reporter – Page 5 – Survive Your Job In Television News

Time to question, all those questions!

You would think asking questions would be the easiest part of a TV journalists job. We are paid to ask them all day long, so we should be experts, right? Yet it is nearly impossible to watch a newscast and not see very strange and uncomfortable Q and A’s. We recently discussed those pesky consultant/management mandates that say you must have the anchor ask the reporter a question going into a live shot (see “What’s with the question”). Now let’s talk about required questions in live tags.

First a comment to managers and producers that think this must happen after every live shot no matter what: Is this a cheap copout? Yes, there is a tone in my question. There is good reason. The nature of many news philosophies is to exploit, and I would argue create, tension in Q and A. We want spirited debate. We want to expose the swindler. We want to play out the anger in the situation. We want to separate fact from fiction. These are great elements to make great TV, no arguments there. But what is the point of Q and A between anchors and reporters? It’s team building. Here is a wild and crazy idea: Could these mandated questions actually make it seem like the team is working against each other?

To clarify, I am talking about Q and A out of basic news of the day stories. I’m not talking about breaking news. Q and A is very natural and frankly expected by the audience in breaking news. In this article we are talking about Q and A found at the end of live reports about school budget cuts, ongoing court cases, follow ups to yesterday’s big fire. These are the stories that can really be bundled up in nice little packages. The facts are not changing minute-by-minute and therefore do not need clarifying. In other words, the reporter doesn’t really need the anchor to back them up and make sure the information was clear because new facts are constantly coming in.

We’re talking about Q and A scripted after the event that the reporter is covering is finished. Stories that give viewers insight into what happened. In these run of the mill situations, the questions often come across as forced and, if you really think about it, often make either the anchor or the reporter seem clueless about a given fact.

In order to script effective Q and A in the tag to a live shot, you must first really understand the role of both the anchor and the reporter TO THE VIEWER. The anchor must be more than the “pretty” person sitting on the desk, telling the reporter what to do. This is how many Q and A’s come across: The boss (anchor) is quizzing to see if the worker (reporter) did his/her assignment and understands the material. Is this team building? What is the anchor to the viewer?

At stations where the anchors are very highly regarded, you find that viewers consider the anchor to be their voice, their advocate. Viewers say, “The anchor looks out for my community. He/she asks what I am thinking.” Reporters are the eyewitnesses that show viewers what’s happening in their town or neighborhood, and demand the truth. So when you have an anchor ask a reporter a pointed question that can seem adversarial toward the reporter, you lessen the credibility of the reporter a bit. Then there’s the other common type of scripted question: the softball. Since many producers and reporters are under intense time constraints, the mandated questions are often after thoughts. They become trivial questions that make the anchor look like he/she isn’t paying attention to the issue being discussed. No, you don’t want the anchor picking a fight with the reporter. You also don’t want the anchor coming off as having sat in “la la land” for the last 2 minutes and being clueless about the issue. The viewer assumes the anchor has a clue about the story being discussed. Remember the anchor is the viewer’s advocate. So asking, “Hey Joe Schmo when’s the next council meeting if people want to attend?” is a throwaway. It’s information that’s too basic. If you are required to script a question, have the anchor ask something like, “Joe, if people really want to speak before council at the next meeting on the 7^th, what do they need to do?” This shows the anchor knows there’s another meeting, and is thinking about concrete facts the viewers need to know to have a voice. Then the reporter, who demands truth, has the answer. The question is in no way adversarial between anchor and reporter. Each role is clearly defined in the exchange.

That, my friends, is the key to scripting Q and A in live tags. First and foremost remember the role of the anchor to the viewer and the role of the reporter to the viewer. It will help make sure mandated questions do not come off seeming forced as often. Have the anchor ask questions so that the viewer can gain more control of the situation or move forward with the facts presented. Have the fact finder, eyewitness reporter, show the viewer the situation or explain the fact.

*Anchors if you are told to “just put questions in” you need to actually call the reporters. Don’t assume you know the story. Often you are wrong and the reporter is trying to keep you from looking like a moron. (Check out the Art of ad-lib and On the spot, when anchors put you in uncomfortable positions articles.)

As for producers or managers who mandate these Q and A’s every time, without fail, there are other ways to build team. And, keep in mind, viewers like variety. Too much scripting becomes too formulaic and makes your newscast look tedious. In conversations, there are times to ask questions and times to shut up and just listen to take it all in. The anchor’s conversations with reporters should reflect how we actually communicate with others in “the real world.” Sometimes we ask a question. Sometimes we don’t.

Developing your interviewing skills on the beat.

It can make or break a story if it isn’t done correctly. It can also capture the essence of what you’re trying to convey and draw your audience in like the earth’s gravitational pull. Interviews are the foundation of good reporting. They are the best way of understanding a situation and seeing the story from someone else’s perspective. Most importantly, a successful interview requires strong people skills and technical ability.

As reporters, you’re constantly working under deadline pressure and the first thing you think about is, “Who should I interview for this story.” As you know, finding someone to talk on camera is half the battle. So when you do find them, and get ready to push record, make sure you don’t waste time by asking meaningless questions. Those questions are anything you know you’re not going to use to get your story on air. This is usually the small talk or chit chat that helps warm up your subject. Take it from me; this can really slow down the logging process when you’re under deadline.

Even though you’re getting to the point, don’t forget to be conversational. What I mean by this is, don’t ask one question, and then immediately think about the next question we’re going to ask. At this point you’ve lost. Your subject may say something that could lead to a much better story. Listening closely and intently will help you uncover any possible hidden details of the story you’re trying to cover. My advice is to have just a couple of questions you really need to ask, but “play” off the conversation. I find this will help you write into, out of, and around your sound bites.

Depending on the rapport you’ve established with the person you’re interviewing, many times you can ask your most poignant questions first and get to the heart of the matter. Time is money, (well for you it’s precious seconds so you don’t miss slot.) Remember, it’s most important to ask questions which are relevant and revealing about the participant’s character and opinion.

You never know what you’re going to get when you interview someone. Hopefully, you’re getting raw emotion like anger, sadness, enthusiasm, excitement…etc. Whatever you’re getting, don’t be afraid to let that raw emotion breathe. The toughest thing to do for reporters and anchors is to be silent and let the interviewee say what they have to say. Don’t cut someone off in mid-thought or sentence. Let them stay in the zone until it’s appropriate to ask the next question. This is the hardest to judge and will take time to develop. All I can say here is…it’s about feel.

When you’re done getting that great interview, don’t forget to tell your producers. They can really help setup your story and help you hit the story out of the park.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Kennan Oliphant is a morning Executive Producer at WMBF News in Myrtle Beach, SC. He started his career as a anchor/reporter. He’s won numerous awards and loves to connect with people over social media. Follow him on Twitter: @TVNewsGuru or facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kennan-Oliphant/313726945344980

Could you turn a story without any track?

No this article is not for photojournalists. They don’t need it. They can turn a story without any reporter or anchor track. This question I pose is for two other groups in the newsroom: Producers and, to some extent, reporters. I am guessing most of you reading this are saying, “Probably, but why would I?” Because in truth, most TV journalists cannot do it and end up with a piece that makes any sense at all.

Why does this matter? Why should you have the skills to be able to produce a story without any track? There are several reasons:

Sometimes you must “see it” to get the context
Great content often needs no words
Video is the essence of TV news

When I was producing in a large market, my ND issued a really intense mandate to all producers: No writing vo’s, vo/sots, anchor packages or teases without first looking at and time coding the video. Now this was really a lot to ask, because we didn’t have desktop editing yet. You had to pull feed video or raw video, find an open edit bay and sit and log a videotape! It took a lot of time, AT FIRST. But soon, I started to see why this was required. Stories I had planned to air in my newscast were not always as they seemed. Written descriptions of the video, sent from other affiliates, were often off the mark. The video told a different story than the words. My field crew, or a reporter on the feed, missed an awesome opportunity with a sound bite or section of video. Soon I noticed a big change. When I sat down to write, I was fast and very efficient. The number of errors both I and my AP wrote went way down. My copy editors loved me. I didn’t assume as much about stories and actually saw the realities.

I also learned another amazing lesson. Great content often needs few words. I could play out sections of great nats and watch people in the newsroom suddenly stop and stare. I learned to use silence as natural sound occasionally. (For more on that technique see “Storytelling on a dime”, and “Can you picture it.”) Sometimes I ran a long bite instead of writing a vo/sot. Let the people involved give the context. I just set up the situation, and explained what would come next in the tag. No, this technique won’t work on every story. But if you don’t learn how to tell a story without track, you will never truly tell a great story for television.

The reason why is simple: Video is the essence of TV news. You cannot showcase the power of video without first seeing that video. Having a photographer or a reporter describe it is not good enough. With desk top editing there is no excuse. Call up the video, sit back and watch. Let the images move you. Let the video sequences form in your head. Let the images bring questions to your mind. The answers are your powerful elements. The answers are often in sound bites and single images. Remember “a picture tells a thousand words.”

So how as a producer do you write stories without using any track? Next time you are asked to write an anchor package, try and outline it without a single sentence of copy. Just write down the images and sound bites. Chances are you will end up with little to no track. The example above, where you let the sound bite breathe and tell the story instead of having an anchor talk over generic video, can be effective as well. Let’s take a story from a protest for an example. The anchor can introduce the piece saying where the event was held and how many people showed up. “What was their message? We’re letting them tell you.” Then let some sound play. Let a few people talk. If there’s another viewpoint, or a counter protest tag with: “And now, the other side.” and then let that sound play out. Never forget we need to be informed witnesses for our viewers. There is no agenda in this type of coverage. The viewer makes his/her own judgment. You can always tag out with some factoids to help the viewer see the whole picture.

As for reporters, too often nowadays the emphasis becomes the reporter track, not the video. How often do you pre-write your package before you even get on scene to shoot the video? How often do you hear the 1 sound bite you think you need then signal the photojournalist to turn off the camera and walk away? Yes, you have intense timing constraints. Many of you are backpack journalist or get to have a photographer only because you churn two or three packages a day. I get it. Instead of pre-writing sections of your pieces, jot down notes like you would for a live shot. Then go and really listen to the person you interview. Be discerning. Are you really getting the point of what is going on or just assuming the situation is a certain way? You don’t know if you don’t listen. Then write a log of the video and sound you have, in the order you want it, before turning those bullet points in your notebook into copy. At the very least you will write more effectively to your video. I bet you will surprise yourself and see that you need less track and find more chances to let your sound breathe. Finally, once in a while, take a story you did and try to redo with just the video and sound. Do not write any reporter track. Attempt a photo essay in your spare time as a way to hone your skills (see “Humble pie” for more ways to help yourself grow). You will become a better storyteller and a more informed witness for the viewer because of it.

What can we learn from crusty old journalists.

There is a very witty blog called Stuffjournalistslike.com that is truly a blast to read. I had tears streaming down my face with laughter. One article on Grumpy old journalists, actually made me nostalgic for some of the crusty old reporters from my past. It reminded me that there are fewer of these old die hards and that the lessons we gained from them cannot be lost.

Mandates of a crusty old journalist

No room for errors (especially fact errors)
No exaggerations
Don’t take a person’s word for it
Deadlines are mandatory
Don’t screw your team over

Fellow journalists, we have failed those crusty old guys in terms of journalistic integrity. A lot of embarrassing errors and exaggerations make air. (The Jeremy Lin, ESPN “Chink In the Armor” reference is just the latest.) Crusty old journalists do not use cheesy phrases. (Honestly, even if the people didn’t know that “Chink” can be taken as a highly offensive ethnic slur, it is a cheesy phrase to use highlighting a 1 game losing streak.) Old timers also always made sure their pieces were not just fact checked once, but triple checked. They did not assume they could not screw something up just because they are veterans in their field. To them, you had your facts checked simply because, there was no room for error. These old timers would say “If you can’t get your facts straight, you don’t deserve to be a journalist!” That’s why you fact check and refuse to exaggerate.

So, naturally, crusty old journalists were special kinds of skeptics. If a PIO said “This is the way it is!” and walked off in a huff that reporter knew to call “Bullshit! Prove it.” To take a line from Missouri’s state mantra, “Show me.” Crusty old journalists didn’t care if they occasionally pissed off a PIO. They remembered a key fact: PIO’s need to respect journalists also. That journalist would go to a source in order to fact check the PIO. And if the PIO was lying, you can bet that old timer would expose the truth.

But the last two mandates of a crusty old journalist are the most important if you want to survive and thrive in a modern day newsroom. Don’t miss deadlines and don’t screw your team over. (These go hand in hand.) I get that the new mantra is more “me” oriented. But here’s the deal, putting “deadlines” and “team” first actually puts your best interests first. If you are screwing over the producer, anchor, photographer or manager regularly you will face payback. And, oh by the way, it will hurt. Don’t make yourself vulnerable. Be an untouchable, crusty old journalist.