admin – Page 35 – Survive Your Job In Television News

Getting around allegedly

This one word, is the biggest no-no you can write in TV news other than an actual fact error. Why? It does nothing to protect you legally. Saying something “allegedly” happened or a person “allegedly” did something is only calling attention, to the fact, that your facts are probably unclear and you may not be able to defend your statement.

So how do you get around the word “allegedy” or the phrase “the alleged?” Here are some simple ways.

Avoiding “allegedly”

Attribute information to source
Do not name names
Name person with the specific charges

So let’s spell these out for you. When police tell you a place was broken into, or a man confronted a clerk, or the clerk fired a shot at the man and missed then the man ran away, write it that way. These facts often end up with the term “allegedly” or “alleged” in the sentence descriptions. Same thing if you have security video of the actual robbery. Don’t say: “You can see the alleged robbers in this security video.” The guys with the guns in the video are the robbers. So you should say it: “You can see the robbers holding up the place in this security video.”

How about this one? “An alleged break in at a store in Mayberry today.” Sound familiar? Did police call it a break in? Was something actually taken? Do you have video? If you can say yes to these questions then the break did not allegedly happen. It happened for real. So you should say: “A break in today at a store in Mayberry. This video, released by investigators, shows you (describe what viewer sees).. ” If you know the answer to police calling it a break in, but do not know if anything was taken and there is no video, then write: “Police say someone broke into a store today in Mayberry.” See the difference? Police are calling it a break in. You are taking their word for it a bit, right? So state where you got the information. Another way to attribute both scenarios is “Police need help finding out who broke into a store in Mayberry today.” Again, you attribute.

When police tell you a man confronted the clerk, the clerk shot at the man, and then the man ran away, you do not need the word “allegedly” either. Often you will hear copy that reads, “The man allegedly confronted the clerk.” Or “The clerk allegedly shot at the man but missed.” And lastly “The man allegedly ran away.” No, no and no. “Police say a man confronted the clerk.” Or better yet if you have surveillance video: “Watch the man confront the clerk. Investigators tell us (and provide a detail about the exchange).” As for the clerk firing a shot and missing, “Police say the clerk fired a shot and missed.” If you have video of it: “Investigators shared this video where it looks like the clerk shot at the man and missed. “ (If you are still nervous about declarative statements.) And remember, the man who broke in, is a man. He is not a “suspect” if we don’t know his name, and police haven’t declared him a “suspect.” But during a break in a person doesn’t “allegedly” get away or run away. A person does get away or run away, unless you know there’s been an arrest. Then the person arrested becomes a “suspect.”

The next most common reason why “allegedly” is used, is because you have a name and want to use it. When you really stop and think about it, the majority of stories do not need to name names to be highly relevant. It is most often the action that is interesting, not the person. You can call the person, “the man” or “the woman.” You do not have to use a name even if you have it, especially if charges are pending. Usually the story is what interests viewers, not the name of the person, unless it is a public figure. The person who shot other people in a parking lot, is not an “alleged” shooter. Again you should say: “A man shot some people.” or “A woman, shot some people.” The term “alleged” shooter doesn’t work.

If the person is charged and you want to name names, use attribution again and list the charge. “JOE SCHMO is charged with burglary tonight” or “Police charged Joe Schmo with…” If you use a name, have a charge by it. It just protects you.

So there you have it, ways to get around “allegedly” and “the alleged.” Here’s to never seeing those words in news copy again!

The one thing you should ask about in a job interview, but probably don’t

We have talked a lot about ways to feel out a station when job interviewing. We have discussed not judging a place by its market size. Now let’s talk about the one thing you should ask about in a job interview, but probably don’t. It is: How does your boss juggle work and family life (and what does he/she do to promote family life for employees)?

Stations continue cutting back on resources and many are chronically short staffed because of budget cuts and the constant threat of layoffs. So, this may seem like a crazy question to ask in a job interview. It’s not though. The reason: You have to be able to balance your life wherever you end up. If you have a workaholic, eat three meals a day at the office desk, sleep on a cot when necessary kind of boss, then you can pretty much kiss quality family time goodbye. If the boss doesn’t get it, you don’t get it either.

Of course all of us understand that TV news is far from a 9 to 5, punch in and out, kind of job. (If you don’t you are going to be very frustrated!) Still, some managers take gross advantage of salaried status and work us to death. Often it isn’t even because of short staffing. It is simply poor organization. If you read through our section “Picking a Shop” you will see this is a big theme. Poor organization, means poor management, means premature greying and a possible heart attack or bleeding ulcer for you.

Sitting in a job interview and asking a potential mentor how he/she manages to juggle work and family is a fair question. You are getting advice. You are also getting great insight into how this manager ticks. Is this a person who will be reasonable when a life crisis happens? Is this a person who will consider a crews safety during dangerous stories, like natural disasters? The simple, “How do you juggle family/work?” question helps you naturally delve into these types of scenarios. You will get great intel on your potential future boss.

If family is very important to you, it is best to be upfront about that from the get go. If this is a run and gun, take no prisoners, work until you drop type station then you are going to be miserable. It is possible to balance family life and be a successful highly productive journalist. It requires organization. And not just from you either. Team effort is crucial. You are not being selfish wanting to protect your family life. You are maintaining a balance, so you can excel while at your job, because you know your family is fine at home. A lot of managers get this, but even more need to be reminded. Small rewards, like occasionally letting you head home early when your work is done, lead to big gains. When the breaker happens on your day off, you are going to be more apt to call in and offer to help. Managers, who respect you, get respect and extra effort in return. It’s only natural. So, go ahead, ask the question. Your personal success is at stake.

Why you need your own continuous coverage plan, before something happens.

When the police chase happened in Phoenix that resulted in a suicide airing live on FOX News Channel, journalists hopped on Twitter right away discussing their shock at what they had seen. As we began to talk about it, one wise reporter said, “It could happen to any of us.” So true, in so many ways.

Throughout my career as a producer, I was shocked at how few local television stations have continuous coverage plans and training to pull it off. Yes, I said training. You can discuss scenarios ahead of time. You can “practice” how you would handle different scenarios. There are some telltale signs of trouble. Early in my career, I was blessed to have an AND out of Miami, who had a lot of experience with continuous coverage. He sat all of us green producers down and laid out rules we needed to follow. These rules, helped me excel at continuous coverage everywhere else I went, regardless of the station’s policies (or lack thereof in most cases). So here are a few of them in case you are in a newsroom where continuous coverage is always a cluster because no one knows their roles.

Continuous coverage must dos:

Two sets of eyes in the booth AT ALL TIMES
Assign roles in the booth
Always have a wide shot available
Clear point person to make ethical calls
Know your personal ethical limits

The single most important thing you need when boothing continuous coverage, is a second set of eyes watching content at all times. (This is the rule, that the majority of stations fought me on later in my career.) With all due respect though, this should not be the role of the director. That person is also extremely busy in the booth. Producers and directors need some sort of backup. If my EP or AND could not do it, I would pull a producer from a later or earlier show. I even used associate producers and editors. I needed someone to tell me if any of the live images changed, while I was talking to management or the anchors. I kept a notebook by my side, so the person could write down notes while I was in the middle of giving instructions. I needed instant access to that information no matter what.

Any managers reading this, your producer must have this. Make it happen!

Which leads to my next point, if there are two people in the booth, clearly define the roles. One person is the only producer that talks to the anchors and director, the other is in charge of figuring out what’s next. Both watch the live images coming in at all times and do not assume the other has seen any of it. Every time an image changes, write down which monitor it changed on in the notebook. The anchors and production crew need one clear, calm voice. This is easy to accomplish with two people in the booth.

Always have a wide shot available to take. Do not be afraid to go to the shot if your gut is telling you that what you are watching is about to go horribly wrong. Remember, there are other cameras getting the “money shot.” You can always show the video even a few seconds later. However, you cannot take it back if you show a man shooting himself in the head on live TV. Most local channels do not have 5 second delays. So, you really do have to be on top of it.

You also need to know what manager is the point person to make ethical calls. There is nothing worse than covering a standoff or police chase, getting hinky about the information you hear a reporter saying and then not being able to get a manager to pick up the #%@! phone. Before you walk into the booth, demand to know the point person. Make it clear, if things go south, you will know where to point the finger. I have even done this with NDs by the way.

Which leads to my last point: Know your personal ethical limits. There is always a fall guy/gal for a big screw up like the airing of a suicide during the police chase that happened live on FOX Friday. Know what you can live with while making decisions in the booth. One time I was told to take a live tight shot of a SWAT team during a standoff. The shot would’ve clearly made it easy to figure out where they were setting up. The ethical call was made by the ND: “Do it because it’s great TV.” There was no worry about the risk to those SWAT officers. I handed my headset to the ND, and said “It’s on you.” I was not going to put lives in jeopardy. That was not something I wanted to live with throughout my life and career. These were real people, with real families. You can’t take it back, if you make a horrid ethical call. Every journalist must remember that, from reporters and photojournalists on the scene, to producers in the booth, to the ND or GM making the ultimate calls. Know what your limits are and be true to yourself. Make sure your managers know what those limits are ahead of time. Have your personal continuous coverage plan, even if your station does not.

What survivetvnewsjobs has taught me. A note from the founder.

Survivetvnewsjobs was born in February of 2011. In that short amount of time, it has become a place where journalists find practical advice to situations they face in newsrooms each day. It also has become a place to hop online using Twitter and Facebook to share ideas, network and mentor.

All this time, most of you had no idea where the information was coming from. I was never trying to hide my identity. I simply wanted the focus to be on the content of the site. But now, I want to formally introduce myself. My name is Beth Johnson. I’m a former EP and producer and the founder of survivetvnewsjobs.com.

Why now? For several reasons. The website has gained enough exposure that I am getting called out a bit from college professors and industry leaders. I am also starting to be asked to speak on behalf of TV journalists about issues we face. And I have also just accepted a job offer, with MediaStars to do something no other agency has tried: Represent producers and managers, with an ambitious goal, to raise pay, especially for producers and EP’s. (On air people are welcome to call me also by the way.) Survivetvnewsjobs will not be used to convince you to get representation. That is not, never was and never will be the goal.

From day one, this website has been all about sharing practical advice. It was designed to let journalists have a voice about the industry they love. Initially, I had contributors who were afraid to put their names on articles for fear of possible conflicts with their employers. That’s why the website began with no bio.

Then something awesome happened! Journalists began writing for the website, and were able to safely sign their names. Newsroom managers started passing out some of the articles and talking about them with staff members. Professors began passing out articles to discuss with soon to be journos. The overwhelmingly positive feedback is humbling and inspiring. I appreciate it immensely, and I respect the trust you have put in this site and in the discussions we have had.

So today, I am sharing what this site has taught me so far. Just like when I was in the daily grind, journalists need to connect with each other and share ideas. They need to raise a flag if their pay doesn’t seem to match up to their peers. Journalists need training and support. Many believe this biz is great and has the potential to be even better. Newsies are looking for ways to network, so they can help each other grow and make the most of the jobs they love. This website fulfills an important need.

Survivetvnewsjob will remain, just that: A place for you to connect, grow and compare notes. What all of you have created with me is too important to give up. I will still offer just as many articles and discussions on Twitter and FB. You will hear about MediaStars in occasional fashion articles, because frankly, so many of you responded, and liked the advice and debates. You will also see a MediaStars ad banner, but that’s about it.

I am asking for one thing in return. If you have a topic you are passionate about and can offer positive solutions, submit an article for review or send me your idea. This website was not designed to be just one person’s voice all the time. Help keep the discussion going and allow this website to be what it’s always been intended for: Helping journalists survive their TV news jobs.