Job Shadows: What You Saw, Part 4

Here's a sampling of some of the various job shadows done by you all (this will be updated as job shadow reports are turned in, so please check back frequently). Take a look and see what you can learn from everyone's visits. There's a lot of good stuff here to help you decide what you want to do with your lives; what you need to be doing to get there; and what to expect when you do get there.

Please give each one of these a quick read as they come in, will you?

*****

For my job shadow I followed Jonathan Oosting, a political reporter for MLive. He covers all matters of legislature at the Capitol. I followed him on October 20. We purposefully scheduled the jobs shadow on that day because legislation was in session and Oosting thought that it would be more beneficial for me to see a day where congress was in session.

            For Oosting he usually gets to the MLive office somewhat early because a lot of time he left something for himself to do from the day before, plus it makes him get motivated for the day if he feels like he accomplished something. From there he does research on what’s going on at the Capitol that day. That day the things that he was most interested in a Criminal Justice committee meeting, a vote on teacher evaluations, the Senate Local Government Committee, and a debate on raising taxes for new roads in Michigan.

            Going into the day he was most excited for the debate because it was something really unusual. A conservative lawmaker issued an open challenge to anyone in the house or senate to debate him on raising taxes. A democratic freshman senator took up the challenge and the two were going to have a debate open to the public. Going into the day Oosting was planning on trying to periscope the debate live and then write a follow up story on it. While we were in the Capitol we heard from another reporter that the tea party issued a public advisory to all of its followers to pack the room for the debate to try and support or the lawmaker.

            Before we headed to the committee meeting Oosting gave me a quick lesson on exactly how the Capitol, like the differences between committee meetings and the house floor, which was much appreciated because most of my knowledge about how laws actually formed was from School House Rock, the West Wing, and House of Cards. The major take way that I took was that committee meetings were usually more important than what actually happened on the house or senate floor. For example, most of what happens on the house or senate floor is a lot of “pomp and circumstance” as Oosting put it. Committee’s actually debate the wording of the law and listen to testimony from anyone who wants to speak on the matter.

            Going into the first committee meeting we went to Oosting was going to mainly cover a bill about increased penalties for destroying or vandalizing road signs. However at the meeting something else being discussed was a bill increasing penalties for motorcycle riders who aren’t registered to be motorcycle riders. This caught Oosting’s eye because the two people who are working on the bill are a senator and the senator’s opponent in the last election. So they were rivals recently but now they’re working together on this bill.

            Oosting said that going to committee meetings is how he finds most of his stories. He said that most of his job is going to places and listening. The few exceptions to that are when legislation isn’t in session, so there are no committee meetings that can be sat in on.

            Oosting and I also talked about social media and how he uses it, sometimes he’ll use to live tweet events or committee meetings but he has to find the balance. For example, he doesn’t want to live tweet a committee hearing that 99% of his followers don’t care about, so he’s got pick his spots for it. Other than that he mainly uses it to promote his articles.

            The major takeaways I took from shadowing Oosting was that there is always something going on the in capitol, he usually writes three stories a day. He’s got to find ways to multitask and sort of know what’s going on everywhere.

Job Shadows: What You Saw, Part 3

Here's a sampling of some of the various job shadows done by you all (this will be updated as job shadow reports are turned in, so please check back frequently). Take a look and see what you can learn from everyone's visits. There's a lot of good stuff here to help you decide what you want to do with your lives; what you need to be doing to get there; and what to expect when you do get there.

Please give each one of these a quick read as they come in, will you?

*****

I think watching TV shows like Newsroom movies like All the President’s Men can make newsrooms seem like they’re exhilarating and energetic. That wasn’t the case at the Lansing State Journal.

It was a Friday morning and the whole newsroom was pretty quiet: people making phone calls, checking the web traffic, finishing stories and starting new stories.

I sat with Kate DuHadway, the Active Lifestyle reporter at the LSJ and the first few hours with her were the same way. She finished up a story about aerial yoga and had me copyedit it (just to make me feel special, someone else had already copy edited it). Then we worked on her next story about incorporating exercise into your daily life. I watched as she wrote, and rewrote, again and again, her lede and her nut graph. It made me feel a little better about not always having a stroke of rhetorical genius every time I go to start one of my own stories.

She started at the Lansing State Journal as a social media manager and started her own local social media campaign called #MoveLansing. Her Instagram, Twitter and Facebook pages that correspond with the hashtag allow her to get sources for her stories and give her a direct audience of people who are interested in exercise around the Lansing area. I used to think that doing social media would be a simple job. But after my discussion with her, I realized that it’s harder than you might think to get people on board with a campaign like that (the Facebook page has 30 active members and was only started at the beginning of September).

Kate and I walked around the streets of Lansing looking for more sources for her exercise story. She stopped people and asked them how they incorporate exercise into their daily lives and asked if she could take a photo of them.

My experience with Kate was very eye opening, but not in the sense that I learned something magnificent and new about journalism. I was actually surprised to see how simple it can be. What we are doing in class is pretty much the same as what we’ll be doing if we work in a newsroom, except we’ll have less time in a regular newsroom. I felt affirmed that if journalism is the path I end up taking, that I am on the right path to succeeding in that field. 

Job Shadows: What You Saw, Part 2

Here's a sampling of some of the various job shadows done by you all (this will be updated as job shadow reports are turned in, so please check back frequently). Take a look and see what you can learn from everyone's visits. There's a lot of good stuff here to help you decide what you want to do with your lives; what you need to be doing to get there; and what to expect when you do get there.

Please give each one of these a quick read as they come in, will you?

*****

For this report, I shadowed Ann Pierret, a reporter for WILX Lansing. Ann graduated from Fordham University, in New York City, with a degree in Communications and Media.

Shortly after graduation, Ann was hired at WILX, where she has been working as a reporter for over a year.

When I first arrived at the WILX station, which is located not far from downtown Lansing, Ann was finishing up her work on a package she had put together earlier in the day. When she came to get me from the front of the building, she immediately introduced me to the stations news director, Kevin. “Run!” he said, when I told him I was a student at Michigan State University studying journalism. That first encounter definitely scared me and made me a little weary of my plans to go into the journalism field.

After this, I sat in the newsroom and watched Ann put the finishing touches on her package and upload it to various media sites. While she was doing this, I had the opportunity to speak with a few other reporters who were wrapping up their work for the day. When Ann finished, we sat and talked for a while about her education, how long she had been in the business and what a “typical” day might look like for a reporter.

After answering my many questions, Ann began to tour me around. We started in the newsroom, which was pretty empty at the time. Only a few reporters were still in the office after a long day of newsgathering. Ann continued to introduce me to several people, including producers, anchors and other reporters. She then took me to the conference room, where she told me the reporters and producers meet every morning to discuss and get approval for potential stories. Next, Ann showed me the stock footage room, where any previous footage used by the station has been logged and stocked according to date and category.

After leaving this room, Ann took me down the hall to the studio. Many other stations I have visited have two or three studios, so I was surprised WILX only had one. I was also surprised at how much equipment and props they managed to fit into that one small studio, but somehow they make it all work. Ann told me a little bit about each different set and when it was most commonly used. I was really excited when she suggested I get a photo of myself sitting at the news desk.

Finally, Ann took me to the control room, where she told me about what the producers do to put the newscast together and make sure it airs promptly.

After we finished touring, we went back to the newsroom, where I was able to ask her a few more questions about her job, her most memorable stories and her likes and dislikes of being a reporter. Ann told me that social media has exponentially changed the way we report news and that she is constantly using Facebook and Twitter to find sources and keep herself updated. She also told me that working as a reporter can be extremely challenging and frustrating, but to constantly remind yourself why you got into journalism when that happens. Towards the end of our time, Ann and her coworker Joy both offered me some great advice on ways to update my professional portfolio, reel and resume.

Overall, I really enjoyed my time touring WILX and learned a lot about the news industry. I feel like I now have a better understanding of the time and effort that reporters, anchors and producers put into making a newscast successful. Ann was a great person to shadow because she is a young reporter and can easily relate to many of my concerns about working at a news station. I hope to keep in contact with her and look forward to watching her segments in the future.

Ann Pierret, 517-243-3052, Ann.pierret@wilx.com

Web News: How To Get Hits On Your Stories

By Joe Grimm

As more journalism is posted online, we have to change the way we organize our stories to take full advantage of the Web.

Regular readers of our Web sites will find our stories based on how and where they are posted. But there is a much larger audience possible, based on how well we organize our stories to show up in Web searches. Building Websites and content to help the largest number of people is called optimizing for search engines, or Search Engine Optimization (SEO).

Headlines are important, of course, and so is the way stories are named for the Web site, as well as the nature of the Web site itself.

But reporters have tremendous influence over the hits they get, just by following a few practices.

The largest search engine running is google, of course, and the recent launch of the google Chrome browser makes it seem likely that Google's importance will grow. Engineers at Google are constantly tinkering with the rules behind the Google search engine, trying to make it deliver the right story as high up in the results as they can.

This is what we know about Google searches today, and how reporters can use that knowledge:

Google searches work on the words typed in by users. Search terms and typically nouns. The terms used to find material about a football game between Michigan State University and Notre Dame, for example, would most likely be "MSU, Michigan State, Notre Dame, football" and perhaps the name of a coach or standout player. People would not search on terms like "blowout, awesome, afternoon or East Lansing."

When you write for the Web, write for your readers but organize your story so search engines can find you. Here is an outlining technique you can use:

LIST the top half-dozen nouns someone will use to find your story. Make sure the top one or two are in your lede (they should also go in the headline) and once again in the first 100 words of the story (that's as far as Google looks).

INCLUDE the remaining words somewhere else in the first 100 words.

SUBHEDS do not help search engines, but they help Web readers, who tend to scan. Write a subhead about every 4-6 grafs.

LINK to related stories or definitions that can help readers understand your story. Links can also raise our profile on search engines.

JRN 300: MODIFIED Publication Schedule

So we are continuing with our out-of-class story cycles, where you will have about 7-9 days per story to go from approved idea to draft form to final version.

Basically, every Monday you'll have the idea for your next story due; then every Tuesday you will have a draft due for your latest story and the idea for your next story due before class, and in-class we'll review everyone's previous stories OR have a field day (if it's a field day I'll let you know one week in advance; if I say nothing then it's a class day).

And every Thursday, you'll have at least some lab time (and at times that lab time will be the whole class) to finish your latest story, which will be due by the end of class.

Here's a revised out-of-class story schedule for the semester (with changes in bold):

Story 1:
Idea due: Wed. 9/30, 9 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Wed. 9/30 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 10/6, by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 10/6 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 10/8 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 10/8 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 10/13

Story 2:
Idea due: Wed. 9/30, 9 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Wed. 9/30 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 10/13, by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 10/13 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 10/15 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 10/15 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 10/20

Story 3:
Idea due: Tue. 10/13, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Tue. 10/13 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 10/20 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 10/20 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 10/22 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 10/22 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 10/27

Story 4:
Idea due: Mon. 10/19, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Mon. 10/19 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 10/27 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 10/27 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 10/29 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 10/29 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 11/3

Story 5:
Idea due: Mon. 10/26, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Mon. 10/26 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 11/3 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 11/3 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 11/5 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 11/5 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 11/10

Story 6:
Idea due: Mon. 11/2, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Mon. 11/2 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 11/10 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 11/10 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 11/12 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 11/12 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 11/17

Story 7:
Idea due: Mon. 11/10, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Mon. 11/10 by 6 PMDraft due: Tue. 11/17 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 11/17 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 11/19 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 11/19 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 11/24

We also have our final project story, which should be your most elaborate, ambitious trend-and-issue story of the term. Please note the idea is due in late October, even though the draft isn't due until late November. That's to give you a lot of time to work on this. Please don't wait until the last minute.

Final Project:
Idea due: Tue. 10/20, 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Idea OKd: Wed. 10/21 by 6 PM
Draft due: Tue. 11/24 by 8 AM to omars@msu.edu
Draft returned: Tue. 11/24 by 6 PM
Final version due: Thu. 12/3 by end of class to WordPress
Final version posted: Thu. 12/3 by 6 PM
Review as class: Tue. 12/8

Questions? Please ask me. And good luck, everyone!

Your First Story: Way Too Many Fatals

A big surprise to me on this assignment were the number of fatals I came across. Really, it was a shocking amount. Let's go over where the problems were so we can learn from each other and avoid these mistakes going forward:

* We used incorrect words. When we meant to say cannons (a weapon), we said canons (ideas and thoughts). That misspelling changes a meaning, so it's a fatal.

In another case, we said Section (area) Bill when we meant Senate (a legislative body) Bill; that's a formal title we're misspelling and misidentifying, which is also a fatal.

In yet another, we referred to residence (a home) when we meant residents (people). Again, that changes the meaning of a sentence, so it's a fatal.

We need to check our work with our eyes and not just spell check; spell check won't catch a word that is unintended but correctly-spelled, like here. And we need to make sure we understand the words we are using, and that the word is in its correct form.

* We used incorrect information. On a local construction project, instead of using the cost number for a project in Lansing we used the cost number for a similar project in Washington, D.C. and linked to the latter. We need to pay attention to detail and make sure we know what we're suing, information-wise.

* We used wrong names. In one story we had two different names each spelled two different ways. Obviously, one way has to be wrong. We need to make sure we're properly proofing our work and making sure that names are spelled correctly and consistently on each reference.

Just like in JRN 200, it's not the big stuff tripping us up; it's the little stuff. But in journalism, there's no such thing as a small error. If we can't get the little things right, readers are fair to ask, why should they believe we didn't mess up with the big stuff?

Proofreading: Three Checklists

Given our recent fatals binge, I think it's prudent to introduce everyone too these three fact-checking and proofreading lists I offer in my JRN 200 class.

Whether you have been fataling frequently or not at all, please take a look at the suggestions here, and either work them into a regular routine that best works for you or make sure your existing routine is up to snuff.

*****

ACCURACY CHECKLIST FOR JOURNALISTS

Created by the Reynolds School for Business Journalism

Distributed by the Poynter Institute for Journalism

Instructions

After completing your story, use the down arrow on your keyboard to highlightand then complete each of these checks.

I. Facts

Check these first three items while your story is on the screen:

1. Run spell-check, review suggestions and correct any actual errors.
2. Click hyperlinks.
3. Call phone numbers.

Use a printout of the story for the remaining checks:

4. Put a ruler under each line as you read the text. Underline every fact, and then double-check each one, including:

a) Names and titles of people, places and companies - Also, does each second reference (Jones) have a first reference (Mary Jones)?

b) Numbers and calculations - Do the numbers add up? Is it millions or billions? Are the percentages correct?

c) Dates and ages - Watch references to “next month/last month” when the month is changing.

d) Quotes - Are quotes accurate and properly attributed? Have you fully captured what each person meant?

e) Superlatives - What’s your source that something is the biggest, oldest, etc.?

II. Grammar

5. Check each sentence for correct use of:

a) Subject-verb agreement - Also, are you consistent in your use of either the present or the past tense to tell the story?

b) Pronoun-noun agreement.

c) Plurals and possessives.

d) Punctuation.

III. Spelling

6. Read the story backwards, checking the spelling of each word. Use a dictionary.

IV. Fairness and context

7. Terms - Define or eliminate unfamiliar terms, such as acronyms and jargon.

8. Fairness - Have all stakeholders been contacted and given a chance to talk?

9. Missing - Does the story leave any important question unanswered?

10. Context - Does the reader have the context to understand the story?

V. Your own common errors (for example, if you have a habit of getting dates wrong, misspelling names, ect.) 

11. ____________________________________________

12.____________________________________________

VI. Final checks

13. Read the story aloud.

14. Have someone else read it.  

15. Accompanying elements - Run the previous checks on the story's headlines, captions, sidebars, photos, graphics, videos, interactive media and podcasts. Check for inconsistencies.

*****

CHECKLIST ON AVOIDING ACCURACY PROBLEMS 

Reporting isn't just about habits; it's also about a mindset that nothing is assumed and everything needs to be cross-checked for accuracy. This is a modified version of an editor's checklist on how to help reporters avoid inaccuracy problems by having the right skeptical mindset. I think there are some tips worth following. Let's take a look: 

Problem: Not detail-oriented. Plan to ask at least five extra questions not covered in your assignment that go into greater detail; keep asking clarifying questions.

Problem: Making assumptions. Reports should back up statements in story with evidence; reporters should take their time and not rush during interviews; reporters should self-edit religiously and ask themselves if they can back up what they are writing; reporters should ask sources follow-up questions; reporters should ask the obvious questions to make sure they're not assuming; reporters should ask, "How do you know that? and "how do I know that?" of themselves and sources.

Problem: Interviewing confusion. Reporters shouldn't be shy about asking sources to slow down or repeat something; reporters ask "can you elaborate?" or say, "I don't understand"; reporters can repeat the information back to the source in their own words and give the source the opportunity to correct them; reporters can go back over direct quotes with the source; reporters can make a recording of events or interviews that can be checked.

Problem: Relying on out-of-date information. Never type something before you've checked it; always ask sources for an updated title; do research ahead of time; check Web sites for the last time they were updated and if it's been more than one year, then the information might be old; check the date on press releases.

Problem: Time constraints. Plan ahead for a long day -- start doing research the night before or get up early to get all your reporting done on time; overestimate the time everything will take; start writing what you know while waiting for that last callback, it might also help you find out earlier what you don't know; don't multitask during the editing process; keep fact-checking.

Problem: Exaggerating/using more powerful words than your reporting shows. Use precise language; use self-discipline and resist the urge to overwrite or overstate the facts; always attribute it. If you can't attribute some part of your story, then perhaps your words are wrong; reporters should use balanced reporting and make sure that it's reflected in the writing of the story; reporters should put the facts in the proper context.

Problem: Relying on unreliable sources. Reporters can ask sources for another source or documents to back up what they tell you; reporters should vet sources' credibility during interviews. Does what they're saying make sense? Always ask, "How do you know that?" 

*****

Get Your Eagle Eye On: 10 Tips for Proofreading Your Own Work

A guest post by Leah McClellan of Peaceful Planet

The best blog post I read this morning—of many—is good. Very good, actually. It flows. It’s fresh. It has a rhythm that drew me in and made me want to read every word. The ideas are thought-provoking.

But how much more enjoyable would it have been if I didn’t have to reread certain sections to make sure I was getting the gist of things? How much better would the post be if I didn’t hesitate at it’s instead of its and there instead of they’re? How much intended meaning and power was lost over a lack of subject-verb agreement or commas that might have been better placed?

Tripping, stumbling, and hesitating over misspelled words or ill-placed punctuation is like watching a TV show with a shaky cable signal or trying to talk while a cell phone connection is breaking up—the reader is jostled right out of the story the writer is telling.

If the errors are too big or too many, I’m outta there.

This writer intentionally broke a lot of rules in his 1100-word article, and he broke them well. Sentence fragments clustered together as ideas to ponder, a long list of items without commas that symbolizes repetitive drivel, the same word repeated over and over in a few short sentences to pound in a point. Good stuff and well done, for the most part.

Some grammar and punctuation rules can—and should—be broken, when you know what the rules are and how to break them effectively. But the lack of solid proofreading in this piece is like cake without icing, pottery without glaze, or a fine piece of wood in need of a polish. The writer didn’t step back and get his Eagle Eye on.

“Come on,” you chortle. “It’s hard to proofread your own work. And who notices anyway?”

Believe it or not, lots of people notice unless they’re just scanning. And it’s quite possible that many of those scanners might linger on every word you write if typos and bloopers and unintentionally-broken punctuation or grammar rules weren’t making them stumble and wonder and lose their focus.

Typos and errors break up the “voice” that readers are trying to hear as they read your written words.

It doesn’t matter whether you’re a freelancer, a blogger, a student, or anyone who writes for any reason. Most of us don’t have proofreaders or a skilled family member or friend to help us out on a regular basis. And if you’re submitting work to an agent or publisher or a big blog for consideration, why let typos and mistakes clutter and cloud the brilliant work you want them to read?

Any time you write something, you want readers to enjoy and appreciate your masterpiece. It’s your baby, an extension of yourself. Take good care of it.

Writing and editing is art. Proofreading is science.

So says Rushang Shah, President of Gramlee.com, an online editing service with editors behind the scenes constantly proofreading and copyediting. Rushang says that “all proofreading and copyediting involves the human element, and that’s why computers cannot replace a proofreader.”

Proofreading your own work can be challenging, it’s true. You already know the story, you already have a picture in your mind of what to expect and, as a result, you tend to skim over words and groups of words. Plus, you know your own voice and, even if there are errors in your writing, you don’t “hear” them or see them because you’re in a hurry, and your mind fills in the blanks as you skim over things. You might be daydreaming—even if you’re reading out loud.

If you have a system, though, proofreading can be like doing a quality check on an assembly line. It’s just busy work, really, and not very creative at all. But it’s so important.

Here are some tips to help you get your Eagle Eye on and proofread your own work like a pro.

1. Don’t proofread until you’re completely finished with the actual writing and editing. If you make major changes while proofreading, even if it’s just within sentences, you’re still in an artistic, creative mode, not a science mode.

2. Make sure you have no distractions or potential interruptions. Shut down email and social media, hide the cell phone, shut off the TV, radio, or music, and close the door. Print your document if you need to get away from the computer altogether.

3. Forget the content or story. Analyze sentence by sentence; don’t read in your usual way. Focus on spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Work backwards, if that helps, or say the words and sentences out loud. Concentrate.

4. Make several passes for different types of errors. Try checking spelling and end punctuation on one pass, grammar and internal punctuation on another, and links or format on yet another pass. Develop a system.

5. Take notes. If you notice a format issue while checking spelling or if you need to look something up, make a quick note and come back to it so you don’t lose your focus.

6. If you do make a last-minute change to a few words, be sure to check the entire sentence or even paragraph over again. Many errors are the result of changes made without adjusting other, related words.

7. Check facts, dates, quotes, tables, references, text boxes, and anything repetitive or outside of the main text separately. Focus on one element or several related aspects of your writing at a time.

8. Monitor yourself. If you find yourself drifting off and thinking about something else, go back over that section again. Try slapping your hand or tapping a foot in a rhythm as you examine each word and sentence out loud.

9. Get familiar with your frequent mistakes. Even the most expreienced writer mixes up their, they’re, and there or too, two, and to. When I’m tried or writing fast, I right what I here in my mind and just get careless. Not a big deal. That’s what proofreading is for. You caught those errors, didn’t you?

10. Check format last. Every document has format, even an email, whether it’s paragraph spacing, text wrap, indentations, spaces above and below a bullet list or between subheadings and text, and so on. Leave this for the end because contents may shift during handling.

You already know better than to rely on spell-check, so I won’t belabor the point except to say that “wear form he untied stats” doesn’t bother spell-check but it might get an American in trouble at a customs checkpoint.

What if you don’t quite know what you’re looking for while proofreading?

Do you know basic comma rules, how to use a semi-colon, or when to use who orwhom? You might have an excellent sense of what things should look like or sound like, especially if you’re an avid reader, but if you don’t know basic grammar and punctuation rules, proofreading might be guesswork, at best, with doubtful results, at worst. Why not make your life easier and your writing better? Take some time to learn basic rules from some online resources I consult when I need help:

Grammar Girl: Quick and Dirty Tips

Purdue Online Writing Lab: General Writing Resources

Oxford Dictionaries: Better Writing

GrammarBook.com

You can also download a free copy of The Handy-Dandy Everybody’s Guide to Proofreading over at my blog, Peaceful Planet.

Don’t let mistakes tarnish your work of art, whether it’s a research paper, a blog post, a query letter, or business communication. And remember, proofreading is not the same as writing and editing. It’s not about creativity; it’s a science that needs a system. Follow these tips and create your own system, and you’ll have your Eagle Eye on in no time.

Leah McClellan is a freelance writer, copyeditor, proofreader, gardener, vegetarian, and animal lover who dreams of world peace and writes about communication atPeaceful Planet.

Your First Story: A Draft Roundup

Overall, we had some hits and misses with our first drafts. That's not surprising; you're new to your beats and still trying to calibrate what you're supposed to be doing and what it's supposed to look like when you're done.

Still, let's try to learn from what e've done, so we can do better next time. Areas where I think e need to work on include:

* Stories that weren't very developed. Really, your draft should read like a finished story, with the idea that before the draft deadline we do the vast majority of our reporting and between the draft and final deadlines we're simply tweaking things. Too many people turned in work that ended substantial reporting still to be done.

The reality is, we simply don't have enough time between the draft and final deadlines to do substantial reporting and expect to have a solid final story. We need to start reporting on our stories as soon as our pitches are approved, and your reporting has to be substantially completed by the time you file your draft if you are not to really scramble to get your final version done adequately. 

We don't have a word minimum, but for a story to be substantially-enough reported I can't imagine you'd ever have reason to turn in a text story that's less than 700 words, or a video story that's under 2 minutes.

* Not enough sourcing. Too many people were taking one side of a story; maybe two. There was a lack of examination of other perspectives. There was a lack of neutral experts. And a lack of data to support your conclusions. Please look at the earlier blog posts regarding sourcing and make sure you're getting a broad array.

* Not enough sourcing from within your beat. Too many people were citing people from MSU or East Lansing for their stories, even though they are writing for a publication that doesn't cover East Lansing or MSU, that's read by people who don't live in East Lansing or go to MSU. That's like writing a story about Detroit for the Detroit Free Press and quoting everyone from Cleveland.

We need to talk to people who live and work in our beats. That means we have to get out to our beats and find such people. We're not going to find them in East Lansing or at MSU. Really, the only people we should be quoting from outside our beats are our neutral experts. Pretty much everyone else needs to come from within our physical beats.

* We're writing before we're reporting. Too many stories have a main point and supporting points even though no or very few interviews had yet been done in those subject areas!

This isn;'t a term paper, where you start with the point your teacher wants you to support and then you find info that conforms to that point. This is a news story, where we don't know how we want to lay out a story until after we have talked to a wide range of sources and we see what kind of story we discovered.

It's not about presuming what the news is; if that's all we did, then the audience doesn't need us. We report, and then we write; not the other way around. We write based on the facts we discover by interviewing; not based on presumptions before interviewing.

* A lack of attention to detail. Like town names. It's not Saint Johns or St. John's, for example, it's St. Johns. That's what the city's own Web site says. We need to play attention to detail and get our basics exactly right. Getting basics wrong will quickly make you appear as unknowing impostors to our audience, which consists of people who live there and know the basics by heart. 

If we are to be credible to them, then we have to get the basics right, every time.

* A lack of attribution. Too many stories offered information, but didn't say where the info was from. We need to be sure that if we get data or facts or history, we list from where we learned what we learned.

* Borrowing from other media. That's a no-no. Don't cite another newspaper or TV station or news Web site; see where they got the info from, and then contact those sources directly, yourself. Media can't just cannibalize from other media; at some point, someone has to get the info first-hand.

* Not conforming to AP Style. We were very sloppy overall in this regard. Please proof your work and make sure you are conforming to AP Style rules.

The solutions? Actually, there's one, and it shouldn't be hard:

* We need to think back to what we did in JRN 200, and do it here. All the good traits and habits we learned in JRN 200 regarding story structure and sourcing and attribution and fact-checking weren't meant to be left behind in JRN 200. Rather, those skills -- especially those developed doing out-of-class stories -- were supposed to be brought here and used as a foundation that we build upon in JRN 300 with beat reporting.

Everything we learn in one class is expected to be something you'll know and use for the rest of your career, both academic and professional.

We simply don't have time to redo JRN 200 here. That's what JRN 200 was for. I can help people on particular points, but starting from scratch and reviewing EVERYTHING from the start simply isn't realistic. 

So, look back at your JRN 200 semester. Think about the rules and principles and techniques you worked on there. And start doing it here. Then, when this semester is done, take what you did in JRN 200 and JRN 300, and use those skills as the foundation in other classes.

Right now, I'm teaching JRN 400, and I can tell you that you will be thrown into the deep end of the pool from the start. What we learn here you will need there, and you'll need to be ready to act on what you learned in JRN 300 on your first day of JRN 400.

You know how to do this. You did it in JRN 200. Now, let's do it here.