producing – Page 14 – Survive Your Job In Television News

Faking the present: When what’s happening now, really isn’t

A morning producer recently posed this question: What do you do with the phrase “police are looking” from the previous night’s copy? Do you keep the phrase present tense? Immediately other morning producers jumped in stating you need to write present tense. No question TV news is designed for the here and now. But let’s get realistic for a moment. In early morning and late evening newscasts, the expectation that all the news is here and now is not possible for multiple hour shows. The biggest offenders perpetuating this idea that everything is all new and all happening right now are Newsies. Too often during morning and late evening newscasts, I hear “false present” tense. The anchors always look uncomfortable reading this “faked” tense because it is not natural. Viewers get that everything you tell them is not happening right that minute. They just want you stop pretending it is. Harsh? Not when you spend time with non-newsies. If I had a dollar for every time I was asked “Why do you news people have to act like something is happening right then when it’s not?” well, I would not be writing this article. I would be sipping Mai Tai’s on a tropical beach, fulltime!

So what’s the work around? First, let’s look more at false present. Popular examples, “the President authorizes a bill”, when showing video of him signing it the day before or “the Olympics start in London” when they actually started the day before. Just because the video shows the signing or opening ceremony doesn’t mean it’s happening at that moment. Viewers know when events like that happened. This is also called headline speak and it is frustrating to hear and read. So why is it drilled into TV journalists to write in present tense and only in present tense? Because that is an easy way to try and force you into sticking to what’s new in a given story. Yes, if you are putting a story in your newscast there should be a new element that you can explain in the first sentence. Yes, use present tense if you possibly can. But remember, viewers do not watch every day and they do not watch every newscast. You must include enough “background” so they have a clue what you are talking about. Use past tense when providing the background, when appropriate. This is especially true if the story is a follow up from the day or week or month before. Often, I hear headline speak in these type of follow ups as well. Journalists leave out the verb in these “follow up” sentences. You get weird, title like, descriptions such as “the July 9^th shooting”… or “the mill fire.“ Unnatural and uncomfortable.

Now let’s look at the phrase the producer brought up: “Police are looking.” Unless there’s been a mass murder or a police officer was shot, odds are police are not actually out physically searching for the people responsible at 4:30 a.m. You can keep this present tense if what police were looking for is still relevant later that night or the next morning (i.e.- they really are still on the street actively looking). Write it this way instead: “Police hope to find…” or “Police want to find…“ That would still be true and you are not emphasizing an act that isn’t really happening at the time of your newscast. There’s also nothing wrong with showing video of the search and saying “Police looked for 3 hours, with no luck yesterday. They hope for more leads today.”

The big takeaway here is that every sentence in your copy does not have to be present tense. Conversational writing changes tenses naturally. When you tell someone a story, you provide background information for context. I guarantee when you do, you use past tense, because that’s when the background information happened. The “write present tense rule” doesn’t mean deny past tense completely, no exceptions. It is a generalization. Remember the reason behind it. Focus on new. If you do, while still providing context for the stories, you will legitimately focus on the present, while not denying the past.

How to avoid losing grip, when covering a seemingly unexplainable story

No doubt, the shootings at the Colorado movie theater, is the kind of story that haunts us journalists. I can tell you, no matter how much you cover stories like these, the emotion you feel remains the same: Raw. It is impossible not to feel an intense emotional reaction. But how those gut feelings sway our coverage decisions is crucial.

We must make time to stop and think. We need to take a hard look at how we are determining our coverage philosophy.

Right when I learned of the shooting, I started re-tweeting interesting issues that were coming out about covering this type of story. I soon stopped myself because it was obvious to me that many journalists were on edge. The story was getting to everyone. How could it not? That was not the time to talk about why we journalists were defaulting to police speak and immediately discussing whether metal detectors need to go into movie theaters now.

I am not going to go into whether angles like theater security, potential causes for this kind of shooting, and whether installing metal detectors in movie theaters should have been brought up the morning of the shootings. Al Tompkins of Poynter summed that up beautifully.

What I am going to ask you to consider is why we “go there” with these angles, so we can look at how not to “lose grip” on the impact. Let’s begin with deferring to “police speak” as coverage begins for these types of events. It is natural to go into CYA mode and fear deviating from the exact language the “authorities” use, in order to prevent possibly misinterpreting what they say. I also think journalists defer to this type of language to set up a sort of emotional barrier between us and the story we are covering. By writing in a very conversational way, it is only human to really feel the impact of the story. By deferring to police speak we are setting up a sort of emotional detachment from the reality we are struggling to grasp ourselves. As difficult as these stories are, and as hectic as the pace is in covering them, you must take even a few seconds to let yourself feel the range of emotions. You need to allow yourself to see them, so you can then move forward with your job. When headed to the booth in these situations I often stopped and took a series of breaths before walking into the control room. I needed to recognize this hurts like hell to think about, and we have an obligation to respect that for everyone who will hear it.

When it comes to worrying whether you misinterpret information, ask questions to be clear. So often we become obsessed with being first and rationalize stilted language and possible errors by saying “Its breaking news, viewers understand.” They don’t completely. They expect you to ask questions. Defaulting to police speak does not make you seem more credible or show that you “checked the info out” before reporting. It is a tell-tale sign to viewers that you are uncomfortable with the information you are reporting. Instead, use attribution. That way as information changes, viewers can see how the information has changed, and who changed it, more clearly.

I also am going to encourage you to talk openly, with the viewers, about how the newsroom is gathering information, as you gather it. So often while doing continuous coverage, anchors are filling time, until new information comes in. This can be an incredible opportunity to let viewers “see the process.” Have a reporter or EP stand by the assignment desk and explain that the newsroom is monitoring Twitter, the networks, local feeds, scanners etc. Explain that you like to get two sources saying the same thing before you go with it (if that’s your station policy of course). Take a live “picture only” of your field crews walking around talking to people. This will make you less nervous about also asking the information gatherers questions. In fact, ask viewers to tweet or email questions about the story that you can try and answer as well. Interact. Don’t guess what they want to know in this type of situation, ask them. You might get an incredible angle this way.

The term “go big or go home” should not mean forcing angles in so that you can be “first” on the next development. Own the here and now. Too often we skip past the part of stories like this that viewers are trying to understand most. In Produce it up I talked about weaving in perspective throughout the earthquake coverage in Japan. Specifically, how to showcase elements that helped the viewer see the scope of what happened. We forget the crucial need for perspective because we are working at a whirlwind pace, not stopping to really absorb what happened. Remember, viewers can get the basic facts. They need us to connect them together in a clear way for some understanding.

We often forget the role of reporter and anchor to the viewer, especially in these situations. Anchors are the viewers’ advocates. Anchors ask the questions the viewer’s cannot. Reporters are the eyewitnesses. If you focus on these roles when designing continuing coverage and the angles that follow, you have a tremendous opportunity to enhance your relationship with the viewer. Too often approaches to continuous coverage over emphasize “new” instead of explaining what’s there, right now. Remembering these roles will also help you avoid “police speak” because it demands you ask questions throughout the news gathering process. As eyewitnesses, reporters do not have to know all the answers right away. The anchor can ask a question and the reporter can explain how he/she is going about getting that information. It shows that the team is trying to give viewers what they need to understand the event. It also naturally helps producers avoid exaggerating the facts with “sexy sells.” You are “selling” your team’s credibility.

Finally, as you sit in editorial meetings and are told “viewers want more of this, what angle can we do?” do not misinterpret “finding blame” for “advocacy.” We journalists often do this. Ask if you are exaggerating the situation with the ideas you bounce around. I mean actually ask, out loud. Often people are in that editorial meeting thinking it, but afraid to say so. Take the time to talk it through. Slow the whirlwind pace just a little bit. If not you will play on the fear factor, possibly too much. In terms of the shooting at the movie theater in Colorado, I shuddered in the morning thinking, “The first angle will be theater security.” Sure enough, a journalist tweeted the question “should there be metal detectors in movie theaters,” six hours into the coverage and as half of America was waking up hearing this for the first time (this reporter was on east coast as well). Three hours later I saw a reporter tweet, touting an exclusive on how easily he was able to sneak into a movie theater unnoticed. Honestly this is a stereotypical “fear” angle to go for. Why do we journalists do this? Again, we confuse advocacy with blaming someone. We figure viewers are saying “Why isn’t someone protecting us?” We decide we must answer. After all, these feelings are human. But you must look “big picture” for the WIFM. What impact will this shooting have on people, today, tomorrow and next year? This requires providing proper perspective. Does the sneaking into a movie theater or using a metal detector angle accurately portray reality as we know it? How often do viewer’s walk through a metal detector in their daily lives? Should there now be metal detectors every public place we go? Think about that when you go to the grocery store in the next few days. Shootings have happened at grocery stores too. Sometimes there is no clear blame to be laid except on the person who did the shooting. Viewers know that better than we do sometimes. Do they expect us to hold people accountable, or help them see how people are reacting to this happening? People coming together to grieve, and to console each other are the more likely realities. They are realities that showcase impact. Helping with those efforts is advocacy.

Now that you see why we tend to resort to these “crutches,” challenge yourself to look back on your newsroom’s coverage so far. Does some of this ring true? Did part of the coverage you helped with or saw “lose grip” on the impact of this event? If so, stop and learn from it. Viewers are counting on you. It isn’t too late.

Welcome to news, now brace yourself. How to survive the wild ride.

If you just graduated in May and — if you’re lucky — were hired right as college ended, you’ve been on the job at a television station for about two months now. If not, don’t worry too much. Even in the best economy, it can take a new grad months to get hired as a broadcast journalist. We’re seeing an uptick in the number of TV jobs available and the amount of hiring going on, despite the still lousy economic environment. In fact, the latest RTDNA/Hofstra University Annual Survey found that TV news staffing grew in 2011. And it grew a lot, by more than 4 percent from the year before. So if you’ve got a little talent that can be developed and a lot of drive you’ll be employed soon.

But when it happens, expect a shockwave to hit your body, mind, and spirit.

That first job in a real newsroom where you’re working full-time, overtime — whatever the assignment desk needs! — is exhausting even for those of us who’ve been in the business for more than a decade. You’re probably used to a senior year of a few classes a week, maybe an independent study or internship, perhaps a part-time job to help pay the bills, but all-in-all still enough time to hang with friends, read US Weekly, and watch NBC Nightly News.

Mmmmm, not so much after a news director brings you on-board.

Your official day in the newsroom might not begin until the 9:30 a.m. editorial meeting. But that’s just what station managers write down as your official start-time. You’ve literally got to have something to bring to the table each morning. And that means waking up early to check your local newspaper and neighborhood blogs online, flipping between the network morning shows so you find out what’s going on nationally as well as what your station and its competitors have in their cut-ins, and calling around to “cop shops” and other sources to see if there’s a story that could make a great package. (After you’ve been on the job for a little while, you’ll hopefully develop a long list of sources you can call every morning to once a week for tips that’ll have you scooping the competition.)

When it’s time for the morning meeting, please come into the conference room with at least three doable stories.

I have been on both sides of the table — as a reporter pitching ideas and as an anchor whom management trusted to make calls about which stories to pursue. I can tell you, nothing is more aggravating for your colleagues than for you to come into a meeting with one teensy idea, one that we don’t even know if it applies to our market because you saw it on Good Morning America but didn’t make any calls to local leaders, and then when someone in the room asks, “What else ya got?” You look at us, shrug, and say, “I’m open to ideas.”

No, I don’t think so.

We reporters bring ideas to the show producers, assignment manager, and ultimately the news director for them to approve or turn down. We are the ideas people. Not them. (They will, of course, contribute ideas. But my point is to not rely on them.)

Reporters are reporters because we have a need to know before other people and are naturally curious about what’s happening in our community. For instance, while driving to the mall, you see a patch of land that’s been cleared. You start wondering what’s going to be built there. You start calling City Hall, real estate agents, and developers. You learn it’s where the governor wants to put a small business incubator on a bet it’ll create jobs for your town. She just hasn’t announced it yet. But you don’t need to wait for her news conference because you’ve already confirmed it with local leaders, zoning documents, permits, etc.

The reporter who does this before a morning meeting is in and out the door in under five minutes. And believe me, no matter which side of the table you’re on, you want to limit the amount of time you’re in a morning meeting.

Let’s say shooting this story takes four hours because you’ve got to drive all over your market to get the right people on camera — the people who actually know about the project. You barely have time for lunch. In fact, when you ask your photographer to swing through McDonald’s he says “OK,” with a sigh because he’s already eating his sandwich and wonders why you didn’t bring your lunch, too.

It’ll probably take you an hour to an hour-and-a-half to write a package at the beginning.

Then it’ll probably take your photographer an hour to edit it.

You’re both running late again as you head out the door for your live shot but you make it in time.

You’re live at 5, 5:30, and 6 p.m.

The 11 o’clock producer calls and would like a look live. So you spend another 10 minutes shooting that after your last live shot.

Then you’ve got to drive back to the station and write your web story.

When it’s done, you notice the red light on your desk phone is on. So you spend another half hour returning messages.

By now, it’s pushing 8 o’clock at night and you haven’t even had dinner yet.

And for a person who’s only had part-time jobs before, all this is going to wear you out.

I say that with no judgment. It happened to me during the first three months at my first TV news job. It happens to a lot of people because that’s a long day.

So here are some tips on how to cope:

Stay in touch with a friend from college so you can both commiserate about what life is like now that you’ve entered what your father, big sister, and the commencement speaker sarcastically refer to as the “real world.”
Don’t forget to call your best friend. Facebooking is good for little updates here and there. But you want to continue to nurture that deep bond you both have.
Skype with your parents and/or significant other every night if you have to.
Keep your apartment full of fruits, vegetables, and the foods you love. Stock-up for the whole week the weekend before, if you have to. (Also, since you won’t be making much money in TV news in the beginning, learn where the Aldi, Dollar General, or other discount store is in your new neighborhood.)
Have a favorite show? Set that DVR to “series record.” You never know when you might get called out to breaking news. And as TV people, missing our favorite TV show puts us in a bad mood.
Read for fun. (As in a trashy novel or something else that gives you a thrill.)
Go to a church/synagogue/mosque if that is part of your tradition.
Take time to meditate if that is a good outlet for you. Free meditation guides and music are all over the internet. You can find lots of music on iTunes, too, as well as podcasts.
Be firm with yourself that you will go to bed by 11:30 p.m. even if you’re naturally a night owl. Sleep is so important to your mental and physical well-being.

Finally, don’t forget to enjoy this part of the journey. We are driven, ambitious people. And too often we sign a contract at one TV station and immediately start daydreaming about how big of a market we’ll be able to get to from here.

I’ve made that mistake. So have many of my friends. Sounds like Robin Meade has been there, too.

But you’re going to drive yourself crazy and your contract is going to seem really long if, from day one, you’re thinking about your next gig.

So embrace your market.

Yes, it’s rural. Yes, people here “talk funny.” Yes, there are still places in the United States that don’t have a Target.

These are the memories you will need for the rest of your career. This is the texture and perspective you will be able to credibly add to your banter when you’re a big time anchor in Chicago or to your package scripts when you’re a correspondent at CNN.

Not to sound like those sappy people who spoke at your graduation, but you have begun an incredible journey.

Embrace it.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Matthew Nordin is no longer counting down the days until the end of a TV contract. He tells us he is loving it in Cincinnati where WXIX-TV has hired him as an investigative reporter/anchor. Feel free to reach out to him on Twitter @FOX19Matthew.

(Gasp) I can’t believe he just posted that!

Journalists from all over recently got to see the social media policy for NBC owned stations. Immediately after an article on TVNewsCheck was posted outlining the policies, journalists and legal experts began tweeting, many calling the policy ridiculous. No doubt, it is strict. According to the article, you have to state that you are an employee of NBC Universal on every social media site you use, even private ones. You also have to get approval from management if you want to express an opinion about any issue, on any of your sites. Yes, this includes personal accounts. Any facts should be verified before retweeting someone else’s comments. All of these points are worth discussion. There’s already plenty of talk about it online. But one part really struck me. An ombudsman for the station group stated that when posting online, there is a tendency to “be more flip.” Anything you post, you should also be ready to broadcast. His statement is a reminder that what you say or do online is out there for everyone to see. It reminds me of what a couple of mentors used to say, “If you do the news, you don’t get the option to be truly anonymous.”

That advice is certainly true, and as Chef Emeril Lagasse would say, “Let’s kick it up another notch!” What you say online can be seen by more people, than things you say even out in public. Over the last year I have watched many journalists make comments online that surprise me. I saw a tweet from a reporter claiming a company she hired for a home repair “stinks” and is a “rip off.” She named the company, then stated you should never hire this company. A producer tweeted about a story in one of the station’s newscasts, stating that he doubted a business owner’s claims that a piece of equipment that failed had recently been inspected and passed. An anchor posted video on Facebook of another anchor shooting the bird and chiding her. A photojournalist mentioned on Facebook that he thought someone accused of a crime was “guilty as hell” weeks before the trial even started. The list goes on and on. And in many of those cases, their Twitter accounts specified exactly where they worked. Like it or not, that means their comments could be construed as speaking on behalf of those companies.

We all have a right to opinions. We all have a right to blow off steam. We all have a right to talk with our friends about things we love and things that bug us. But participating in social media is more public than going to a restaurant or bar and living it up one night. There is a far greater chance of getting caught doing something your station will not approve of. Yes, again some of these social media policies are overly harsh, and possibly would not ”hold up.” But consider your paycheck, do you want to try and fight it? I can read all kinds of articles on why these social media policies are ridiculous, but is enough written about how to gauge your influence on social media as a journalist?

Let’s spell it out. Your comments on social media are published representations of you. Do not forget, with each post, you are potentially giving a worldwide audience access. If you have a bad day and go off, those comments could come back to bite. That can be the case even if you do a mea culpa, and even if you delete the post realizing you temporarily lost your mind and did something pretty stupid. As journalists we understand how permanent publishing something truly is. Yet, so many journalists are posting things online that we would not dare write down on paper. By typing your thoughts out, instead of just speaking them, you create a permanent record. It is much harder to pull off a “he said, she said” type of defense. If you ever are sued, how you act on social media accounts could be brought up to question your credibility.

The point here is not to preach, but to protect. Social media is such an incredible opportunity for journalists to connect with their audience and each other. Let common sense prevail. That way it won’t matter if your station’s social media policy is strict. You will always showcase yourself in a positive, proactive and professional light.