Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Wed/ Thurs Nov 6 /7- writing lead test/ quotes/ attribution


REMINDER, I NEED YOUR COLLEGE ESSAY OR WRITING SAMPLE NOW.  I'LL SPEAK WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY TODAY. ANY NOT  TURNED  IN BY TOMORROW WILL HAVE HIS / HER NAME FORWARDED TO MS. ASPENLEITER.  THANK YOU.
Take a look at the reporter's notes from yesterday. How did your lead compare to the actual one, which was published?

 Notes for story 1
Dr Michael Kai is a scientist with the Papua New Guinea Department of Primary Industry. He has been working for ten years on a project to breed larger pigs. One of his pigs, an adult male, has been weighed at 350 kgs. This is the heaviest pig ever to have been bred in Papua New Guinea. Mr Kai hopes to use this animal to breed other very large pigs.

Story 1 correct lead:
A government scientist has produced the biggest pig ever to have been bred in Papua New Guinea.
Notice how we have put a human face on our story by starting with the scientist, even though the most unusual aspect is the pig. We do not give the scientist's name or details of the size of the pig. These can wait until later in the story.


Notes for story 2
A school bus ran off City Road in Suva, narrowly missed an electricity pole and came to rest in a garden. Most of the bus windows were smashed. There were more than 30 children on the bus. They were going to Martyr School. It was a 36-seater bus. All the children escaped serious injury. Some of them jumped out of the bus and grazed themselves. Eye-witnesses said the children were helped from the bus screaming and shouting and in a state of panic. This happened this morning.
Story 2 correct lead.

More than 30 children escaped serious injury when a school bus crashed in Suva today.


The main point of this story is obviously the children. This intro tells us just enough about what happened to interest our audience, without overloading it with details which can come later. We could have written an intro which said that 30 children were in a bus crash, but that alone would have been unfair to our readers or listeners if we know that they all escaped serious injury. This fact alone is newsworthy.

There are two more sets of reporter's notes below. Copy and paste them into a work document. They are due at the end of class, not later. Send along; test grade. 

When you have finished writing the lead for story 3 and 4, look at the following assignment, which is due at the close of class on Thursday.

Story 3
In July last year, Mr Sione Tuanuku went to work for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) in Nuku`alofa, cleaning out the dog pound and caring for the dogs. Yesterday he was sacked by the manager of the dog pound, Mrs Anita Chan. She said that he had mistreated one of the dogs.
Mr Tuanuku said: "The dogs always barked at me and sometimes they tried to bite me. I didn't like it. Yesterday I got fed up with one dog that tried to bite me, so I bit the dog in the leg to teach it a lesson. Now I have been dismissed from my job."
Story 4
Mr John Erikub and his wife, Laura, were driving to their home in Majuro yesterday afternoon, after shopping in Uliga. Mr and Mrs Erikub were in the front of their Toyota pick-up. Their three children were travelling in the back - Paul, aged nine; Rachel, aged seven; and Miriam, aged three.
Driving past the cemetery, they met a truck travelling in the opposite direction. This was a semi-trailer belonging to Pacific Earthmoving Inc, carrying a 12-ton bulldozer. The truck was driven by Mr Lewis Kili, who comes from Jaluit Atoll. The pick-up ran out of control and collided head-on with the semi-trailer.
Police and ambulance were sent for. Mr and Mrs Erikub and their two elder children died instantly. Miriam was taken to hospital with serious injuries and died later. The pick-up was a write-off. The semi-trailer suffered only minor damage. Mr Kili was also taken to hospital and treated for shock, but was later allowed home.
Police have interviewed Mr Kili. They say they are unlikely to charge him with any offence.

Please read the following information on quotations and write out the definitions and / or responses. You will see these Friday on a test..........These are due by the end of class tomorrow (Thursday)  Please send along. Don't forget to review how to punctuate using colons and quotation marks.

1. quote
2. inverted comma
3. reported speech
4. How should radio / audio broadcast words?
5. How could television journalists use quotes?
6. Define attribution.
7. What verb is most commonly used with attributions?
8. What is attribution also known as?
9. Give three reasons for using quotes.
10. Give two reasons why should you not start a news story with a quote?
11. At what point in your news story should you insert a quote?
12. When might you turn a quote into reported speech?
13. What are partial or incomplete quotes?
14. When is the use of partial quots acceptable?
15. What are scare quotes?
16.  When do you use attribution?
17.  What is the function of the linking word "that"?
18. Name five verbs that may be used for attribution other than said.
19. What is the problem with using "according to" more than once?
20. What is the problem with using "claimed"?
21. Give two reasons why an attribution might not be needed.
22. Give three phrases you might use, when your source does not want to be named.


 Quotes
We are now looking at how to use quotes properly when writing your news articles, and how to correctly attribute them, that is how to tell who said what.  
_________________________________________________________________
A quote is the written form of the words which people have spoken. Occasionally it will also apply to words they have written down, perhaps in a book or a press release. In print journalism, quotes are shown surrounded by quotation marks, either single (‘) or double ("). These are sometimes called inverted commas- mostly a British English thing, but since we come across material not published in the US, you should be familiar with that term. The alternative to using a quote is to rewrite the sentence into what we call reported speech. We will also discuss how to move between quotes and reported speech.
Quotes should not be used on radio, which should broadcast the words in the spoken form, sometimes called audio. Television journalists can use quotes shown as text on the screen.
Attribution is stating who made the quote or gave the information. The most common form of attribution uses the verb to say. Always say who is speaking. In America, attribution is called the tag.
Why use quotes?
There are three main reasons why you should use quotes in print journalism:
  • If you repeat the exact words which people themselves used you will reduce the risk of misreporting what they say.
  • When we give a person's exact words our readers can see both the ideas and the way they were presented.
  • People often use lively language when they speak. Quotes allow you to put that lively language directly into your story.
Remember too that, as a journalist, you are simply the channel through which people with something to say speak to people who want to know what they said. The best way of keeping the channel clear is to let people tell things in their own way. One of the golden rules of journalism is: Let people speak for themselves. Use quotes.
In print we hear people's voices through quotes, in broadcasting the voices are heard in the form of audio or actuality.
Because radio journalists should avoid quotes altogether, and television journalists should use them as graphics on the screen, we will concentrate on using quotes in the print media.
When to use quotes
Quotes serve many useful purposes in print journalism but they cannot be used everywhere in your story. You will make your writing more effective if you obey the following rules.
Never start a news story with a quote
WHY?
The most important reason for not starting a story with a quote is that a quote itself seldom shows the news value of your story. It is your task as a journalist to tell the reader what is news. You should tell them what is new, unusual, interesting or significant about the information you present. Only when you have told them what is news should you use a quote to support your intro.
A standard intro in reported speech is the most effective method of expressing an idea. (That’s the lead; you know, what we've been working on.  Very few people speak well enough to say in one sentence what a good journalist can compress into a well-written intro.
Starting a news story with a quote produces awkward punctuation. By putting words inside quotation marks, you give readers an extra obstacle to overcome just at the time when you are trying to grab their attention.
Beginning with a quote also means that your readers see the quote before they know who has said it. How can they judge the importance of the quote without knowing the speaker?
A quote can often be most effective following straight after a hard news intro. See how effective a short quote becomes when it follows a short, sharp intro:
The Minister for Finance, Mr Joe Wau, yesterday attacked laziness in the public service.
"Government employees must get off their backsides and work," he told a lunchtime meeting of senior department heads.
Quotes in the rest of the story
If you are going to quote a speech or a personal interview, never leave the first quote later than the third or fourth paragraph of the story. If you cannot find a quote strong enough to go that high, you should question the value of covering the speech or doing the interview in the first place.
One of the problems faced by many journalists is that their shorthand - or their memory - is not good enough to get a full and accurate note of what a person says. So they take the easy way out and write everything in reported speech. It is your task to make sure that you get an accurate note of what is said, even to the extent of asking the speaker to repeat it. Modern journalists can, of course, use tape recorders to make an exact record of what a person says. However, you must still take care in transcribing your quotes into your story.
There is, of course, no excuse for making up a quote. That is one of the greatest sins a journalist can commit. It destroys your integrity and risks landing both you and your employer in an expensive action for defamation. Don't do it.
How often should you use quotes?
Although quotes bring a story alive, it is still possible to kill a good story by carelessness, particularly over-repetition. It is like smothering a meal with sauce, drowning the taste of the meat. Each quote must earn its place in the story. Do not put in strings of quotes simply because you have them in your notebook.
Alternate quotes and reported speech, choosing those quotes which are especially strong and rewriting in reported speech those which are either too complicated or too long. Just because someone said something does not mean that they have expressed themselves well or clearly. If the quote is likely to confuse your readers or spoil the rest of the story, turn the words into reported speech. As we said earlier, very few people are able to compress ideas into sentences better than a good journalist can.
Writing quotes
Many new journalists are afraid of using quotes because they believe that the language and punctuation is complicated. In fact, there are some simple rules which, if followed, can make quotes as easy to use as any other kind of sentence.
Punctuation
Most newspapers adopt a standard style when punctuating. Two simple phrases will act as a reminder of how to punctuate quotes. (For simplicity, we use the term 'tag' for the attribution of the person who said the words and 'caps' as a shortform for 'capital letters'.)
When the attribution (the tag) is at the beginning of the quotation, the order is:
TAG, COLON, QUOTES, CAPS.
Look at the following sentence:
He said: "It is not something I expected."
See how the punctuation follows our rule:
He said(tag) :(colon) "(quotes) I(caps)t ...
When the tag is at the end of the quotation, the order is:
COMMA, QUOTES, TAG, POINT
as in the following sentence:
"It is not something I expected," he said.
Again, we can see the pattern in the sentence:
... expected,(comma) "(quotes) he said (tag).(point)
Notice that periods / full stops, commas, question marks and exclamation marks always go inside the quotes. When you have a quote within a quote, use a single inverted comma for the inside quotation. If both end in the same place, put the comma, full stop or similar punctuation mark within the single inverted comma:
Sgt Ovea said: "I told him, `You are your own worst enemy.'"
You should always start a new paragraph for a direct quote. If you have started a quote and continue to quote in the next paragraph, you do not need to close the quotes before going on to the next par, though you should start the new paragraph with inverted commas. See how we leave out the quotation mark after the first paragraph but include it at the beginning of the second:
Mr Raukele said: "It is not something I ever expected to happen in this country in my lifetime.
"I have to admit that it came as a complete surprise."
Whenever you introduce a new speaker, put the tag before the quote, giving the speaker's title as well. This is particularly important when you are changing from one speaker to another. If you quote a new speaker and fail to put his tag at the beginning, the reader will assume that the first speaker is still being quoted:
RIGHT:
Businessman Mr Tom Avua said that trade was lower than last year.           
His partner, Mr Michael Mu, added: "I may have to sell my home to pay off the outstanding debts to the bank."
WRONG:
Businessman Mr Tom Avua said that trade was lower than last year.           
"I may have to sell my home to pay off the outstanding debts to the bank," said his partner, Mr Michael Mu.
Notice from the example above that it is possible to change the usual "somebody said" order of the tag to "said somebody" order. This becomes necessary when the tag has a long identifier, so that you do not separate the verb "said" too far from the actual quotation:
RIGHT:
"It is a load of rubbish," said Mr Peter Kuman, vice-president of the Retail Traders Association and its regional representative on the PNG Chamber of Commerce.
WRONG:
"It is a load of rubbish," Mr Peter Kuman, vice-president of the Retail Traders Association and its regional representative on the PNG Chamber of Commerce, said.
Partial and incomplete quotes
Although you may not be able to write fast or make notes in shorthand, you may still have notes of particular phrases the speaker used. This is when you might be tempted to use partial or incomplete quotes. These are quotes which do not make full sentences.
There is seldom any excuse for using partial quotes, whether it is in an intro or in the main body of the story. The main exception is when the words you are quoting are slang, such as "dead loss", "the bee's knees", "Star Wars" or "junket", as in the following example:
The Prime Minister Mr Galea yesterday defended his European tour, saying it was not a "junket".
"The trip was very successful, particularly in Germany," he said.
If you do use a partial quote in the intro, you must give the full quote later in the story, otherwise the reader may believe that it is you using slang.
Some bad journalists use quotation marks around words or phrases which they think might be defamatory. They mistakenly believe that, by showing that the words were said by someone else, they themselves will not be sued for defamation. This is not so. If you use defamatory words, you can be sued, whether they were your words or someone else's, whether or not they were in quotes.
Do not put individual words or phrases in quotation marks simply because someone else said them first. Most descriptive words can stand by themselves, without the support of quotation marks. For example, the minister may have said in an interview: "The job ahead will be difficult." If you put that into reported speech, it would be wrong to choose only the word difficult for partial quoting:
RIGHT:
The minister said the job ahead would be difficult.
WRONG:
The minister said the job ahead would be "difficult".
Incomplete quotes are slightly different to partial quotes. Incomplete quotes are full sentence quotes with some words left out. They can be used if it is made clear that you have omitted some words or phrases without altering the essential meaning of the sentence. This should not be done because you failed to make a note of the whole sentence, only if the part you want to cut is either insignificant or unconnected. You should type three dots (called ellipses) in place of the missing word or phrase. For example, we may not want to use all of the words quoted in the following sentence:
"Carelessness, as many people before me have argued, is the curse of clear writing," he said.
so we rewrite it as:
"Carelessness ... is the curse of clear writing," he said.
Sometimes you may need to use a strong quote which does not actually contain all the information your reader needs to make sense of the sentence. This can happen because the person is speaking about something he or she does not mention in the actual quote itself. In such cases you can insert the missing fact - often a name or a title - in square brackets - within the quote to show what you have done For example, the Finance Minister might be speaking in Parliament about the May Budget but did not use the actual title in the sentence you want to quote:
"I have repeated a thousand times, it will be ready when it is ready and not a moment before."
To make sense for your readers, you can use the quote by inserting the words "the May Budget" in square brackets:
The Finance Minister told the Opposition: "I have repeated a thousand times, [the May Budget] will be ready when it's ready and not a moment before."
Whether you use a full quote, a partial quote or an incomplete quote, you must not take it out of context. The most common complaint against journalists - after that of misquoting itself - is the accusation that the reporter took the statement out of context.
A journalist might be tempted to quote someone as saying: "I entirely agree that the plans are good" when, in fact, what he said was "I entirely agree that the plans are good, but they are unworkable and unsuitable." That is bad journalism.
Scare quotes
Scare quotes are words or short phrases which are placed between quotation marks when they really do not belong. Usually, the writer is trying to add stress to the words or to suggest something other than their obvious meaning.
Scare quotes are usually unnecessary and should only be used if you are confident they are required. As discussed above, there are usually better ways of using partial quotes.
The simplest reason for scare quotes is to add emphasis, which in literature is normally done by the use of italics. In news reporting, however, this usage can cause confusion or be misleading. Unless the words are actually quotes which can be attributed to a person, avoid scare quotes for emphasis.
BAD:
The priest said he would "never" marry a divorced person in his church.
BETTER:
The priest stressed that he would never marry a divorced person in his church.
or
The priest said: "I will never marry a divorced person in my church."
A more common use of the scare quote is to suggest that the word or phrase should not be taken at face value. It is often used to suggest disbelief or actual disagreement with the words as they are being used.
Someone who does not believe in global warming might put the phrase in scare quotes to signify that disbelief.
The Opposition Leader, Mr Tony Abbott, said people should not be alarmed by the threat of "global warming".
The problem with using a scare quote in this way is that it is now unclear whether the disbelief is in the mind of Mr Abbott or the writer of the sentence. Your credibility as a journalist depends partly on presenting information clearly and unambiguously for your readers, so avoid scare quotes in such circumstances.
Finally, the use of quotation marks to define a single word or phrase linguistically is justified in certain circumstances when the use and meaning are clear. For example:
The Minister said he had been misunderstood by some people who thought he had said 'weather' when, in fact, he had said 'whether'.
TO SUMMARIZE:
Quotes are an important tool for print journalists, but they should never be used on radio, and only as text on television.
Never begin a news story with a quote.
Try and keep a balance between quotes and other sentences.
Take care when punctuating quotes.
Avoid partial or incomplete quotes unless they are necessary.
Avoid scare quotes.
Attribution
_________________________________________________________________
Attribution is stating who said something. Attribution is essential in all the media, including radio and television. Journalists do it so that your readers or listeners can know who is speaking or where the information in the story comes from. You can use attribution for both spoken and written information, so that you attribute information gathered from interviews, speeches, reports, books, films or even other newspapers, radio or television stations.
 How attribution works in speech.
Reported speech
In the previous chapter, we mainly looked at attribution as it applied to quotes. However, attribution should be used whenever you want your readers or listeners to know where your information comes from. For example, in reported speech the attribution is still part of the sentence, although it is not as distinct as when you use a direct quote. In both of the following sentences, we attribute the words to Ms Mar. In the first, her words are in quotes; in the second they are put into reported speech. The attribution is in italics:
QUOTE:
Ms Mar said: "Students can expect no special treatment if they go on strike."
REPORTED SPEECH:
Ms Mar said that students could expect no special treatment if they went on strike.
Notice how, in the reported speech, we had to change the verb "can" to "could" and the verb "go" to "went". This is because, although quotes must be word-for-word, reported speech is a report of something which was said in the past, so the tenses have to be changed.
The use of the linking word "that" is usually optional in reported speech. It is often left out to reduce the length of the sentence, but should be included whenever it makes the meaning of a sentence clearer. It is often used to separate the verb of attribution from a following verb. Compare the two examples. Notice how including "that" in the second example makes the meaning clearer:
The doctor felt many women worried about their health.
The doctor felt that many women worried about their health.
How often should you use attribution?
The good journalist has to strike a balance between the need to make clear attribution of statements and the risk of boring the reader with too many phrases such as "he said".
It helps to change the word "said" occasionally, in attributing both quotes and reported speech. Some useful alternatives are "warned", "suggested", "urged", "asked” and "disclosed". But beware: each of these has a specific meaning. Check that it is the correct one for what your speaker said and the way they said it.
The phrase "according to" can be used in attributing reported speech, but do not use it more than once with any single speaker. Although it is usually a neutral term, not suggesting either belief or disbelief, if you use it too often it can give the impression that you doubt the information the speaker has given.
There are other, more obvious danger words to avoid. Words such as "stated" and "pointed out" both imply that what the speaker said is an undisputed fact. You can, for example, point out that the world is round, but you cannot point out that this cake is delicious, because that is an opinion.
Also avoid the word "claimed", which suggests that you do not believe what is being said. Be especially careful when reporting court cases. Lawyers and the police like to use the word "claimed" to throw doubt on opposition statements. You must not do the same.
The exact balance of attribution depends on the kind of story you are writing or the material you can use. If the statements are reliably factual throughout, you only need to attribute occasionally. If, however, the story is heavy with opinion or unreliable statements, you should attribute at least once every two sentences.
Attributing facts and opinions
One of the greatest dangers facing young journalist is accepting what people say as the truth. Just because someone tells you that something is a fact does not make it so.
There are some things which are universally accepted as true, for example that the world is round, that Tuesday follows Monday, that Fiji is in the Pacific. But there are also things which people want you to believe are true but which are either not provable or are lies. These people may not knowingly tell a lie, but many people are careless with the truth.
Also, situations may change; so that the truth at one moment may be wrong the next. Attribution helps you to overcome some of these problems. Attribution is the act of specifying who said what.
If you attribute the words to the person who said them, you do not have to prove or disprove the truth of their words; you simply report them. Also, people judge what is said by the person who says it. Statements made by people in authority carry more weight than statements made by other people.
Look at the following example. The attribution is the phrase said the vice-chancellor Ms Una Mar:
Striking students who miss exams will be given fail marks, said the vice-chancellor Ms Una Mar.
In this case, you may have very little doubt that this is exactly what will happen. But there is always the chance that Ms Mar will change her mind and give the students a second chance. By attributing the statement to Ms Mar, you protect yourself against this possibility. Thus, if the students do get a second chance, you can say to your critics: "We didn't say it, Ms Mar did."
In any case, your readers will be interested to know what public figures believe to be true. Even if it is later found that Ms Mar was mistaken, it is interesting to know that she once believed she would fail the students. As soon as you find out she has changed her mind, you can carry a news story saying so, recalling the previous story attributed to Ms Mar.
Clear and undisputed facts
In cases where there is undeniable evidence that something is so, you obviously do not have to attribute facts. In the following example, the weather was observable. Who is going to argue?
High winds and torrential rain lashed Port Moresby today, bringing down trees and flooding parts of Waigani Drive.
Neither do you need to attribute if you have witnessed the event yourself, for example while reporting from a court:
The National Court sitting in Kieta has sentenced a man to 12 years imprisonment with hard labour for rape.
The court has found the man guilty of rape. You saw the judge sentence him. You can state it as a fact.
There is another category of stories which appear to be true because of the reliability of the sources. These are statements made by people in authority who are in a position to know, such as the police chief telling you about an arrest or the farm manager talking about his cooperative. In such cases, you might not attribute the facts in the intro, but your readers and listeners will still want to know how reliable your information is. So you must attribute the facts further down the story:
A gang of youths ran riot through Boroko shopping centre yesterday, smashing car windscreens and shop windows.
Police said about 30 youths were involved and all are thought to be from Morata.
or:
The Pago Farm Cooperative plans to double its rice production to 200 tonnes next year.
Manager Mr Irwin Neman revealed the plans yesterday at a ceremony to mark the cooperative's second anniversary.
In both cases, the sources are reliable enough for the intros to stand on their own. Attributing the information has added extra weight to them. Your readers or listeners can judge how reliable the information is.
Opinions
There is no alternative to attribution when statements made are opinions. If you do not attribute an opinion to an individual, your audience will assume that it is your own opinion - and there is no excuse for that kind of confusion in a news story.
Your problem may come in deciding what is a verifiable fact and what is only opinion. In many cases this is easy:
Localisation in the public service has been rapid, but the quality of work is still below expectations, according to Home Affairs Minister Mr Barney Kina.
With a concept as vague as "quality of work", this can only be an opinion, even expressed by a senior minister. You will often find that opinions use vague and unspecific language. (See Chapter 56: Facts and opinion.)
In cases where fact and opinion are not easily separated, play safe and attribute the story.
Attributing a statement to someone is no defence in a claim for defamation. If you wrongly accuse a person of being a thief, it is no excuse to say that you were just quoting someone else.
Reliable sources
In some cases, your sources of information may not want to be named, for fear of revenge. Journalists who are sure of their facts often attribute such information to "usually reliable sources", "informed sources" or "sources within the department/company".
In some cases, they use phrases like "it is widely believed that" or "it is understood that". Be warned! If your information is wrong, the blame will rest at your door. The greatest danger comes in "off the record" interviews. You must always consult your news editor or chief of staff about what you can and cannot say in such cases. (See Chapter 59: Sources of information.)
TO SUMMARIzE:
Quotes are an important tool for print journalists, but they should never be used on radio, and only as text on television.
Always attribute quotes to the speaker or source of information.
You can use alternative words to "said", but beware that they may have distinct meanings and may imply support or disbelief.
Attribute all opinions and information which is not a clear and undisputed fac




No comments:

Post a Comment