
Pull quotes which support your position are a great idea, if you need more pictures.
Have you got two or three hours and a laptop? Then you can write a professional quality journalistic article without having any relative experience in the field.
Thanks to burgeoning "citizen journalism" sites, the line between professional work and amateur editorializing is blurrier than ever, and publishing your own thoughts for the world to read has never been easier -- from finding insider sources to typing out your views, to syndicating them and finally, building a sizable audience.
But many would-be amateur journalists still seem intimidated by the job. Although there are well over a hundred million blogs in existence, that leaves hundreds of millions of voices unheard. Chances are, your mom isn't blogging, and in the internet age, there's no reason she can't have a voice just as credible as those found on sites such as the Wall Street Journal.
So, here's a guide for regular joes looking to make the leap into journalism. We'll lay out all the steps you need to take to build your reputation as a serious journalist, and present some expert opinion about getting it read.
As you're signing up, it's a good idea to consider your screen name. The best part about journalism in the internet age is that it's very easy to pick a fake name, such as midwestmama and act as an anonymous journalist with just as much credibility as those in the mainstream media.
Don't forget to have fun.
This is a hyperlink to an authoritative tutorial on creating HTML links.
Most links start with "http" and are then followed by a webpage address. For now, don't worry about the meaning of http -- no one really knows anyway and knowing won't make your links work any better. The most important aspect of linking (as I've just demonstrated) is that you can present a topic and then link to someone else who has already written extensively on that topic, thus saving yourself a lot of time and effort. As journalism is about deadlines and speed, this may be the difference between repeating a story, and breaking a story.
Say you want to write about Barack Obama's issues with weight. Specifically, you may think he's too thin and that other people may think this too. The trouble is, you don't have any sources or evidence to back up your story.
Oh no! Time to move on, right?
Wrong.
The internet is teeming with possible "sources" and evidence is only a leading question away. Simply join an online community or forum and ask the question you want an answer to. In this case, you might ask:
"Is Obama too skinny to be President?"
Now, chances are fairly strong that several of the initial responses may not fit the story you want to write. Don't worry about those responses. Given enough time, someone will probably eventually answer "yes" to your question, and -- voila! -- an instant source. The only thing left to do is pick the most interesting affirmative response. Part and parcel of respectable journalism is using the best content, rather than all of the content.
It's important to note that, without sources, your writing will have little to no credibility, so grab hold of anyone you can get. Mining for sources is a big step in earning your wings as a respectable journalist, and it couldn't be easier.
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim."
Journalistic ethics state that you cannot say this, and present it as a fact. But what about this:
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim?"
Perfectly acceptable. Now, you've presented an opinion and you've suggested a fact. Remember, you can post this question to a forum in an effort to gather sources and -- so long as even one person believes that Obama is a Muslim -- your article is real journalism.
Quote that person, link to another website, and you've just completed your first article, not unlike one you might find in your local newspaper.
Congratulations: You've just upgraded to a collective and have achieved a instant boost in credibility.
There are various benefits to pooling content but one of the biggest benefits is the sudden ease with which you can accomplish the linking step of being a real journalist. Ten friends equals ten possible links in support of your position.
It's also possible to split your rhetoric down the middle: Five far right voices against five far left voices will allow you to claim "no bias, no bull" -- just like CNN.
(Tip: Balance doesn't require centrist opinions.)
Journalists usually don't even write their own headlines, so learning to do this well will put you in a league of your own and will give you a step up against your mainstream competition.
There you have it. A few easy steps to becoming a journalist. Just remember, the real deal is a dying breed, and now is a better time than ever when it comes to stepping in and staking your claim on a piece of journalistic real estate.
It's almost impossible to do it wrong.
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim."
Journalistic ethics state that you cannot say this, and present it as a fact. But what about this:
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim?"
Ah ha ha ha...
As you have written some actual self-help articles for Newsvine I thought this was a serious article at first. Half-way through I thought I had better check the tags. I was pleased to see "satire."
Nice.
Same here. Especially since you had just contributed a few links to a guy asking for help with citizen journalism.
I was fooled at first, then I kept thinking, wait, wait, wait. And eventually I looked at the tags.
Well, you didn't include anything as outrageous as this:
All you need to know is that a block of HTML — essentially, a bunch of gobbledygook words and symbols — can add extra features to your site.
And I did catch on around point 3 ;-)
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim."
Journalistic ethics state that you cannot say this, and present it as a fact. But what about this:
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim?"
Hahaha.
Who says you can't just state that. For someone who claims to be tolerant, you're pretty intolerant. You Obamaphiles will just jump on anybody not towing your company line.
Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim."
Journalistic ethics state that you cannot say this, and present it as a fact. But what about this:
"Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim?"
You know what's scary? I had a copy editor once who would turn every story into a headline question, partially because it was less passive but also I think either laziness.
The copy editors also write the headlines.
So I'd write about the council considering raising taxes.
The headline for the morning paper would be something responsible and safe:
Council talks of raising taxes or
Council may raise taxes
Then this guy would alter it for the afternoon edition:;
Council raising taxes?
or
Taxes going up?
It got to be a standing joke because he could turn everything - everything? - into a question and he would.
Mayor may be fired would become
Mayor fired?
Those sound like SimCity headlines.
City hit by tornado?
Police inmate escapes?
Pentagon bombed?
Quick - which two of those three do you think ran in our newspaper?
City hit by tornado?
My fave.
If memory serves the first two of those three ran. I think the 9/11 headline was differnt.
We had a windstorm and there was a chance it might be viewed by some as a tornado.
Thus
Storm Hits Area - for the morning edition
became
City hit by tornado?
which could indeed also be a sim city headline.
which could indeed also be a sim city headline.
And was every time I got bored...
"Look out there, here's your headline: Town threatened by storm"
"What if the storm doesn't hit?"
"...Town miraculously spared"
The movie had Kevin Spacey in it, was it The Weatherman?
Find out tonight on news at 11.
Suggested topics include: Barack Obama, celebrities, Barack Obama, your cat, John McCain's latest opinion about Barack Obama, and abortion. Whatever you write about is journalism -- citizen journalism.
You forgot, "Hillary Clinton is is not might be might not be is definitely not the vice presidential pick".
Great article, Brian. I LOVE the examples..Cheeky! :o)
This is excellent work, Brian. I too at first this was serious and was ready to clip it to the how to group. Instead I'lll clip it to Newsviner's Picks as this is hilarious. (oh and I see you DID clip it to the how to group)
Off to read that link... left a comment from you above showing just how, sadly, this isn't too far from the truth even among "old" media.
The line asking if your mom was a news blogger did give me pause - "hmm, i've not heard from mom lately. If she is at newsvine and i didn't know it...oy!" - before I read on.
With my luck she'd be seeding 100 percent msnbc stuff and I'd have to read her the riot act.
I did not see the article as satire at first. I just sort of scanned it and was trying to be polite. But I had to object to the Digg reference and the idea that a username somehow works in citizen journalism. I don't believe it does. For one thing, Google isn't going to help your 'career' much if you go with a username, although a pen name is acceptable.
Robert, your sincerity is very sweet. Don't let these snarky people scare you.
Brian, you are inimitable.
Yeah...I should have checked the tags, as some other (insert 'smarter') folks did. It's kind of funny. I read the article, and then I thought: 'Geez...this is really BAD advice.' But, I didn't want to slam on Brian about it. I kept wondering...why would he write this stuff?
Now that I see it was a parody, then it made sense. Yeah...you fooled me.
Robert, just so you know--every time you post a comment like the one above, you're still not getting the joke.
What they're making fun of is people who spend their time trying to figure out ways to get their blog/column/internet commentary to the top of search engine results--as if how high you come out in google were any measure of the quality of your writing or the reliability of your information.
In other words, the satire is not targeting bad SEO advice; it's targeting the sorts of people who care about SEO advice, who worry more about search engine optimization than they do about having anything substantial to say.
Good writing, SEO, and Google ranks are not necessarily exclusive of each other. It's sort of a package deal. If you're going to spend the time trying to put out quality material...you may as well make the additional effort to ensure people find/read it.
This is really good, but it needs more pictures.
When I saw this piece today by Robert I immediately thought of this one. Ha.
Duly noted. Article updated to include a new picture.
LOL
When I saw this piece today by Robert I immediately thought of this one. Ha.
Good, solid advice in that article. No satire. The system I describe in that article works, at least for me. I'm getting between 5-10 NV Link Love messages a week, sometimes more. Often, for some weird reason, they are finding articles I wrote like a year ago or more. Don't ask me how they (whoever 'they' is) do it.
What about cartoons? Are they good to prove your point? I heard you could make your own.
:)
I know you're being satirical there.
Cartoons? Sure. Tom Cruise, Michael Vick, Bill and Hillary, aliens, and others have been portrayed. My favorites are the Vick cartoons.
I know you're being satirical there.
You think?
Isn't this whole article and discussion satirica?
satirica
Scott, is that something like 'ephemera'? Nice nounage!
Brian -- I particularly liked your point #2:
Suggested topics include: (emphasis added) Barack Obama, celebrities, Barack Obama, your cat, John McCain's latest opinion about Barack Obama, and abortion
Yes---that sounds like me......but to my credit I did try to mix it up a little (vas are you out there?) and write this week about John Edwards for a change......
don't worry about the meaning of http -- no one really knows anyway and knowing won't make your links work any better
that code is a bunch of gobbledygook technicalities about facts and truth which don't really apply in the internet age
Images are the "pearl necklace" of any successful journalistic endeavor.
No words. Laughing too hard.
You're a genius and should have two RAV's to recognize brilliant wit and inspired citizen journalism
Brian, I was just thinking, the author's e-mail address of the original WSJ article is at the bottom of that article. I'm think they need to get a link to this here parody of yours ;-)
Thanks Brian I will start right away. lol
Pam yes I will vote for that too, Brian should get at least half a RAV but of course two would be better, lol and non lol.
Good piece Brian and I am being serious.
Muslim Barack Hussein Obama: Too Skinny to be American?
Journalistic ethics? Say what?
Maybe having no prior experience as a journalist is better than having much prior experience as a BAD journalist.
One ethics point that is always met with this citizen journalist thing is: "Don't in turn parrot on the air or in your writings what some producer (or editor) is parroting from some flack or hack they have as a go-to source."
Brian -
Thanks! I was so worried about being able to be a strong citizen journalist while covering the DNC. Now you've really given me some great tips.
You're my hero.
As a journalism student I saw light. Then I read the article and thought I was well on my way for the pulitzer, until the ethics point showed. Thats your basis for credibility. No joke; I was fooled! Touche
And the web eats all of it up.
FOX News: Help wanted - Empty headed blondes to read teleprompters rife with propaganda pieces. Ability to feign various facial expressions (surprise / shock / cynicism / intelligence) required. Ability to interrupt, talk over and ridicule guests with opposing opinions a real plus. Must show ability to jump to conclusion and unwillingness to back down in light of facts or scientifically-derived evidence.
Yes.
Wanted: Public to take this crap seriously. Oh wait we've got that ;)
All positions (at Faux) have now been filled with the qualified applicants...
Fox News really news?
You're very funny - and helpful - a rare combo on the Net or anywhere. Dry humour is uncommon these days - maybe because it takes intelligence and thought to pull it off.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |