDT has saved lives and can millions more,” Kincaid says. According to whom? What kind of survey or research can he actually cite? This isn’t to say that journalists shouldn’t be held to the same strict standard when taking the “liberal” approach to covering a particular social issue, but the statements made by AIM in this piece are rife with generalizations.

Maybe we shouldn’t be so afraid of a lack of objectivity in the news. With the rising competition between “just the facts” newspapers and the frank, editorial tone used on citizen journalism Web sites, maybe we should take a stance one way or another. Our readers might like it or they might flat out oppose it. But isn’t that what freedom of choice is about?

JANET COOKE’S “JIMMY’S WORLD”

CASE STUDY

This was an even more powerful example of how easy it is to fake a story, dupe your editors … and ruin your career. (Or get a sweet cut from a movie deal based on your screw-up.) Janet Cooke’s story was full of holes and inconsistencies. It’s a wonder it got past Ben Bradlee (although, apparently he was known for being a risk-taker and brazen as far as editors go). At the same time, however, I can understand the Post‘s willingness to take the story as-is. As much as it was outlandish, it was provocative, and Cooke’s writing was captivating. It won the Pulitzer, the most prestigious award as far as the written word goes. The fact that all this happened under the watch of The Washington Post shows that it can happen anywhere. Even though it’s embarrassing and disturbing to see how a journalist could blatantly deceive readers, it’s definitely an important case study for future editors. “Jimmy’s World” undoubtedly raised the eyebrows of some editors at the Post (and hopefully not just the copy editors). If these skeptical editors had been more vocal about their concerns, this story wouldn’t have made it to print. We take most reporters at their word, but fact-checking is as important as ever, even when it has the potential to piss someone off. Since Cooke was a black woman working at a mostly white newspaper, maybe some were worried that their questioning her might have been misconstrued as prejudice. While Cooke’s legacy may be disastrous, her story is a thought-provoking lesson for anyone considering a job in journalism, especially editing.

STORY IDEA

With President Bush’s announcement of the economic stimulus plan, which includes sending out tax rebate checks to several million American families and individuals, I’d be curious to see what UF’s economics professors think about the ideas behind it and how the rebates may or may not affect students. The rebates will range anywhere from $600 to $1,200 depending on your filing status and how much you earned in 2007.

Will some students theoretically be eligible for the tax rebate? The rebates will most likely require an individual to have earned at least $3,000 in 2007, which is possible for those students who work 20-30 hours a week.

I would talk to a few working students to see how hopeful they are about receiving a check, what they would do with it (save vs. spend), etc. UF Professor Debbie Garvin, a CPA and tax expert, could give information on how this would most likely affect UF’s student population.

Another source would be UF Professor Jonathan Hamilton, chair of the Economics department. He would provide some tips on what young people should do with their tax rebates if they do end up getting one. He could also provide some insight into whether or not the rebates have the potential to reverse a recession.

15-20 inches with money-related graphic or a photo of a student working. Online story could have some sort of calculator where readers could enter their information and determine if and how much of a tax rebate they would receive. Another option for online could be a quiz to determine what you should do with the money based on your financial situation and spending habits.

Week 3 Abstracts

SKEPTICAL EDITING

There’s no doubt that this week’s theme revolves around just how common it is for fake or false information to be freely published without the slightest bit of hesitation. This either results in an embarrassed editor or, most often, an unemployed reporter with little chance of ever regaining any credibility in the industry.

Most — if not all – of the  latest newspaper reporting scandals that Reid MaCluggage hints at (Jason Blair, The New Republic, etc.) could have been prevented with more stringent, cynical editing.  Just as MaCluggage argues, the entire blame for fake or inaccurate stories can’t be placed on the reporter. The root of the problem is our tendency, by human nature, to believe everything we hear, read and see, especially if it’s seemingly sincere.

 

I think it’s crucial that MaCluggage doesn’t limit his editorial advice to just being skeptical about information in reporters’ articles. He also argues the necessity to question the implications made in these pieces. Just as many inaccuracies are made when a reporter takes a few accurate facts and figures from a rudimentary survey and makes sweeping and misleading conclusions based on them. This is how we get monthly stories about President Bush’s declining/increasing approval rate when closer examination of the margin of error of the data shows it’s more likely the president’s approval rate stayed relatively the same from month to month.

 

MaCluggage is dead on when he attributes the decline of skeptical editing to the fact that editors simply don’t have the time to read every story line by line and question the facts, figures and implications made in each. By the end of their shifts, most newsroom editors are merely reading over stories while looking for gaping news holes or glaring spelling and grammar mistakes.

MaCluggage’s idea about hiring one person whose full-time job would be devil’s advocate, who would look at every fact or assertion with healthy skepticism, is ingenious. This seemingly adversarial role of full-time skeptic would help reporters distance themselves emotionally from their stories and instead take a look at them pretending they are an incredulous reader who’s never heard anything on the topic before.

 

I believe that every story a reporter is assigned should be looked at as a perplexing mystery that requires lots of legwork and critical thinking to solve. Obviously, the who, what, why, where and how of a story are all equally important, but journalists should extend their investigation to “Is this true? Is this important? Is this misleading our readers?”

 

Obviously, MaCluggage’s push for skeptical editing requires a dramatic shift in reporter-editor relationships. It is true that too often reporters look at their editor as a good friend, a concerned equal with the shared goal of getting the story to print by deadline and without any glaring mistakes.  Maybe reporters should be more scared of their editors and what questions they raise about a given story. It may be a clichés, but it’s always better to err on the side of caution, especially when journalists are supposed to be America’s trusted truth-tellers.

JOINT OPERATING AGREEMENTS

At a time when revenue is in short supply and the newspaper industry isn’t particularly thriving, joint operating agreements seem like the best option for all involved: two separate daily newspapers with newsrooms in the same city combine their business operations while still remaining competitive – at  least in theory.  The idea is a more streamlined newsgathering process, less resources being expended and, most importantly, cost savings. Joint operating agreements allow the participating companies to operate with fewer employees; eliminate duplicate facilities, equipment, and functions; and save through bulk purchases of supplies and materials. What this means for us soon-to-be-journalism-graduates is that it’s very likely that newspapers will  be cutting costs at our expense, mainly in the way of layoffs and extremely low salaries (if they can possibly be reduced anymore, that is).

Another concern I have about JOAs is that costs are also cut at the expense of the quality and breadth of news coverage. If two news entities’ editorial departments are working together, you have to wonder if there’s any sort of diversity in the viewpoints presented in either paper. I don’t think sameness in news coverage is anything we should be striving for. Of course, many newspapers with JOAs maintain separate news and editorial departments and strictly combine their business and advertising offices. However, I wonder if this still risks reducing the amount of news stories to make way for more advertising, or worse, stories that are thinly veiled advertisements.

MEET THE NEW FACE OF HYPERLOCAL JOURNALISM

After spending years at newspaper giant The New York Times, I can understand why the switch to hyperlocal journalism was so tempting to Debbie Galant. Of course, like she explains in her online interview with USC Annenberg, hyperlocal blogs don’t really offer journalists a chance to do groundbreaking, national investigative pieces ala Watergate. However, they probably allow for much of the same hard-nosed exposes of local politics, which probably matter more to members of a small-town community in the long run than something on the national level. There seems to be a big disconnect these days with what’s going on in Washington and what residents of Smalltown, USA are talking about. Hyperlocal journalism also allows reporters to get much more reader feedback in a much more decentralized space. Forget to mention a controversial community event in that day’s blog post, and you’re likely to get dozens if not hundreds of comments. Despite criticism from many elitist journalists, readers of local blogs do expect much of the same professional polish and high-quality writing that they would expect from a big metropolitan daily. Galant’s readers, for example, have high standards for the writing on the Baristanet blog. Typos and grammatical errors are frowned upon, Galant explains in her interview. Galant’s Baristanet helps to discredit the criticism of hyperlocal blogging as being merely a space for amateur, community-newsletter- type writing. There has been quite an evolution in the direction and quality of these local blogs.

As a hopeful newspaper reporter, I admit that these hyperlocal blogs aren’t good for ‘my’ business. They have the real potential to draw much of the advertising dollars away from the newspaper industry, not to mention the potential to attract a huge base of loyal readers. This isn’t to say the newspaper industry hasn’t responded. Most if not every reporter is now being asked to maintain a specialized blog, a space where they are allowed to stray away from stuffy, hard-news writing and explore a more casual, editorial style with more chances for reader feedback and input. It will be interesting to see how major newspapers will have to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to compete with hyperlocal blogs like Baristanet.

 ‘POTEMKIN VILLAGE’ REDUX

 The Online Journalism Review’s Tom Grubisich provides a great (if not completely comprehensive list) of some of the Web’s most thriving grassroots news sites. With all the talk of how hyperlocal blogging is the newspaper industry’s greatest and newest competition, it’s nice to see some of the most concrete evidence of how an independent online alt-media is emerging. Brattleboro, Vermont’s IBrattleboro.com is, while mostly dominated by ads, a decent example of citizen journalism. It seems to provoke thoughtful discussion, mostly about politics. However, it also makes it easy for readers to submit useless or fake stories. The site’s stats page says that over 9,000 posts have been deleted as spam. Also, this doesn’t seem to be a blog where a lot of readers comment. Most of iBrattleboro’s posts only have a handful of comments. I do like the weekly polls section, however. It’s an interesting way to elicit feedback and make the site’s visitors feel more engaged.

Georgia’s BlufftonToday.com takes a different approach and merely links to local citizens’ blogs. It does seem a bit disjointed, with readers having to click in a variety of different places to find a particular story or read up on a certain topic. I think the site would benefit from a redesign, as it’s all over the place and not particularly user-friendly, which is something key for a Web site that’s supposed to promote citizen journalism. Comments are only allowed by registered users and aren’t allowed on print stories. This takes away much of the wiki journalism aspect that I think these grassroots sites should be embracing. However, I really like the fact that the site allows users to upload photos of community events or anything of interest to them. It’s a great way for locals to have a part in dictating what is newsworthy and/or interesting

Westport, Connecticut’s WestportNow.com is probably the best example of an ever-evolving and thriving citizen journalism. It has the best layout and design of all the sites Grubisich discusses. It has a good mix of image-driven stories and deeper, more text-based entries. The site is comprehensive in terms of what it covers but is also approachable and not overwhelming. I love the Year in Pictures section, which is a review of the past year through the eyes of dozens of WestportNow readers who contributed photos in 2007. This is a perfect example of taking the power out of the hands of industry and into the hands of concerned citizens with something to say.

 COMMON SENSE JOURNALISM

The University of South Carolina’s Doug Fisher gives a quick rundown of what kinds of things to think about when starting your own community journalism Web site.  He cites HartsvilleToday.com, a site created by a group of USC journalism students, as an example. It is a superb one. The design is user-friendly and the discussion posts are divided up into sizable topics like education, hobbies and government. It even provides users with helpful tips on writing posts and taking photos to submit to the site’s image galleries. The polls section and “Who’s Online?” feature are also extremely valuable.

Fisher brings up some important issues to consider when building that hyperlocal blog or Web site. The details really are important, and you have to consider what kind of niche you want the site to cater to – more personal commentary vs. the filing of traditional stories, social networking vs. reader feedback for your staff, etc. He makes a great point by explaining how linking to other Web sites can actually be a good thing. Being the entry point for access to other sites is better than having no one visit your site at all. Chances are, visitors might stick around for a bit and get hooked.

The best and most important bit of advice is to think like a user and not a bottom-line-focused publisher. To create a really useful participatory journalism site, you have to think about what kind of information is important to you, which stories really resonate. It’s impossible to cover all the bases of news (sports, breaking news, features, business profiles, etc.), so it’s good to have an idea of what kinds of stories are most timely. Just as Fisher explains, the great thing about a Web site is that it can be constantly changed and tweaked based on what users want.

It’s also crucial not to expect overnight success, at least without a good sum of capital to get the site up and keep it maintained on a regular basis. It also takes new and creative advertising strategies to help get the word out. I’m sure sites like WestportNow.com didn’t immediately take off. Citizen journalism requires an unique willingness to adapt to change, not to mention lots of hard work.

STORY IDEA – WEEK 3

As of February 19, 2009, all U.S. television broadcasts will be exclusively digital by order of the FCC. Also, as of March 1, 2007, all new television sets that can receive signals over-the-air, must include digital or HDTV tuners so they can receive digital broadcasts.

The analog switch-off ruling, which so far has met with little opposition from consumers or manufacturers, would render all non-digital televisions obsolete on the switch-off date, unless connected to an external off-the-air tuner, analog or digital cable, or a satellite system. An external converter box (an ATSC tuner) can be added to non-digital televisions to lengthen their useful lifespan. Several of these devices have already been shown, and while few are currently available, low-cost units are supposed to be available beginning this month.

Some existing analog equipment will be less functional with the use of a converter box. For example, television remote controls will no longer be effective at changing channels, because that function will instead be handled by the converter box. Similarly, video recorders for analog and tape-based VCRs will not be able to select channels, limiting their ability to automatically record programs via a timer or based on downloaded program information.

Although this switch is a year away, I’m curious to see who, if anyone, knows about it and what they’re planning to do, what they think, etc. I also wonder how this would affect UF students, who religiously watch certain TV shows every week and might have to purchase either a new TV or a converter box.

Obviously, I would first try to talk to someone with the FCC to find out more specifics about the switch-over, the equipment needed, and when it will be available. I’d also talk to Cox, Gainesville’s cable provider, to see when they’ll be selling the new converter boxes and what feedback they’ve received so far from customers. I’d also talk to some local electronics stores, like Best Buy and Circuit City, to see what they know about the switch. I would also try to gauge feedback from UF students, either by approaching them directly on campus or by going to one of Cox’s local offices, where many students go to pay their monthly bills.

The story doesn’t have too strong a time element, but I would want to run it within the next month. I imagine it would run at 15-20 inches with art of students watching TV and an info box with the basic what, where and how’s of the switch over. An online version could include a link to the FCC Web site that talks about the switch-over in detail. (http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html)

 

 

 

Week 2 Abstracts

“Where Do Story Ideas Come From?”

 

Like Roy Peter Clark declared when he visited our campus last year, there are merely two types of journalists: those who come up with story ideas and those who don’t. This is a timely issue that I think has gotten lost in all the talk of “convergence” and “new media” we’re hearing as journalism undergoes its latest transformation. But it doesn’t do any good to have reporters who are expertly trained in thinking for online when they can’t generate fully developed stories of their own. Most importantly, you’re giving your editor more work to do when you rely on him or her to hand out every story assignment — never the wisest thing to do when you’re trying to earn points with your superior. Instead of just bemoaning this problem, however, The Simcoe Reformer’s Gregg McLachlan actually lists 50 places for writers to find inspiration for fresh and innovative stories.

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m guilty of waiting around for stories to come to me. This past fall, I interned for The Gainesville Sun, and although I came up with a few interesting stories of my own, I’d often revert to the role of what McLachlan terms “the perennial assignment receiver.” Most of it was laziness, and I knew I could be doing better. Here I was surrounded by desks filled with full-time staff writers, many of whom were excitedly pitching enterprise stories to their editors and bouncing ideas off of each other, while I was simply hoping my editor would go easy on me that week and send me off to cover an event story. McLachlan’s list of 50 places (of which there are tons more) is testament to the fact that all it takes is a little effort in order to get out of the slump of passive assignment-getter. Just being observant of what people are saying around you on a daily basis (a nice euphemism for eavesdropping) can be a great jumping off point for generating original story ideas. As journalists, our job is to always keep our eyes and ears open for what could possibly be a good story, and McLachlan shows that there are concrete ways to get out there and find one. But, as he stresses, it just takes some effort. It’s certainly isn’t accomplished by passively sitting at your desk. Going to vet offices, walking through downtown – all of that requires curiosity and a proactive work ethic that is hard to come by.

While McLachlan suggests several more unusual places that I wouldn’t have though of, he does leave out an important point. Besides making you a valuable commodity in the news business, being able to come up with your own stories almost always makes the writing process more enjoyable. With that enjoyment comes taking more pride in your work. You feel more connected to the stories that you’ve seen go from an idea to a total package. You take more care to see that it fairly, accurately and comprehensively tells a great story. I think journalists would enjoy their jobs a great deal more if they weren’t simply churning out stories crafted by other people and took an active role in what they write for their audiences.

“Revamping the Story Flow for Journalists”

The online world is quickly becoming that of “wikis,” which are bits of software that allow users to create, edit and link various web pages easily. The best way to think of a “wiki” is as a collaborative Web site. Not only does the original author get to edit his or her own content but so does the rest of the online community, who’s granted the option of adding bits of extra information and knowledge where appropriate. It only makes sense that this “wiki” theme is gradually infiltrating the world of journalism. It allows for real-time reader feedback, and, more importantly, provides an open environment for sharing information, which is what every journalist’s professional goal should be anyway. MediaShift’s Mark Glaser, in his Dec. 3 blog entry, “Revamping the Story Flow for Journalists,” shows us how the Internet gives us new and innovative ways of doing story generation, reporting and follow-up. The pre-Internet journalist’s workflow of sifting through paper records and relying on letters and phone calls to the editor for feedback has recently given way to a new workflow of looking primarily to the Internet for story idea generation, background information and reader feedback.

Glaser is right on target in predicting that as more and more people look at the Internet as a collaborative space, this idea of wiki journalism will change the way future reporters find, write and follow-up on their stories. An online story will no longer be a static space once it’s published. It can be edited, corrected and retooled to provide links to outside sources. I see this as only helping journalism become more accurate, open and interested in what readers want – and without as much of the newsroom bureaucracy that can bog down a thoughtful story.

Of course, drawing upon the equally loved and criticized use of Wikipedia as an example, it must be realized that not every wiki could produce quality journalism. The reliability of reader-generated information is probably the biggest roadblock to the spread of this kind of participatory journalism. After all, if you leave a wiki open to anyone, you’re bound to get some questionable edits. However, as long as access is restricted to registered users who are required to cite their sources for anything they add to the story, I don’t see why wiki journalism can’t help improve the breadth and quality of news. It could also be used to help streamline the news-gathering process. Wikis could serve as a great tool for compiling password-protected lists of helpful (and equally unhelpful) sources. Any reporter about to start on a story could look at his or her news organization’s wikis for feedback, advice and background information.