Suggestions for helping reporters focus stories A line editor sent me this e-mail. What suggestions do you have for him? So how do you coach
focus? I have a reporter who is very smart and has lots of good ideas,
but her long enterprise stories are always lacking a clean point. Her
budget lines tend to be very long, indicating she can't focus the story
going in. How do you help a reporter like that learn to sharpen her ideas? Some thoughts on your question about helping writers focus their stories: First of all, you've
got to play hardball. Unfocused stories simply should not be published. Fact is, you don't know. And if the story is not focused, publishing it is a waste of time because no one is going to read very far into it anyway. If you find yourself tempted to publish it because you need to fill a big hole in the paper, don't do it. Run wire. (The AP features digest is just one of several sources for quality enterprise every week.) The writer described by the line editor in Michael Weinstein's memo is far from unusual. Every writer needs help with focus sometimes, and most, especially on long stories, need it every time. The focus question needs to be addressed first not when the reporting is finished but at the idea or assignment stage. If you send a writer out the door with an assignment to "follow yesterday's murder" or "take a look at the new utility rates," you are asking for trouble. At the assignment stage, writer and editor should kick around possible angles and approaches. A folo on a murder, for example, could be a profile of the killer, or the victim, or the investigating officer or the community where the crime took place. It could be a piece about forensic science or the applicable law. It could be a tick tock on the crime. Or a tick tock on the investigation. It could be an examination of the impact of the crime on the victim's family. Or the accused's family. Or the community. And that's just off the top of my head. Writer and editor don't have to decide which to pursue at this point, but they should agree on which angles sound interesting and then take a sniff -- do a little reporting to see which is the best. Then they talk again and make a decision that will guide the rest of the reporting. When the reporting is done, the writer is likely to be lost in details. After all, he has been spending hours, or even days or weeks, gathering them. Now he needs to figure out what it all adds up to, and the editor needs to help. (It is not the editor's role to make this decision for the writer.) How can an editor help? I usually begin just by asking what the story is about. Often the writer can't tell you, and instead starts rattling off details, facts, quotes. Just listen. In the telling, the writer may well stumble over the focus and recognize it. And if he says it and doesn't recognize it, you can say, "Hey, I like what you said just then." Example: An AP writer returned from an Alaska trip with bulging notebooks for four terrific stories. When I asked what one of them was about, he started rattling off details about a remote little town and the people who lived there. They were end-of-the-roaders -- folks who had been chased across the lower 48 and up to Alaska to escape traffic, malls and other (to them) hateful aspects of modern civilization. At last they had settled in a place as remote as one could be and still remain in the United States. And then one morning they awoke to discover a huge ship at their dock. A cruise line had decided to make their quaint little town a tourist stop! And boy were they mad. At one point in the telling, the writer said, "Is there no place to escape to anymore?" And then he stopped, startling himself with the clarity of those words. He smiled, I nodded and he went off to write. It often works like this. You just listen, never say a word, and the writer goes off thinking his editor is a genius for helping him find the focus. If this listening
strategy doesn't produce the desired result, there are questions I ask
that seem to help. Among them: When the writer and
editor finally get a focus they agree on, it should be immediately written
down. (If the story is to have a nut-graph, this will be it.) And if this
is a story that will take several days to write, this focus statement
should be printed out and taped to the writer's computer terminal so he
never loses sight of it. It should guide every decision about the writing
and editing of the piece.. This is not an original idea, but I tell my students before they write to come up with a point statement -- a single sentence (OK, maybe 2) that says what this story is about, why it's news today and why readers should care. Have them write it on a Post-it note and stick it on their computer monitor. Then, everything to be included in the story has to pass a test: Does it contribute to the point statement? If not, it probably doesn't belong in the story. The point statement
often ends up being either a summary lead or a nut graph. Jim's point about theme statements is a good one. I also ask the writer to write a headline for the piece. Or a headline and a deckhead. Sometimes, if I'm feeling extra vicious, I'll ask them to write the story's point in three words, a noun, an active verb, and an object. These generally emerge as themes, rather than a story focus, but they can lead to a theme statement. Maybe, if the story is a narrative, you can get them to outline the complication, development and resolution this way. The story of the Pied Piper then would be, Rats Overrun City. City Hires Ratman. Ratman Kills Rats. City Stiffs Ratman. Ratman Steals Children. Moral: Keep Your Word. Or...Flutists Kick Butt. I ask them what, from the information they've gathered, is the one thing that the reader MUST know. A story must have one dominant meaning. I ask them what surprised them most about what they learned. I ask them how the story will end. If they can visualize that, it can give them clues of how to get there. That can, in turn, give them clues as to what the story is about. I ask the writer to put away her notes and start writing as fast as she can and see if logical patterns of meaning emerge. I ask him to write a bunch of leads as fast as he can. Maybe a dozen. I ask her if anything funny happened. I ask him where the action is. I ask what is the MAIN development in what they've learned. I ask, where does the emotion lurk? Where, as a friend of mine here calls it, is the ``emotional center'' of what they've discovered? Recent, painful personal experience has shown me that not all of these tricks work. If that happens, the structure of the piece may reveal the meaning and, thereby, the focus: is it a journey? a trial? a chronology? an athletic event? does it have a strong central character who successfully overcomes obstacles? If that fails, just forget the damned focus. Include a nice doggy in the story. People will always read about a nice doggy. Finally, if none of
this works just write the damn thing and see what emerges. Focuses and
points of insight can evolve or suddenly reveal themselves during the
drafting stage. This isn't efficient (I once wrote about 4,000 words of
a magazine piece before I figured out I'd focused it completely wrong.
The horror, the horror.), but sometimes it was all that works for me. Many reporters I have worked with also had a problem with defining the budget line. The excuse was that they were still reporting and didn't want to come in with preconceived notions. The end result? An unfocused story. I think you can avoid preconceived notions and still define it on the front end. Your reporter might ask herself: What kind of story is this? Trend, profile, analysis, etc.? Then, when he/she knows what kind of a story he/she is writing, ask this question: What is the most important part of this story? That may change along the way, but always keep the question in mind. After the reporting is done, have him/her look at the notes. A big part of the problem starts there. Remember the reporter from the S.F. Chronicle (I think) who talked to the Training Editors conference last year? The editors in the audience made a point to emphasize the importance of organizing and prioritizing her notes. I think many reporters get stuck with so much information at this stage. They don't know how to separate out the good stuff from the bad. Once the notes are prioritized, outline, outline, and outline! Of course, it is very
important to keep in contact with the assigning editor to tell of changes
in focus or theme along the way. The editor can help maintain that focus
throughout the entire process. Yvette and Jim both
have good ideas. Reporters don't like to hear the outline advice much,
but it doesn't mean Roman numeral I, capital letter A and so forth. Simply
go through your notes and dash off a list of the four or five (we hope
not many more than that) key points that you want to be sure to emphasize
in your story. In other words, what do you insist that the reader have
when he or she is done reading your piece? Then number the points in priority
order. Combine those that beg to be combined, sure. But make your rough
outline, assign priorities -- that's the crucial step -- and you have
your focus. It doesn't take long. Too many reporters think they don't
have time for this, but they do, and it's important. I recently conducted a program for our city staff on the topic of focus. Lack of it is one of the most critical writing issues we face at our paper, especially in enterprise pieces. I built much of our discussion around an essay on thinking written by Christopher Scanlan at Poynter. It's an excellent piece for both writer and editor alike and you can find it on the web at http://www.poynter.org/pub/bnw97/bnw97int.htm. Like others who have
responded to your request, I also strongly believe that requiring writers
to provide a maximum-six-word headline or title with their work is the
best way for them to know whether their story has a point and for editors
to know the point the writer intends. Along with the many good ideas you've already received, a couple more: - Focus is about making choices. If you narrow the focus to have a clean point, what informs the choice, what are the criteria? Sometimes the goals of the paper, sometimes a form (i.e. a serial; a Sunday package), sometimes the time and resources at your disposal. Those are starting point many reporters and editors rush by. Start by agreeing what the overall goal or parameters may be. - The first few chapters of Bill Blundell's book ("The Art and Craft of Feature Writing") are very good on this problem, when it comes to big news features. - In narrative writing, Jon Franklin's approach (in "Writing for Story") of identifying the complication is a good one. Setting on the central complication allows you to pare away everything that does not directly advance the explication of that story line. - Jack Hart has, in the past, shared his "Jot Outline" concept. (I saw it on Writer-L.) E-mail him for a copy or ask him to post it here. - In the heat of battle,
a couple discussion tricks I've picked up from others. - "Story mapping"
(in the Blundell book) can be a very good way to lay out a story's many
angles and then pick the best. (In other settings, this is called "mind
mapping," a form of brainstorming or idea development.) I keep a
large newsprint sketch pad in my office to do this when reporters come
in to talk about big stories. It gets everything out and then lets you
make choices about the best stuff and the path to follow. Sometimes you
can combine it with the discussion approaches listed above. Now that I've finally found time to peruse your posts, I'd like to weigh in with a point I've not seen addressed, except in parts of Mike Roberts' post. This is something most of us know anyway: Focus begins at the idea stage. I add this because
most of what I've seen addresses the back end of the The weakest approach to an idea, and the one most often used in my experience, is "a look at (fill in blank)." Done it myself, many times. Ended up with crap, many times. Why? Because it forces the writer to report the world to capture a single nugget of information. But the writer doesn't set out knowing what the nugget should be, and so may not recognize it when it appears. The best approach is to develop a hypothesis of some sort on which to report. It proves either correct or incorrect or must be adjusted as you go. But you form an idea of the story's likely point and direction before you start (notice I said likely, not absolute). If you don't, how do you wind up anywhere near a sensible destination, except by accident? Good stories aren't accidents. An example from a
story planning meeting today (You don't have such things? You need to.): Our likely focus: A student or siblings' day at school, and their classroom. This suggests a narrative treatment. What we want to know: What's the atmosphere like? How do students treat each other? How involved are parents? How do you run, say, a school paper, plus chess club, FFA chapter, speech and debate, etc., with two dozen kids? Are kids looking foward to graduation and college, or feeling trapped because they know they'll spend the rest of their life on the farm? Isn't education here really a matter of training your kids to grow and do their best so you can send them into the world, perhaps never to return? What we want to avoid: Lookie here at the cute little rural school. Isn't it quaint? Sidebar stuff: Compare it to the state's largest (here in Wichita) in tangible ways: number of kids, staff, student-teacher ration, state aid per student, class sizes, etc. It's a pretty decent start. The reporter knows her stuff and has the tools to pull off a good story. We'll see what she collects. But we already have a good feel for what it'll be and what it'll say. This took all of 5-10
minutes with me, the reporter and her team leader (the photo and design
gurus were tied up, but would have been there). I figure we saved a good
hour of rewrite on the back end by doing it. Pretty good trade, in my
opinion. I'm a firm believer in tightly focused budget lines, forcing both the reporter and the editor to constantly refine the definition of the story. And I'm also a firm believer in outlining stories if they are lengthy or complex. The outlines don't have to be high school variety -- just: 1. AIDS is a major
problem here. I once worked with a writer who reduced all his work to paragraphs in a legal pad and then or lettered them -- quotes, facts, background, etc. His outlines looked like this: 1 That was the order in which he intended to use the information and all he had to do then was write the lead and the transitions. I like for reporters
to give me a tight budget line, talk the lead over with me and then show
me the first three or four paragraphs through the nut graph before they
go any farther. That way, if there are problems, we have them early on
before the rest of the story gets written. I'd start with a friendly
but ruthless conversation in which the editor tells the reporter: "Your
next budget line should be 15 words long. It could be one 15-word sentence.
It could be five sentences of three words apiece. But don't try to tell
me what the story is until you can do it in 15 words." It's a gimmick.
But it imposes economy and organization.
|