Becoming Stronger For The Trying

An Open Letter to Julie Crothers and The Franklin staff.

Dear Julie,

I want to congratulate you on a wonderful semester as editor of The Franklin. In some ways, I think the past semester might be your most impressive as an editor, Julie, because you took a fairly young, inexperienced staff and molded it into one of the best weekly newspaper in the state. That takes dedication, perseverance and loyalty. You set lofty goals and you stuck with them. And you accepted constructive criticism. You were always willing to try again and to learn.

I’d like to think this blog, along with the patient, steady tutelage of John Krull and Hank Nuwer, helped shine some light along the way. But lessons given mean nothing unless they are received. You are reading the 30th blog that I have posted since September, 2009. In four semesters, there have been 2,800 page views and 56 comments. My intent from the beginning was to create a “space” where we could have a regular dialogue about The Franklin. I had no idea so many would choose to participate. You made this space your own. As a caretaker of that space, I am grateful for the many visitors.

If in fact teaching and learning is a journey, then the landscape is a hilly one. There are lots of ups and downs. My friend and mentor, the late Mary Benedict, was fond of telling students, “Journalism isn’t necessarily your best work; it’s the best you could do in the time you had to do it.” Julie, you and your staff gained strength by trying new things, failing at times along the way, but becoming stronger for the trying. Mary would be proud of you for the effort you and your staff were willing to give week after week. So am I.

I think I have a particular bond to all of you because in a sense, I get to “graduate” with you this spring. While we are leaving a familiar part of our lives behind, we face a future having learned an important lesson from each other. It’s not always about being the best. It’s about giving our best despite the limits we face.

And becoming stronger for the trying.

With that, Julie, let me wish you the best.

Sincerely,

–Dennis

Inviting Readers To Enter Our Pages And Stay A While

This is a nice issue from a design and photography standpoint. Permit me to make some very quick observations about our approach to design.

A Well Balanced Page

Page 1: This is a better designed front page compared to last week (which has much the same story module pattern). Editors have paid better attention this week to the bottom half of this page (below the fold). By placing the bike rider photo toward the middle of the page, the overall balance is stronger. I really like the “economic research” story mod at the bottom of the page. This element balances Page 1 nicely. Good work.

Page 2 and Page 3: These two pages have a lot in common. As you know, good photography is critical to attractive design. In both of these pages, editors have a strong horizontal image above the fold that anchors the page. A strong vertical story module provides contrast on the left side of both pages. Ads tend to balance out the bottom of each design. One further comment. Rather than use an AP photo of Daniels, why don’t we use a photo from Lauren Casey, Megan Banta or Jessica Wray? These girls have produced some excellent photos of activities at the Statehouse. It’s always better to use our own stuff (assuming we have assigned it in the first place).

Add Visuals To Lead Editorial

Page 4: The editorial page is strong in terms of leadership. The editorial takes a justifiable shot at Mortensen whom we “know” because of his rather recent campus visit. However, I think we lose a great visual opportunity with this editorial. Surely we could have found a cover of Mortensen’s book — Three Cups of Tea — to use as an anchor point for this editorial. We could have maybe added an “X” through the image to further introduce our editorial position. Keep in mind, editors, that an editorial page can be just as lively visually as any other page. When you think editorials and columns, also think of the visuals this content implies. Usually, mug shots aren’t enough to combat the overwhelming “gray” pattern of too much text on a page. Let’s continue exploring ways to add much needed contrast (and readability) to Page 4.

Page 5: Another strong page because we begin with a strong visual anchor point (or point of entry). Shelby’s photo sets up a visual “bridge” between the image and the headline. The story module below is a nice mix of typography and photography which means editors care as much about the bottom half of the page as the top. I like the overall proportions of this page as well with horizontal story mods contrasting with the nice, vertical column by Katie Beck. When you get the vertical and horizontal elements working well together, the page has a sense of balance.

Watch Those Crops

Page 7: I love “half” of Page 7. The top half of the page is visually attractive and inviting to our readers. However, our design below the fold is much too gray. When we place all of our visuals to the tops of pages it’s like a heavy kid trying to teeter-totter with a skinny kid. All the weight is on one end so the page appears to be out of balance. Also, be careful where we crop sports photos. Runners really ought to have legs (and ankles and feet). After all, they are RUNNERS. In five out of six runners we show on Page 6, only one (#333) appears anatomically able to run (and even that runner appears only to have one-and-a-half legs). Just be careful. We’re journalists, not surgeons.

Page 8: I like Page 8 because editors usually push the envelope here in terms of design. This week is no exception. I think we pulled some good quotes from Mitchell and I love the display type selection. Here are some quick observations.

• When we use quotes in a headline, use single quotes. Only use double quotes within the text block.

• Second, while I love the visual connection between the words, “flying through the air,” and then seeing Mitchell flying over the high bar, I think we become too conservative in the last half of the page. Why such a formal design with the smaller photos? At the least, why not turn these smaller “detail” shots so they don’t align so evenly. Tip them slightly to bring a little tension to the page. Then, do a text wrap around these uneven edges. Just a thought.

Overall, this is a visually attractive issue. It’s great to see you editors putting more emphasis on the photography and the graphic aspects of the paper. Every story is an opportunity to search the text for “visual clues.” Readers ignore poorly design story packages no matter how good the stories themselves may be. This week I think we produce not only strong content but a strong “invitation” to readers to enter our pages and stay a while.

Got Some Good Multimedia? You’d Better Be Able To Sell It

I haven’t talked much this spring about the work of Jay Druba and his staff. As the Multimedia Editor, it’s been Jay’s responsibility to coordinate slide shows, videos and audio content of The Franklin staff each week. It’s a big job and Jay has done a good job.

I also know that Jay has been limited in what can be done on our online site. The online template does not always give Jay’s staff the opportunity to “sell” the video or slide show to our viewers and readers. As a result, our multimedia coverage stands alone lacking any real “teaser” material to build and maintain interest.

Make no mistake, multimedia needs to be “sold,” in the sense that we must tell our readers quickly why our content matters. If we don’t market our photos, slide shows, videos and audio on our web site, our readers move on.  Readers, we know, are impatient and if they don’t sense a personal focus in our print or online content, they find better things to do with their time. Who can blame them.

In class this week I’ve been pushing students to write (and rewrite) “focus statements.” These students are creating their first audio slide shows and it’s easy for them to assume that just because they’ve worked hard to produce these shows that readership (or viewership) is automatic. It’s not that simple.

Instead, each student needs to develop a statement that answers the question, “why should the reader care.” Dealing with this question early in the creative process means our work stays focused on the needs of our reader.

Last fall, Kori Steer wrote this focus statement about her slide show subject:

Until the age of 11, Stacie Tanksley was illiterate. Few people thought Stacie would graduate from high school let alone college. But because of the influence of her grandfather and others who believed in her, this Muncie Central graduate is moving toward a degree at Franklin College. She has defied all odds and is finally succeeding in her life.

Kori’s headline over this focus statement reads:

Defying All Odds

The reason such a statement of purpose is important to Kori’s slide show is because it contains the blueprint for what follows. Knowing that this is a “challenge” story, Kori could plan her photo and audio coverage to include Stacie’s grandfather and other support people who have helped Tanksley get her life back. Any materials that don’t support the idea of “defying the odds” gets tossed.

The focus statement serves another purpose. When the headline and focus statement are included online as part of a media package, the text and headline help sell the story idea to the impatient reader. By knowing that Stacie has defied the odds, the media user is much more likely to be interested in the details of the slide show.

Lips For Literacy Slide Show

So, what happens when we fail to include good headline writing and focus statements on our web sites? According to research from Tube Mogul, viewers tend to spend seconds, rather than minutes with video and multimedia in general. In other words, media users are “scanners,” not real “readers/viewers.”

According to Tube Mogul, only 90 percent of those who begin the show are still involved after just 10 seconds. That number drops to 80.4 percent after just 20 seconds. And only six in 10 viewers are still around after just 30 seconds have played in most videos. Only 46 percent still care after a minute of viewing.

I don’t have the research to back it up, but I’d love to compare these statistics to shows packaged with well-focused text blocks, headlines and title slides.

When we simply label slide shows or video with headlines that say, “Lips for Literacy” (what a great place for the Stacie Tanksley slide show), or “Dravecky Inspires Franklin College,” we don’t give the readers much reason to really click on the play button. Readers need to have some context for what they are about to see and hear. So, how can we improve the way we present multimedia presentations to our readers?

As an example, consider this video titled, “William and the Windmill.” Look closely at the way editors of the Toronto Star packaged their story about

William and Windmill Video Package

William Kamkwamba who used scraps from a local junkyard in Malawi to build a makeshift windmill thereby changing the lives of his family and village. There’s more.

• A strong title slide. These slides often can be used to introduce a video or slide show. By shooting an environmental portrait (we had some photos of Dave Dravecky holding a baseball that we could have used) of a key subject, we can create a title slide that gives the viewer a strong first impression of  the story. Instead, we tend to use a grainy, low quality image from the slide show itself. It would be better to create a clean, attractive title slide and use it to link to the slide show or video.

• The full headline under the subtitle, William and the Windmill, reads:

Boy’s dream to build windmill transforms lives in Malawi

• The text block written by Star reporter Peggy McKenzie is highly descriptive, a style that sets the scene and introduces the main character, William Kamkwamba.

This close to the equator, night descends quickly in November. By 6 p.m., the sky bursts with stars. All is dark outside the village of Wimbe, save for a compound of houses where outdoor fluorescent lights twinkle.

Far off the electric grid, three windmills rattle in the breeze, producing enough electricity to provide indoor and outdoor lighting, and to pump water. The windmills are the legacy of a rickety prototype conceived by William Kamkwamba, a desparate teenager with big dreams.

I don’t know about you but this text block makes me want to SEE THIS VIDEO. The writer has given this package what good writing does best: set the scene and provide context for the mulitmedia part of the story.

Here’s another example I use in Media Design that makes these same points.

Paraplegic Dog Video Package

Dan Pelle from the Spokesman Review produced a video about Craig Mosher, a man who cares for a paraplegic dog with the same love and attention he would reserve for any human friend. Dog lovers might watch this video because of the first slide. But most research indicates a need for more. Consider the full package:

Paraplegic Dog

• The headline is more of a label but when viewers see the headline and the picture of “Loois” together, it’s a powerful package.

• Consider the scene-setting text.

What sounded like a little story of an animal with a disability quickly evolved into a tale of great love and devotion. Loois was adopted as a puppy by Craig Mosher and his ex-wife Maria after she saw the severely injured animal on television. The dog had been used as bait for fighting dogs. Loois recovered from the injuries, but in 2004 underwent back surgery and suffered damage to his spinal cord. He lost use of his hind legs.

Okay, I’m hooked. I hope you will CLICK ON THIS LINK to this story and time yourself. See if you are still interested after one minute. I’ll bet you stick with it because the story has provided you with just enough information to pique your interest. The video itself completes the story begun with the headline and focus statement.

With just a little creative writing, along with the production of a simple title slide, we give our videos and slide shows the very best opportunity to be viewed and appreciated. In the business, we don’t want to be ignored.

As we succeed as writers, photographers, and videographers, we have the power to turn scanners into appreciative readers and viewers.

Designing From Our Readers’ Perspective

The April 8 issue of The Franklin is distinctive because most pages in this 16^th issue feature strong “visual leads.”

Wait a minute. Aren’t leads supposed to be text? What’s with this visual lead stuff?

I am convinced that the first element readers see on a page becomes the lead. Tim Harrower, author of the popular Newspaper Designer’s Handbook confirms this general reading pattern.

(1) Photo or illustration

(2) Cutline information

(3) Headline or display type

(4) Story lead

Some might argue that photos and display type are often seen together with headlines providing a “bridge” from photo content to the story. Unfortunately, newspaper editors tend to design pages backward. We often begin with the story and end up with photos and graphics added on at the end of the process. Readers, however, read the photos and graphics first and eventually find their way to the story lead if the visuals are good enough.

Page 1

What does this reading pattern say to us about this issue? Let’s take a look at Page 1.

The visual lead (or Point of Entry) onto this page is the unit of three vertical photos at the top of the page. I think editors made a very good decision putting three student faces on the internship story. Our visual lead is sound. Nice work, Heather Leavy and Shelby Howard.

Most readers will quickly absorb the photos and cutlines on Page 1 and look for some theme in our story about “stepping ahead” (see headline). In the second paragraph, Monica Harvey mentions, “getting your feet wet” with internships and later, “putting us a step ahead.” So the metaphor is supported in both headline and story. This reflects good focus between story and display type.

Let’s look at the ingredients that help define good page design:

(1) Focus or dominance–Single element (often a photo) played about twice as large as any other element on the page. This area is also referred to as the “point of entry” because it’s what readers see first.

(2) Balance–A sense of overall visual weight when page is viewed from corner-to-corner and side-to-side. Unbalanced pages often feel “top” or “bottom” heavy.

(3) Proportion–Story and photo modules should feature a variety of verticals and horizontals. No two modules should be the same size (area).

(4) Contrast–The sense of “brightness” and “variety” on the page. Contrast can be created with good use of typography, especially the handling and placement of display headlines and graphics. Contrast is lacking when a page appears “gray.”

While I like Page 1 from a design standpoint, I think that Page 5 is stronger when we apply the four concepts above.

Below The Fold

If you fold Page 1 in half (see left), you will see a balance and contrast problem. The top half (above the fold) is a very strong mix of photos and text. However, when you look below the fold, the page grays out significantly. It looks like two separate page designs with the top half of the page holding much more visual weight than the bottom.

Now, look at Page 5 and mentally draw boxes around each story module. The Katie Beck column is a strong vertical shape.  And that shape contrasts with the horizontal lead photo (which is strong visually). The remaining three story modules also are horizontal but notice that none of the four stories are exactly the same. This reflects strong proportion.

When you add the notion of contrast, Page 5 is stronger than Page 1 simply because the second half of the page (below the fold) has some focus. The photo by Morgan McClelland is just large enough to give the lower page a visual anchor point. The top half of Page 5 is also strongly focused because of the excellent packaging of Kelly Lynch’s “bird’s eye” photo angle, headline and lead by Abigail Godwin.

Page 5

I love it when photos (the visual lead), cutlines, headlines and story leads all work together as one. We harmonize all of the elements of design with our “Card Shark” story on Page 5. Note how the headline: “Card Sharks On Campus” is the ideal bridge between photo and lead. Abigail wastes no time painting a “words-eye view” of the story. Consider her lead:

“Margaret Nelson drive to Franklin College every Thursday afternoon for classes. She’s not a commuter or faculty. She’s drawn to the college for a non-academic reason.”

Because of the headline, the reader knows why Margaret drives to FC each week. The only thing that would make this package better is if we had identified Margaret in the photo’s cutline above the story (if she’s one of the “sharks” pictured). The photo is strong here because Kelly Lynch is able to find a high camera angle.

Visual Lead, Page 7

Speaking of strong photos, I love the visual lead on Page 7. Kerri Kinker is an excellent photographer and will find a way to communicate a story with every photo she makes. Kerri captures the “decisive moment” in the photo on the left through a combination of timing (shutter speed) and depth of field (f-stop). If you’d like to know more about what makes winning photography, consider this link.

Kerri Kinker strikes again with a very strong visual lead on Page 8. This page has become our gallery for strong visuals and I love the fact we are able to give good photography the space it deserves. The photo of Eric Whitaker is taken from a very low angle this time. The chunks of dirt probably sprayed Kerri as well. But this is the way to capture a meaningful moment. Again, nice work, Kerri, Jack Messer and Allie Nash.

Strong Photo, Page 2

When you editors care as much about the visual elements of your pages as you do the story content, readers will respond. We’ve always been a newspaper with good “story content.” Increasingly this year, we’ve also been a newspaper with strong visual dimension as well.

Congratulation and keep up the good work.

Can We Speak Candidly? It’s About Your Mug (Shot)

I may find time later to do a more proper review of the March 18 edition. In the meantime, I’m adding this post built around one question: How can we turn traditional “mug” shots into quality photographs?

Better Mug Shot

Jerry Miller stopped by my office last week and he wondered why those single-column photos that decorate the tops of our columns each week look so bland. I got to thinking: Is it such a good idea to depict our writers as expressionless and uninterested? Probably not. To illustrate how the “lowly” mug shot can capture the character of a writer, consider the photo (left) that Jerry sent me. This is Eiffel Plasterer, “one of the wildest characters I ever wrote about,” Jerry told me. It’s an effective image for a number of reasons. Let’s break it down.

You’ll notice that photos of all sizes usually are successful when the light is right. An interesting aside: Photography literally means, “writing with light.” Keep in mind that light falls on a subject one of three ways: front, side and back. Okay, light can come from underneath if you’re interested in creating a mug shot for the Halloween edition.

Second, light for any photograph is either natural (i.e. from the sun directly or indirectly) or artificial (i.e. electronic flash).

All of our mug shots (and a good many of our candids) feature front lighting with artificial light. That means the light falls fairly evenly on the subject either from the sun or sky or from a flash unit.

Lead Photo P. 1

Can you tell from our lead photos on pages 1 (left) and 5 whether they were photographed with natural or artificial light? Clearly, it’s flash photography. I realize that artificial flash often is the only way we can get a photo; however, the problem with flash is that it creates a very harsh light. Such “hard” light seldom flatters the subject.

When you look at the mug shots we use in each issue, (including Allie Paul on Page 2), you will notice a hard, contrasty light on the subject’s face. If the camera is higher than the subject, the flash creates “raccoon eyes” or dark shadows around eye sockets. Most of our column writers look like they haven’t slept in a very long time, which may be true.

Strong Use Of Composition

The construction of a good image also depends on composition. A good example of making the light and the camera work together is the photo above by Morgan McClellan (see Page 7). Natural light falls evenly across the image suggesting a bright but cloudy day. Also notice how Morgan positions herself behind a foreground littered with numerous golf balls (great effect).

Morgan adjusts her camera for limited “depth of field.” That means she’s using a low f-stop (f-4 or f-5.6) along with a low camera angle. The result is a photo with great clarity (isolation) of the two golfers and just enough foreground and background to give the image a nice context. Our eyes run back and forth from the well-focused subjects and the slightly blurred foreground/background giving the image a sense of depth.

The best lighting for mug shots and many candids is “side” lighting. We talk in Media Design class about the best time to capture side light – the “golden” hours of the day — found during the hours just after sunrise and just before sunset.

Great Use Of Side Lighting

Our photo (above) on Page 8 is shot in the late afternoon well within the golden hours of the day. Direct sunlight on a subject’s face often creates exposure problems for digital cameras. However, Kerri Kinker positions herself low and behind the net so the blue sky becomes her background. She uses the tennis net as a framing device so we have a sense of foreground, middle and background. Unlike Morgan’s photo, Kerri uses a greater f-stop number (f-11, f-16, etc.), and this adjustment provides a sharp, well-focused background beyond her point of focus.

But beyond camera controls, the key ingredient in this photo’s success is the quality of the light. It’s late afternoon light and it crosses the subjects’ face at a low angle. The side lighting here is flattering because readers can see texture and expression within the mix of highlights and shadow.

When readers see photos like the ones produced by Morgan and Kerri, the entire design of the page becomes fresh and lively. The interplay of light and shadow creates a perception of depth and contrast. Additionally, these photographs tells good stories. Readers like looking at images that capture the essence of a story in a way that’s fresh and different (note Kerri’s low camera angle). While engaged in the photo, readers also notice the cutlines, headlines and lead paragraphs around the CVI (Center of Visual Interest). Good photography is the first building block in the successful page design.

When I look at pages anchored by strong photography (see pages 7 and 8), the “lead” isn’t the text. The lead is what readers see first: a strong photo in most cases. Readers also see weaker photos as the lead of the page too. The “visual lead” for the entire page is weakened if we haven’t considered the quality and direction of light, or if we haven’t used  good compositional techniques in the images we publish.

What does all this have to do with mug shots, the original subject of this critique? Everything.  With these same techniques, mug shots can tell a story too by better reflecting the personalities of each writers. To do so, I would suggest:

•Use quality natural light, not flash. Utilize a bright, “north” facing window (light is always soft when it comes from the north) on campus and find a neutral background. The atrium in the Fine Arts building is a good location for soft, directional light.

•Use side lighting. Position the camera so that the light is falling on one side of the subject. Position the camera so you are shooting perpendicular to the light (not into it). Don’t allow the shadow to be too dark. Just create a small difference in light from the right side to the shadow. B0unce some light into the shadow area as needed.

•Vary the camera’s point of view. Subjects look better when they are looking up slightly and into the camera. Photographers should try a higher angle.

•Work with some natural poses. Create a sense of depth by angling the shoulders of the subject so they are not flat against the background. Subjects look better when they lean slightly toward the camera. Experiment with expressions, some smiling and some more serious.

•Relax and have fun. Experiment with head and shoulder shots along with three-quarter crops. Suggest that a subject hold an object or be looking at it. Consider natural gestures and/or other familiar body language.

I think these simple techniques would greatly improve our “standing head” shots and make our writers seem more interesting to our readers. Hopefully, you’ll end up with real photographs rather than “mug shots” that look like they belong on an I.D. card. And who knows, using these techniques on your new Facebook profile photo could make you the envy of all your friends.

In This Critique, Let Me Be Clear

Last week, Jerry Miller made a connection between good lead/headline writing and a newspaper’s “liveliness.” This week, the theme is “clarity.” How do we take a complicated subject – think of tuition increases and budgets – and make it clear to our readers why they should care? This process involves story telling, not just a recording of facts.

Think of it this way. If a photograph is well focused, the image will be clear. So it stands to reason that if we are well focused as writers, our stories will have a sense of clarity. So too with editorials and columns. Well designed pages feature a single focus as well. Clarity means it’s easy for readers to see what writers, editors, photographers and designers think is important.

Page 5

We achieve a good level of clarity in our packaging of the “Trading Places” story on Page 5. I could tell in an instant what Julie Brashaber and Kelly Lynch thought was important from seeing how the photo and cutline worked with the story lead. This is a story about a former FC professor who loves to learn and has formed a special relationship with a former student who now is his teacher. Readers get the essence of this story in a matter of seconds because the writer, designer and photographer are focused on the same aspect of the story. There’s clarity.

In much the same way, Shelby Salazar’s story about a local government class embracing real-life assignments on Page 2 benefits from a focused photo, cutline, lead and headline. There’s communication here. And the result is clarity.

However, it’s takes Shelby a little too long to put a face on this story. I’d like to have seen us use, for instance, Kayla Cash’s comment to fashion a more personalized lead. Such a lead could then read:

For senior Kayla Cash, lobbying at the Statehouse last week not only fulfilled a class assignment. It fulfills her sense of civic duty as well.

Such a lead would be dynamite with a photo of Kayla maybe holding a sign protesting H.B. 1328. When photos, cutline, headlines and leads focus on the same aspect of the story, clarity is the result.

The “Workers Protest At Rally” story on Page 3 would have been much less interesting without the excellent photos by Jessica Wray. Unfortunately, we position the photos in the middle of the page, leaving readers to wonder which story the photos go with. Photos need to be anchored (under a headline) to one story. Again, this is an issue of clarity.

Page 1

Okay, let’s look at Page 1 and carry forward this idea of simplicity and clarity.

Considering the three stories about House Bill 1328 and another story about a nearly 5 percent increase in tuition next year (plus an editorial), the news value is an 8 or 9 out of 10. Money matters.

But I think our presentation of these stories – the way we package our headlines, leads, photos and cutlines – rates maybe a 7 on the “clarity” scale. While our reporting is spot on, I think we missed chances to show the impact of these critical news stories on our student body. We didn’t make it altogether clear why readers should care about these complex issues.

Julie Crothers’ well reported story about a 4.9 percent tuition increase next year is a major story that only can be measured in terms of students themselves. Yes, students will have to cough up an extra $1,210 next year. That’s good reporting. But it’s not until the ninth graph that we get some needed context. It was just a year ago that the tuition increased nearly 6 percent! So, how does Franklin College compare to other “peer” institutions? And how are students handling the near 11 percent tuition burden? Such question make us good “writers” as well as good “reporters.”

Had we connected these dots, a more focused lead could have read:

Students will see a 4.9 percent hike in their tuition for the 2011-12 academic year following a 5.9 percent increase in those same fees just a year ago. The nearly 11 percent increase in back-to-back years has some students wondering if they can afford to stay in school.

“If tuition keeps increasing Franklin will start to lose current students and potential students,” said Amanda Perkins, junior, who blamed the poor economy as well.

The Amanda Perkins quote is from the 16th paragraph (jumped to Page 6). That’s my point. The perception of clarity comes from the way we assemble (write) a story. Why wait so long to bring a student voice into a story that effects students so directly?

Also, clarity suggest a headline less focused on numbers. Maybe:

Students worry about steep increases in tuition

Or,

Students brace for more fees, less aid

Or,

More fees, less aid push students into ‘survival’ mode

I think Page 1 is an example of smart packaging. Indeed, the top three stories are linked. The problem is that it takes a lot of work for readers to figure out how to connect the dots.

I like our story package titled “Lobbying Lawmakers.” Immediately, readers see a photo of lobbying students that confirms what they read in the headline. So far, great focus and clarity. Despite some strong reporting (getting the basic facts) our writing gets bogged down in technical jargon.

It takes us six paragraphs into the lobbying story to finally hear from sophomore Alex Lancaster who can’t afford college if he loses state aid. Sophomore Michael Cooper worries about his mounting debt and Cassy Bogdon wonders how she can afford to pay for more tuition with less financial aid. All three students are “buried” not by debt, but by our story structure.

These three students provide us an important anecdotal side of the story and gives the story a clear focus. If you are playing euchre, it’s good strategy lead with your trump card, right? In this story, we hold on to our best three cards (quotes) for too long. Here’s the story again had we played our cards a little differently.

Sophomore Alex Lancaster was among the thousands of college students who marched on the Statehouse this week to protest House Bill 1328, a piece of legislation that could diminish state funds for public and private college students.

Sophomores Michael Cooper and Cassy Bogdon also were lobbying against a bill that could lead to massive loans and an unreasonable load of debt. Their college futures could hang in the balance.

“I don’t have anyone else to sign (a loan) for me,” said Lancaster who relies heavily financial aid. Lancaster was one of many who joined the lobbying efforts of the Independent Colleges of Indiana Tuesday.

When writers emphasize how news affects readers first, the “what, when and where” can be weaved into the personal narratives. Julie Brashaber’s excellent photo on Page 1 is the focal point of the page. Readers see three familiar faces. It just follows that lead and headline writers ought to put faces on their stories first. Doing so makes sense to readers and adds the perception of the paper being lively and clearly focused.

Let’s take a quick look at the third story in this “money-themed” front page. I love the fact you editors sensed the need to write a story about funding from the viewpoint of two key sources: Alan Hill (enrollment management) and Bryan Spetter (VP for finance).

Jessica Wray’s story centers correctly on Hill and Spetter. As a reader though, I had to weave my way through too many long paragraphs to learn that the college has no money to make up for any cuts in state funding used by about 40 percent of our students. It takes us 11 paragraphs and a jump to Page 6 to find out how many students are directly affected. Finally, we actually meet one (Drew Mason).

Our headline suggests this story is about students and faculty who are upset about House Bill 1328. No faculty quotes appear in the story and we squeeze in the Mason quote at the end of the story. Spetter and Hill are administrators, not faculty.

So, I’m wondering why we didn’t make it easier for readers to understand what’s really important in this story? Consider this rewrite of the headline:

40% of student body
face ‘tough choices’
if state cuts funding

I think this headline suggests a good map for how the lead and story itself could be rearranged to add clarity. Let me also add that this story contains a lot of important facts. Sourcing is very strong. It’s another well “reported” story. Unfortunately, readers will not take the time to dig out the important aspects of this story if we don’t focus on why these facts matter and to whom they matter most.

Page 4

I want to close with a comment about the editorial which is based on Julie’s news story on Page 1. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that you editors will remember to add the “see related editorial”line to the  news story next time. That aside, let’s see how we handled our editorial response on Page 4.

Editorializing about the tuition hike makes sense because this story affects as many as 400 FC students. As much as any news story, the editorial needs a clear focus. As a newspaper, this is where we boil it all down so students can see clearly what all the fuss is about.

But I’m not sure we provide that clarity. At least, not at first. Instead, we spend a very long first paragraph discussing President Moseley’s e-mail. The second graph adds glowing acknowledgment about the quality of the college as we slowly move to our point: A 4.9 percent hike is too high in this economy especially when the state legislature may cut aid to students in public and private schools. And if we needed more ammunition, we could have mentioned that the federal Pell Grant program is under fire as well.

Yet we seem to wander around for five or six graphs before getting to the essence of our editorial position. Once we get started, we make a pretty convincing case for those few readers who make it that far. Clarity requires writers to get to the point of their stories NOW. Don’t mess around. Don’t try to build a case. State your case NOW so readers know immediately what stake they have in the story. Consider this more reader-friendly editorial lead in:

What do you get when you add 4.9 + 5.9 x 40 percent minus state aid? Disaster. Or, at least, financial hardship for hundreds of students.

This is the math problem facing at least 40 percent of FC students who rely on a combination of financial aid from the state and/or a short-term loan program from the college. The problem is made worse by two tuition increases – 5.9 percent last year and 4.9 percent next year – coupled with probable cutbacks in state-based financial aid programs.

So we ask, where are students supposed to find this kind of money in a tough economy to begin with.

(Now, go to the fourth paragraph and you have a stronger editorial statement). Also notice the blending of hard facts with the narrative weave. This is our goal as reporters and writers.

So much of what Jerry said last week boils down to knowing what you want to say and saying it clearly and efficiently. When we ignore the student angle, bury good quotes, over-generalize in headlines and fail to get the essence of the story in our leads, readers simply move on. If we can’t figure it out, why should they?

In this business, the worst thing that can happen is to be ignored. Yet, we have the power in each story to help readers connect with the information that is vital to them.

If we are dull or boring, it’s not because we don’t have great stories to tell. It’s just that it takes us too long to make find the real story ourselves. Readers want clarity and they want it now. They want to see it in our photos. They want to see it in our headlines and cutlines. And they want to see it in our leads.

Reporters, before you write a single word, take a few minutes to explain your story to an editor. Editors, before you write a headline or cutline, study the story and ask, “what’s this story really about and why should readers care”?

If writers, editors, designers and photographers can agree on the story’s focus, you will achieve clarity. And everything else falls into place.

Readers are not wrong to demand clarity. It’s our job to provide it.

Putting A Lively ‘Sheen’ On Story Development

NOTE: I’ve asked Jerry Miller to write a critique in this space for the March 4 issue. Since his retirement from PSJ, Professor Miller has maintained a keen interest in The Franklin and has added timely commentary to many of my own posts. I want to thank Professor Miller for taking the time to offer you editors this feedback. Please feel free to comment at the end of the blog.

___________________________________

By JERRY MILLER

I hope I don’t come off like some bad substitute teacher you had back in high school by filling in for Professor Cripe this week, but I promise you he will step back in and undo any damage I do with this week’s critique of The Franklin.

First, let me say that I thought this week’s edition was solid and devoid of any major gaffes or crimes against the honor of journalism. I did think the one overall disappointment was its lack of much that made it seem like a “lively,” vibrant newspaper, in terms of articles, photos, and design.

Now, when I say “lively,” I definitely do not mean loud and splashy the way that TV news programs often are, heavy on the lipstick and light on the foundation makeup, breathlessly assaulting us with the latest escapades of Charlie Sheen and Bristol Palin at the expense of meaningful coverage of revolutionary events in the Middle East. That’s sensationalism, not liveliness. Big difference.

As it applies to The Franklin, I saw a lot of bland articles and photographs and vague, semi-boring story leads and headlines. I won’t try to go through them one-by-one, just cite a few examples, while passing out some well-deserved kudos along the way.

Page 1

On Page One, for example, I felt that the leads on all four stories ranged from fairly vague to sleep-inducing and, in one case, bewildering. The lead on the adjunct faculty story consisted of background, not anything resembling a fresh dose of news or human interest. Simply defining the term “adjunct professors” was not the “liveliest” way to bring readers into that story. Perhaps it could have been “personalized” in some way, focusing on one or two of the adjuncts as representative examples of how the whole group impacts the campus experience.

On the other hand, I really liked how the graphic at the top of the story grabbed my attention and put real “faces” on this special group of instructors, while at the same time suggesting the size and scope of their impact on the educational process at FC. Nice, innovative touch there.

The student retention story, I thought, fell victim to the same kind of vagueness as the adjuncts article, leading as it did with the percentage of lost students with no context provided, in terms of how those numbers compared with past years. The Greek Day lead also left me close to yawning; I would have been “enlivened” much more with a lead that hit me with the How and Why of the event, rather than just the Who, What, Where, and When.

Finally, I’m not sure how to summarize my confusion(s) with the headline and lead on the “hunger strike” story. First, what occurred during that event bore no resemblance to a hunger strike, either real or imagined, or, if it did, the comparison was never explained in the story. The figure “470 meals” in the headline was then contradicted in the text, where it reported “approximately 500 meals donated.” Again, as with the other Page One items, the lead was pretty vague and needed to be made more lively and timely.

To comment on the “teaser” photos above the nameplate, I need to preface my comments by noting that I found the photos in this issue to be pretty ho-hum, mostly posed shots, rather than candid shots that showed some kind of “life in motion.” Now, the teaser photo at the top left of Page One was a candid shot, which was fine, but I had to get all the way to Page 8 and read very carefully between the lines to discover the well-hidden “secret” of the photo at the top right. Generally, if you make the readers work that hard to figure something out, they will decline and move on to some other medium of information and/or entertainment.

Page 5

Before moving away from photos, I must acknowledge that the large photo on Page 2 and both photos on Page 5 were indeed candids and served their purposes much better than any of the posed shots in the issue. The photo on Page 6, unfortunately, was too poorly lighted to discern its details; it also seemed an unfortunate choice to use a photo of a student reading a pamphlet instead of some “livelier” scene from the “hunger” event.

The photo at the top of Page 7 seemed to be “action” but still was pretty static for a sports shot. Everywhere else in the issue I was faced with posed, deer-in-the-headlights photos and mug shots. It made me a little paranoid, frankly, like that famous “you talkin’ to me?” scene from Taxi Driver.

Getting back to the written words, what I said about the leads on Page One pretty much applied to every other piece in the edition. All of them would have benefited from personalization and/or tightening, as well as replacing the vagueness with more concrete words and information. The feature on Micah Ling on Page 5, for instance, presented an intriguing theme – how she combined her two loves, writing and teaching – but then went directly into background material without amplifying/elaborating on that opening theme as should always be the case in the following paragraph of any story.

I found the columns and editorials, generally, to be solid and informative. The Ben Fisher column was especially well-written to boot.  The John Sittler column gave an interesting glimpse behind the scenes of “College GameDay,” but the writing could have been a bit more lively (there’s that word again!) and less plodding.

OK, enough! I will trust Professor Cripe’s greater expertise in the area of page design to fill in the gaps I consciously left in my critique in that area. I also will trust him to moderate my one-time criticisms with due appreciation for progress made over the past weeks and semesters, something he has a much clearer perception of than I possibly could. I’ll merely close with: Keep up the good work in the coming weeks; improve on the parts that need improvement, and I’ll return shortly with my ongoing crusade against dull summary leads, vague opening paragraphs and headlines, and anything else I see that keeps The Franklin from being as “lively” a student newspaper as it can be.

Jerry Miller

Professor Emeritus

Pulliam School of Journalism