July, 2009

130 years of must-read stories for digital journalists: Five lessons from 1851-1981

July 20th, 2009
whitehouse_full

--Members of the White House News Photographers' Association, circa 1922-1926--

As journalists, the future looms so large that it feels like we’re constantly on new ground. But we’re not. Whether we tell stories with words, audio, video or a combination of all three, there are a surprising number of lessons to be found in the past. A 115-year-old slice-of-life story about a sick man falling down on a city street has the same emotional power we’re looking for in our own stories. A 28-year-old story about engineers designing a computer has a staying power we’re hoping for in our own tech reporting.

There’s another lesson that’s buried in these stories from the last two centuries. It may be the most important. If you want to create quality journalism, the most important thing is to stand up from the keyboard, walk outside with whatever tools you like best, and start reporting.

1: You can report on technology in a way that it remains compelling — and relevant — for decades afterward.
“The Soul of a New Machine,” Tracy Kidder, 1981 [Google Books]

In the late 1970s, Kidder followed a team of engineers at a company called Data General Corporation as they frantically tried to design a new computer model. It’s a topic that could easily be confusing and dry. And 30 years later it seems like ancient history. But it’s not. The story is still a great read. Kidder took great pains to keep the technology understandable. And while the equipment is now quaintly archaic, the story around it — a crushing race to build a product that appears doomed to fail — is fascinating. “Soul” went on to win the Pulitzer Prize and the American Book Award.

2: Don’t be afraid to get close to the action, whether you’re recording with a notepad, recorder or camera.
“When Man Falls, a Crowd Gathers,” Stephen Crane, 1894 [PDF]
“Can’t Get Their Minds Ashore,” Abraham Cahan, circa 1898 [Google Books]

“When Man Falls” is slice-of-life reporting, not hard news. A man walking on the street falls over in what looks like an epileptic fit; a leering crowd gathers and waits for police and an ambulance. “Ashore” has a similar feel. Cahan is the invisible scribe as he follows a series of conversations at a receiving station for new immigrants in Manhattan. We’re no strangers to up-close journalism these days, whether on a battlefield or a crime scene. But Crane and Cahan are two great examples of reporting that gets close enough to see the smallest details, but not so close as to overshadow the story as it unfolds.

3: If you play with language, with storytelling, never forget the journalism at the core of the story.
The Pig, Ben Hecht, 1921 [Google Books]

“The Pig” is a brilliant example of voice done right. In the last forty years, there have been a few dozen print journalists who fall into that same category of “voice done right”: Joan Didion, Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson, Ryszard Kapuscinski, Susan Orlean. The examples of voice done poorly feel countless. If you allow a strong voice in your work, remember this: Journalists have been trying and failing miserably at it for more than 100 years. Do your homework. Learn how the masters got it right.

4: Sometimes you’re part of the story. Your honesty, not your ego, is what’s most important.
“How Do You Like It Now, Gentlemen?” Lillian Ross, 1950 [New Yorker archive]
“Travels in Georgia,” John McPhee, 1973 [New Yorker archive]

The “I”, the first person, is a firmly entrenched element of modern journalism. The “I” can add a crucial character to a story, one that guides readers with an invisible hand. Done poorly it’s an exercise in vanity. Ross’ profile of Ernest Hemingway is a great example of the “fly on the wall” reporting style that made her famous. In “Travels,” McPhee hangs out with biologists as they do field work and occasionally eat roadkill. The “I” in each of their stories is a remarkably unobtrusive but essential voice.

5: Profiling everyday people will always be powerful.
“Court Buff,” Mark Singer, 1980 [Google Books]
“Watercress Girl,” Henry Mayhew, 1851 [Link]
“The Rivermen,” Joseph Mitchell, 1959 [Google Books]

Singer wrote about courtroom spectators. Mayhew wrote about a child living and working in incredible poverty. Mitchell (and his contemporary A.J. Liebling) spent his entire career writing about supposedly unremarkable people. “I actually believe deeply in the dignity of ordinariness,” Susan Orlean once said. Orlean wrote what I think is one of the best profiles ever crafted, a study of a 10-year-old boy (“The American Man at Age Ten“).

“An ordinary life examined closely reveals itself to be exquisite and exceptional, somehow managing to be both heroic and plain,” she wrote in 2001. “I really believed that anything at all was worth writing about if you cared about it enough, and that the best and only necessary justification for writing any particular story was that I cared about it. The challenge was to write these stories in a way that got other people as interested in them as I was.”

Updated: Digital Journalism Camp has a schedule

July 20th, 2009

-Photo credit: Oliver Ingrouille-

I’m posting this a little belatedly. Ok, really belatedly. Over at the conference site I have a schedule for Aug. 1, as well as list of some of the presenters, panelists and moderators. I just added Carolynn Duncan, founder of the startup incubator Portland 10, to the list. Her presentation is called “Square peg, wrong hole: Why your news product doesn’t meet consumers’ needs.”

Big room:
9:30-10: Introduction
10-11: Hyper-local news: What works and what doesn’t
11-12: SEO for journalists: What, why, and unique challenges
12-1: Lunch
1-2: Digital storytelling
2-3: Licensing your work: a.k.a, What the heck is Creative Commons?
3-4: Real-world successful (and almost-successful) revenue models

Room #2:
10-11: Square peg, wrong hole: Why your news product doesn’t meet consumers’ needs
11-12: Journalism basics: Understand sourcing, fact-checking, corrections
12-1: Lunch
1-2: Video 101: cheap software and editing tips
2-3: Podcasting and audio journalism
3-4: Wikipedia for journalists

Room #3:
10-11: Unconference
11-12: Reserved for caterers
12-1: Reserved for caterers
1-2: Unconference
2-3: Unconference
3-4: Unconference

Here’s a few of the panelists and speakers you’ll find at those sessions:

Cornelius Swart, editor, Portland Sentinel
Ken Aaron, NeighborhoodNotes.com
Justin Carder, Neighborlogs
Ginger Grant, director, Creative Intelligence Laboratory, Simon Fraser University
Paula Holm Jensen, attorney, Holm Jensen Law LLC
Rachel Andersen, Anvil Media
Lisa Williams, Media Forte Marketing
Greg Swanson, former director of interactive media sales for Lee Enterprises; founder of ITZ Publishing
Alex Wilhelm, co-founder, Contenture
Michelle V. Rafter, journalist
Carolynn Duncan, founder, Portland 10
Aaron Weiss, producer, KGW
Mike Gebhardt “Dr. Normal,” producer, Strange Love Live
Ethan Lindsey, OPB journalist- Our thoughts go out to Ethan and his family. For more on his health, visit http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/ethanlindsey/journal

Stay tuned in the coming days as we announce the final list of participants and moderators.

AND DON’T FORGET TO SIGN UP. Space is limited and the RSVP list will be CLOSED on July 27.

eatable politics #94: Palin: theories, answers, and Mr. Quitter himself, Dick Nixon

July 5th, 2009

palin_nixon

Sarah Palin: Wow.

Theory 1: Since she’s not running for reelection, why not use the time to fundraise and raise support for a presidential run instead of just sitting around as a lame duck governor? A similar theory says that instead of president, she’s going to run for the senate against current Alaska senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski.

Likelihood: Possible. She’s hit a political brick wall in Alaska. She doesn’t have a lot of support from the Legislature. The economy is crashing and she doesn’t want to be a governor who raises taxes. The GOP is desperate for a national leader and she could easily fill the void; up until last week polls clearly showed she’s popular among conservatives. As for the senate, there’s no love between her and Murkowski. This was the senator’s one-sentence statement yesterday: “I am deeply disappointed that the governor has decided to abandon the state and her constituents before her term has concluded.”

Chance of success: Lukewarm. Here’s why: a) Romney doesn’t have a day job and to keep up, Palin needs to hit the 2012 trail right now. Right? Wrong. And not just because it’s possible to run a state while campaigning. It also has to do with how much experience you have when you step down to join the race. As Bruce Reed points out, ex-governors like Carter, Reagan, Clinton and George W. either termed out or had served multiple terms before running for president.

Republican strategist Ed Rollins: “I think the premise that she doesn’t want to be a lame duck governor – there’s people like Mitch Daniels, governor of Indiana, (Miss. Gov.) Haley Barbour, Gov. (Tim) Pawlenty, of Minnesota – they’re all gonna run for president, and they’re finishing their job. [...] Most political people fight to the end. It’s now tough. She didn’t finish the job.”

b) The Nixon argument. After Nixon lost the 1960 presidential and 1962 California gubernatorial elections, he gave a bitter, angry speech (a.k.a the Checkers Speech), and seemed destined for political exile. He spent the next six years traveling the nation and world rebuilding his — and his party’s — status as a foreign affairs leader, and went on to become president. Palin isn’t Nixon. She doesn’t have his knowledge of foreign affairs, or his brilliance as a political strategist. Or six years for that matter.


Theory 2: Rather than jumping straight into a new campaign, she’s going to turn herself into an even bigger political superstar (and make lots of money) by writing books, getting her own show on Fox, sitting on corporate boards, and traveling around the country speaking at lucrative speaking engagements.

Likelihood: Possible. The opportunities abound.

Chance of success: Unknown. She’s thrown even her most ardent supporters into a tailspin. Conservatives4Palin.com: “All of us in the Palin camp have found quicksand beneath our feet today. Nobody knows what to think.” How much will they pay to hear her talk? She’s going to have do some serious work to win them back. See also Theory 5.

Theory 3: She’s pregnant.

Likelihood: Um.

Theory 4: She’s facing a federal indictment of some kind. The rumors of an actual indictment are just that. The facts that may lead up to that indictment are, on the other hand, pretty solid. At the center of the case is a building contractor called Spenard Building Supplies. The Village Voice did a in-depth investigation last year; Max Blumenthal has a new roundup:

Many political observers in Alaska are fixated on rumors that federal investigators have been seizing paperwork from SBS in recent months, searching for evidence that Palin and her husband Todd steered lucrative contracts to the well-connected company in exchange for gifts like the construction of their home on pristine Lake Lucille in 2002. The home was built just two months before Palin began campaigning for governor, a job which would have provided her enhanced power to grant building contracts in the wide-open state.

Likelihood: Completely unknown. This is based entirely on unverifiable comments by off-the-record sources. Yes, Palin has faced at least three separate ethics scandals in the last few years. But we’re not going to know anything about this one until the feds announce something.

Theory 5: She’s simply being her impulsive self.

Likelihood: Very high.
Palin’s speech was weird. It was rambling and sometimes incoherent. It’s very likely she wrote it herself; the exclamation points (18 in all), oddly used quotation marks, and repeated ALL CAPS are not the hallmark of a professional speechwriter. Guess where her main spokesperson was at the time of the speech? New York City.

Ezra Klein: All of which suggests that today’s speech wasn’t the carefully vetted product of the team quietly masterminding her presidential run (What’s the difference between a pitbull going for a walk and Sarah Palin? The pitbull has a plan.) I don’t know if Palin is leaving office to preempt a coming scandal or simply because she’s finished with the job. But this looks like the impulsive decision of an impulsive politician. It doesn’t exactly scream president-in-waiting.

Chance of success: Very poor. Joe Gandelman:Sarah Palin is again doing it her way — but the question is whether her way is on the same wavelength as America’s overall polity and the way the political system operates.” Friday’s announcement didn’t catapult her to a new level of politics. In fact it did the opposite. Her resignation, with all its uncertainty and caprice, has cemented the fact that this confusing and unpredictable person is the Sarah Palin we will always see, no matter how long she’s on the political scene.

To quote Nixon: “A man is not finished when he is defeated. He is finished when he quits.”

Ink spots in image by Paulo Correa