It seems having grown up with two engineers for parents who have always insisted that "I've forgotten more than you'll ever learn" and that their intelligence is far beyond my own, and then having gone to a semi-private, highly-regarded high school have given me the misperception that elders and people who outrank me are, by default, smart. This, as I have learned this summer, is not so.
It started when I wrote the following lead on a style article: "_____ is a typical 13-year-old boy. He likes to read Harry Potter, ride his bike and play his sheep-skin bagpipe."
My editor, in her infinite wisdom sat me down and very seriously explained that it is not typical for a 13-year-old boy to play a sheepskin bagpipe, or any bagpipe for that matter. This is when I realized my editor is an idiot.
This escalated today.
ME: Is there a preferred way to spell encased/incased?
Copy editor: Encased. The latter is not a word.
ME: Oh, dictionary.com said it was with the same meaning. OK thanks. Copy editor: Maybe, but no dictionary I've ever read. Encased.
^That is the exact conversation, copy and pasted. How many dictionaries does he read? It doesnt help that the man has the tiniest, most bruised, sensitive ego in the world which leads him to snap to maintain what he thinks is dignity. If I say "Hey copy editor, isnt is 'more than' not 'over'?" (Which, I know it is) he will take me aside and tell me not to correct him -- He knows what he's doing. I know this because that exact situation happened.
I have less than two weeks left and I'm excited to leave. For such a small paper it has a lot of ego and a lot of crazy.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Nicht so schleich
After that last incident things are not so bad. Because I'm not allowed near anything that looks like ad copy, I have been doing news and news features. I'm beginning to like what I'm writing and I'm learning how to fall in love with the subjects I cover -- this is important because otherwise I'm apathetic and it shows in my writing.
I went to lunch with a professor who works for the daily paper. When e found out I dont love my job he offered me one at the daily. I applied, but it is a copy editing position -- something I'm not particularly interested in at this time.
At said lunch I thought it would be brought up that I would/probably would work for the daily when I graduate in May. This was not the case. He told me that I need to be in a city -- something I have now accepted. When I get off the stage with my diploma in hand I plan to head off to NYC or DC. It's where I belong.
I went to lunch with a professor who works for the daily paper. When e found out I dont love my job he offered me one at the daily. I applied, but it is a copy editing position -- something I'm not particularly interested in at this time.
At said lunch I thought it would be brought up that I would/probably would work for the daily when I graduate in May. This was not the case. He told me that I need to be in a city -- something I have now accepted. When I get off the stage with my diploma in hand I plan to head off to NYC or DC. It's where I belong.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Ad incident
After being dragged to a news meeting which was really a "client" meeting in which the advertisers told me what I could and could not write I am no longer allowed near anything that resembles ad copy because I didnt treat the clients the way they were supposed to be treated. The editor did not tell me they were clients, he told me they were sources. After approving all my stories he then told me to pitch it to the ad people who told me what I could and couldnt run. My dismissiveness was apparently insulting and I was taken off the insert which the editor told me I would write in its entirety.
Since then, I have been banished from anything that even vaguely resembles ad copy. I was originally hired to write for a touristy section. I will no longer be doing that. Instead, I am constricted to news and newsy arts articles, which is exactly what I wanted in the first place. Things are getting better because of this. I took a stand and now I'm where I want to be.
Since then, I have been banished from anything that even vaguely resembles ad copy. I was originally hired to write for a touristy section. I will no longer be doing that. Instead, I am constricted to news and newsy arts articles, which is exactly what I wanted in the first place. Things are getting better because of this. I took a stand and now I'm where I want to be.
Friday, June 13, 2008
How I saved Seymour Hersh
Today Seymour Hersh, one of the most famous investigative reporters of all time, came to one of the seminars at the program I'm in to speak. He sits down and starts lecturing. Cameras are on and he isnt shy about his disdain for them. After not too long he makes them leave. So the camera people pack up and go home. He then starts talking about this huge new story about the war in
Not too much later, one of my colleges asks a question about how he keeps his notes. He leans back to reach for his notebook that has his
I get to Hersh, completely out of breath... he is still screaming... and I hand him his bag. He shouts at me "Why the hell did you steal my bag?" and walks back inside, sits down and continues the lecture like nothing happened.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Lessons learned I
The one lesson I have been unable to wrap my head around after listening to these professional journalists and experts is wanting change and being objective. The division between opinion and news. Most people here call investigative journalism "news with a purpose" or "advocacy journalism."
In news when there is a community issue the way I've covered it is by writing a "he said, she said" piece. This is when I show one persons opinion of an issue and then the others without injecting my own opinions or suggestions. This seems to be the big no-no of this camp. All the journalists are saying of my, and most reporter's methods, "What's the point of that?" because it doesn't make much of a difference.
I dont understand how to be an 'objective' news source with opinion or motive. It is against EVERYTHING I learn in journalism classes.
Before I go back to my news editor desk at The Maine Campus I need to figure this out.
In news when there is a community issue the way I've covered it is by writing a "he said, she said" piece. This is when I show one persons opinion of an issue and then the others without injecting my own opinions or suggestions. This seems to be the big no-no of this camp. All the journalists are saying of my, and most reporter's methods, "What's the point of that?" because it doesn't make much of a difference.
I dont understand how to be an 'objective' news source with opinion or motive. It is against EVERYTHING I learn in journalism classes.
Before I go back to my news editor desk at The Maine Campus I need to figure this out.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Day two at journalism camp
Today I met with more amazing people in the industry. People from the New York Times, Democracy NOW, the Center for Responsive Politics, Mother Jones and more.
One of the biggest impact lectures was by Paul Hendrickson who told us to "turn over every stone." This means to talk to everyone and go the extra mile because it is when you dedicate more effort than you need to to a story that you get something amazing. He said there is an idea of "if you need it, it will come" sort of philosophy in journalism. I could relate to this. One example was when someone needed a human part to a boring crime story, a policeman came up in front of him and interviewed a man who had been robbed. He got exactly what he needed exactly when he needed it. This happens a lot. What Hendrickson said about his views on turning every stone were powerful. He said when he does not ask that extra source, doesn't ask that extra question, doesn't do that extra bit of background research and doesn't find out that little extra something -- those are the things he most regrets. Not turning every stone leaves him with the most regret of what he does because he knows he could have had a much better story with not so much extra work.
Another lecture had to do with computer assisted reporting which I think is absolutely imperative that investigative journalists know how to use. I was a little disappointed by this presenter, though the resources given to us were stellar.
Amy Goodman from Democracy NOW was definitely the stand-out though. Her views, though radical, are amazing. She, like almost every other reporter here, believe that "investigative reporting" and "advocate reporting" are synonymous. This astounds me. It throws ideals of objectivity to the wind and says "No, we need change." I'm not sure I'm ready to accept this yet since my journalism professors would cringe and shrivel like the Wicked Witch of the West if they heard this, I'm sure. It is an interesting stance.
One of the biggest impact lectures was by Paul Hendrickson who told us to "turn over every stone." This means to talk to everyone and go the extra mile because it is when you dedicate more effort than you need to to a story that you get something amazing. He said there is an idea of "if you need it, it will come" sort of philosophy in journalism. I could relate to this. One example was when someone needed a human part to a boring crime story, a policeman came up in front of him and interviewed a man who had been robbed. He got exactly what he needed exactly when he needed it. This happens a lot. What Hendrickson said about his views on turning every stone were powerful. He said when he does not ask that extra source, doesn't ask that extra question, doesn't do that extra bit of background research and doesn't find out that little extra something -- those are the things he most regrets. Not turning every stone leaves him with the most regret of what he does because he knows he could have had a much better story with not so much extra work.
Another lecture had to do with computer assisted reporting which I think is absolutely imperative that investigative journalists know how to use. I was a little disappointed by this presenter, though the resources given to us were stellar.
Amy Goodman from Democracy NOW was definitely the stand-out though. Her views, though radical, are amazing. She, like almost every other reporter here, believe that "investigative reporting" and "advocate reporting" are synonymous. This astounds me. It throws ideals of objectivity to the wind and says "No, we need change." I'm not sure I'm ready to accept this yet since my journalism professors would cringe and shrivel like the Wicked Witch of the West if they heard this, I'm sure. It is an interesting stance.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Investigative Journalism Camp
For the next week, this blog will take a new direction of covering my time at an investigative journalism camp in Connecticut. I will meet with some of the top people in the field.
I've met with Jim Wooten who worked with David Halberstam -- the guy the camp was created in memory of. He said that unless you have the burning fire in your belly for journalism and you know it is the only profession for you to go home because you wont do the profession any good.
I agree whole heartedly.
Ralph Nader then came in and said the same. He shook my hand and signed a book for me after I asked him a few questions about the "myth of a free press."
My favorite today is definitely Roberta Baskin though. She worked for national news -- CBS in particular, and left after she did an investigative piece on Nike. The producers took it off the air after its original running because a Nike/CBS deal before the Olympics. The CBS reps then more Nike apparel on the air. I think it is so brave of her to stand up against that and go to another news station. The best things about what she said though involved her ambitions as a reporter. She said she never gets boring stories because everywhere she goes she pitches so much her editors are too busy to give her anything. She assigns everything herself, therefore she gets to report exactly what she wants. This is so smart.
The FOIA lecture didn't hold my interest, but I know I should know it. I feel that the source: Alex Wood wasn't the best and couldn't convey the information in an interesting way, a skill which I'm beginning to realize it of utmost importance.
Another thing I'm learning that is of high importance is writing about marginalized groups. It is hard to think about since I write in Maine and New Hampshire, both of which are 99 percent white, but those are the types of stories which seem to make the most impact. Though Roberta discussed how she would never take an assignment that did not have a wide-spread impact. She also said she would never be "assigned" a story because she pitches so many to her editors -- ones she researched beforehand and know her editors would be interested in that they are too busy to assign her to anything she doesn't want to do. "Drivel" seems to be one of the largest chunks of people's clip books, this seems like a good way to resolve this.
One subject we have touched on which UMaine hasn't is the idea of journalistic independence. This seems radical to me, because although I have a sense of independence from my editors, papers and each institution's influences, I didn't know I was supposed to. It's a hard compromise between being independent and doing your job as a salary employee.
When I mentioned my problems with work and how I'm not particularly happy and not doing exactly what I want to do, I got some amazing advice from ABC World News' (and The New York Time's) Wooten who shouted "USE THEM. USE THEM. USE THEM." He told me to get the clips I want to get-- the ones that will take me to the paper I want to be at.
The main thing I'm taking away from this camp so far is that only the people who have real drive, intensity and "fire" make it in investigative journalism. It makes me more confident that I can succeed. Even surrounded by 24 others who were accepted into the same program, I'm still the most "intense."
*I will post my full notes from each workshop at a later date.
I've met with Jim Wooten who worked with David Halberstam -- the guy the camp was created in memory of. He said that unless you have the burning fire in your belly for journalism and you know it is the only profession for you to go home because you wont do the profession any good.
I agree whole heartedly.
Ralph Nader then came in and said the same. He shook my hand and signed a book for me after I asked him a few questions about the "myth of a free press."
My favorite today is definitely Roberta Baskin though. She worked for national news -- CBS in particular, and left after she did an investigative piece on Nike. The producers took it off the air after its original running because a Nike/CBS deal before the Olympics. The CBS reps then more Nike apparel on the air. I think it is so brave of her to stand up against that and go to another news station. The best things about what she said though involved her ambitions as a reporter. She said she never gets boring stories because everywhere she goes she pitches so much her editors are too busy to give her anything. She assigns everything herself, therefore she gets to report exactly what she wants. This is so smart.
The FOIA lecture didn't hold my interest, but I know I should know it. I feel that the source: Alex Wood wasn't the best and couldn't convey the information in an interesting way, a skill which I'm beginning to realize it of utmost importance.
Another thing I'm learning that is of high importance is writing about marginalized groups. It is hard to think about since I write in Maine and New Hampshire, both of which are 99 percent white, but those are the types of stories which seem to make the most impact. Though Roberta discussed how she would never take an assignment that did not have a wide-spread impact. She also said she would never be "assigned" a story because she pitches so many to her editors -- ones she researched beforehand and know her editors would be interested in that they are too busy to assign her to anything she doesn't want to do. "Drivel" seems to be one of the largest chunks of people's clip books, this seems like a good way to resolve this.
One subject we have touched on which UMaine hasn't is the idea of journalistic independence. This seems radical to me, because although I have a sense of independence from my editors, papers and each institution's influences, I didn't know I was supposed to. It's a hard compromise between being independent and doing your job as a salary employee.
When I mentioned my problems with work and how I'm not particularly happy and not doing exactly what I want to do, I got some amazing advice from ABC World News' (and The New York Time's) Wooten who shouted "USE THEM. USE THEM. USE THEM." He told me to get the clips I want to get-- the ones that will take me to the paper I want to be at.
The main thing I'm taking away from this camp so far is that only the people who have real drive, intensity and "fire" make it in investigative journalism. It makes me more confident that I can succeed. Even surrounded by 24 others who were accepted into the same program, I'm still the most "intense."
*I will post my full notes from each workshop at a later date.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
