Journalism Education: A realy good reality check

I encourage you to read this Neiman Lab article by Amy Schmitz Weiss and Cindy Royal, two people in this j-education biz I really respect.

Amy does a good job of laying out the reality and challenges of journalism at the intersection of data and computer science.

Cindy then does a good job of adding perspective, specifically that journalism/media uses of data, computer science, etc., are often specialized applications of others' broad research and knowledge and thus are not always top-of-mind in the priority list of things like computer science departments.

(In other words, all those calls for collaboration are well-placed, but let's not get Pollyannaish about things.)

As I said, I really recommend you read it.

(You might also check this one out from last week: Larry Dailey's reflection on whether trad news orgs are ready for innovation. Goes for j-schools too.)

Where journlalists rank on the food chain

Latest numbers from Pew say 28 percent of Americans surveyed say journalists contribute "a lot" to society's well-being.

Nice to know that's still above lawyers and "business executives." (That last category includes publishers, doesn't it?)

The highest ranked: Teachers at 72 percent and members of the military at 78 percent. (Yet another argument for arming journalists?)

In all seriousness, Phil Meyer got it right in "The Vanishing Newspaper" when he said this industry's only true business model comes from selling influence (and by implication, trust and respect). Right now, my sense is that a lot of execs just don't get that. It's time to do less with less, not more with less, but do what you do well. Stop the hubris of thinking you can do it all, or even most of it. And be prepared for the long haul; when there are a bunch of idiots around you, it takes time to slog through the mess and stand out.

Usage: Stanch/Staunch

From today's paper:

Some folks who live along Bluff Road are fighting the expansion of industrial land toward Hopkins.
Tuesday, Richland County Council weighs a request to rezone nearly 148 acres from rural to light-industrial use.
Residents say the change would conflict with a long-standing promise by the county to staunch the creep of businesses along the road leading to the Congaree National Park.

The preferred usage still is "stanch" for the verb (and there's no question if you are strictly following AP style -- Stanch is a verb: He stanched the flow of blood. Staunch is an adjective.)

New math, WOLO style

So this story and headline are posted on the website of one of our local TVs - WOLO.

Gas Prices Doubling

COLUMBIA, SC (WOLO)-- Gas prices nearly doubled over the week, prompting concern from drivers.

Here in the midlands, ABC Columbia news found prices ranging from $3.29 a gallon to $3.45 a gallon.

That's nearly 30 cents higher than prices were two weeks ago, when midlands drivers were paying an average of $3.08 per gallon.

Experts say that prices could spike even more as we near August, then the Labor Day holiday.

Really?

A 30-cent increase on $3.08 is "doubling"? Apparently the slide rule needs to go back in the shop for a tuneup.

And the person whose byline is on this is the news director. 

(It's also "Midlands" -- capped  as a recognized region of the state. But that's a guppy compared to the whale of a mistake.)

CSJ Column: Why journalists need to pay attention to 3-D printing

I've resumed my Common Sense Journalism monthly column with some thoughts on why 3-D printing will be one of the long-term business disruptors for journalism and other advertiser-supported media.

Why you should pay attention to 3-D printing

By Doug Fisher

No. 118 for July 2013

The curiosity factor of 3-D printing has soared lately with videos of a working gun made using one of the printers. The curiosity will fade – for a while, at least – but smart media managers will keep tracking the technology's progress because it could be one of your next big business disruptors.

It's not as likely to be a direct disruptor as many other digital technologies of the past 15 years have been. But it will disrupt the business of some of your major advertisers.

The idea of "printing" three-dimensional objects is no longer a dream or even an expensive prototype. It is likely to be an accepted consumer technology within a decade.
Doctors already use 3-D printing to make replacement body parts. Formula One racing teams use it to make car parts. The federal government is putting $30 million into creating a manufacturing hub in Youngstown, Ohio.

For $99, a South Carolina company is putting kiosks at malls where you can turn your or your children's drawings into a 3-D model. Keychains and charms are also in the works, according to The State newspaper. The Center for Digital Education says the University of California-Berkeley now has a 3-D print vending machine. And a consumer-level printer can be had for about $1,300 (see cubify.com/cube for an example).

The digital age is ruthless in cutting out middlemen, as media companies are learning. And many of your advertisers are retailers, the epitome of middlemen. Read more ...

An editor reads the paper, July 3, 2013

A few other things from the larder:

1) Don't make your readers go backward or connect the dots, even in a photo caption.

Reworked: Gaffney's L.J. Peak, with microphone, announces his intent to play college athletics at Georgetown, while Shaq Davidson will play at USC.  (You can't see the crowd, so why mention it?)


2) Watch the numbers - it's mostly just common sense. Consider this excerpt from a Sunday story:

 Fort Jackson has 3,500 civilian workers, who collectively are paid $51 million annually. The 20 percent furlough for the remainder of the fiscal year means those workers will have $2.55 million less to spend on gas, food, entertainment and other commodities. Shaw Air Force Base in Sumter employs another 1,340 civilian workers with a payroll of $59 million. The furloughs will cost Sumter’s local economy $2.95 million this year.

So how does a military base with 1,300 workers have a larger payroll than one with 3,500? And if you do simple division, it suggests the average per-capita salary at the fort is about $14,500 while at the air base it's $44,000. As you might suspect, the average salaries are about the same, and the Fort Jackson payroll is about $155 million. Don't let big numbers make your eyes glaze over - do simple math to break them down into understandable chunks.

(As of this writing, the wrong information is still online - another data point that too many newsrooms still don't get it - while the story was corrected in the paper this morning. Which one do you think can do more to spread inaccurate information?)

3) And not to pick only on my local paper (really, I love you all), this recent story from WLTX-TV was just a mess:

 More than 100 residents are not sitting well with a house committee decision to pass a controversial animal care bill.

Tuesday dozens of residents packed a agriculture house committee meeting, most in opposition of a bill that would limit nonprofit shelters to provide certain kinds of vaccinations to animals.

The sub-committee voted four-zero; passing the bill to the full board. Some veterinarians say this bill will even the playing field between private practices and non profits.

"It will absolutely hurt the animals. This is the most detrimental thing that could happen," said Deloris Mungo with Palmetto Lifeline.

"It has very broad language that is going to restrict what I am able to do," said Janet McKim.

Critics of the bill say it is poorly written, Janet McKim is a veterinarian at a shelter in Charleston.

 "If I don't treat it I am at risk of malpractice but if I do treat it I can be practicing outside the law, so it puts me at an extraordinarily difficult situation."

Those in support of the bill say that this is to level the playing field. But Mungo said restricting residents to only use vets to get their pets spayed or neutered is not fair.

"I have very good veterinarians but I should have the right to go to a private vet if I want to or go to a low cost spay neuter clinic if I want," Mungo said.

Richland County Representative Kirkman Finlay voted for the bill. He says the bill is needed but they need to bring more people to the table to make a fair compromise.

"Groups that are directly supported by the government that are perceived to be in direct competition with these vets are the crux of the issue. The vets are saying we are paying for our competition to come undercut us in price and that's always an issue," Finlay said.

Those in opposition says private businesses compete with non profits in every venue and they feel that this shouldn't be one that changes.

"We shouldn't be dictated to who is going to do our surgeries and how much we are going to have to pay," Mungo said.

Here's a rework. You can decide:


Dozens of opponents are upset with a South Carolina House subcommittee decision to approve an animal-care bill that would keep shelters from spaying or neutering pets.

People packed a House Agriculture subcommittee meeting Tuesday, most opposing the bill. It would limit nonprofit shelters to providing vaccinations and spaying or neutering services only to lower-income people adopting pets. All others would have to go to a veterinarian.

The subcommittee, on a 4-0 vote, sent the bill to the full Agriculture Committee. Some veterinarians say this bill will even the playing field between private practices and nonprofits, but critics say it is poorly written.

"It will absolutely hurt the animals. This is the most detrimental thing that could happen," said Deloris Mungo with Pawmetto Lifeline in Columbia. Janet Kim, a veterinarian at a Charleston shelter, complained that it has "very broad language that is going to restrict what I am able to do."

"If I don't treat it, I am at risk of malpractice, but if I do treat it, I can be practicing outside the law, so it puts me at an extraordinarily difficult situation," she said.

Mungo says restricting people to using only vets to get their pets spayed or neutered is not fair.

"I have very good veterinarians, but I should have the right to go to a private vet if I want to or go to a low-cost spay-neuter clinic if I want," Mungo said.

Rep. Kirkman Finlay, R-Richland, voted for the bill but said more people need to be involved in negotiating a compromise.

"Groups that are directly supported by the government that are perceived to be in direct competition with these vets are the crux of the issue. The vets are saying we are paying for our competition to come undercut us in price, and that's always an issue," Finlay said.

Opponents says private businesses and nonprofits compete in many areas.

"We shouldn't be dictated to who is going to do our surgeries and how much we are going to have to pay," Mungo said.
Have a happy Fourth.

Edit teach: paring down and steering away from court-speak

So you're on deadline, a verdict is in after a long trial and you've got to pound out those words. It's easy to slip into court-speak and repeat yourself.

As I sometimes post for editing teachers who want examples and my current and upcoming students, here is a story from today and my suggested edited version.

Original (611 words)

A federal civil jury took 1½ hours Tuesday evening to find in favor of Camden Military Academy and its top leaders in a civil trial over whether the school was negligent in an alleged 2008 rape case involving a cadet.

 “The Lord was with us, and we’re just so glad,” said Camden headmaster Col. Eric Boland, 55, choking up with emotion as he walked out of the Matthew J. Perry Jr. Federal Courthouse in Columbia as night fell. He was one of the three named school administration defendants in the case.

The plaintiff in the case, now 18, was seeking up to $7 million in punitive damages, plaintiff’s lawyer Marguerite Willis told the jury in her closing arguments Tuesday afternoon. Other cadets were accused of raping the teen when he was 13.

Willis told the jury it should find Camden Military Academy and three top officials responsible for not cracking down on a “climate of violence” at the school.

 “You are here to stop what is going on,” she said. “Unless you punish these people, you will never know whether this will happen to another child.”

In his closing argument, defense attorney Duke Highfield assailed Willis’ version of events, reminding the jury that Willis’ client had changed his stories about the alleged rape and other alleged traumatic incidents numerous times before testifying at trial.

The plaintiff is “an admitted liar” whose allegations about suffering sexual trauma at the hands of two other cadets only came into focus as he got closer to filing a lawsuit against the school and thought of winning a lot of money, Highfield said.

Highfield also told the jury that the three school officials who are defendants in the suit are exceptional people who have spent years developing a safe and nourishing environment at the 55-year-old school.

 “Do you think any of these educators would allow this to go on if they knew about it?” Highfield asked the jury, speaking of Boland, commandant of cadets Lt. Col. Pat Armstrong, and Command Sgt. Maj. Vertis Wilder. Armstrong and Wilder were the other named defendants in the lawsuit.

Highfield saved his most slashing attack for a key plaintiff’s expert witness, Dr. James Ballenger, who had earlier in the trial testified that the plaintiff’s different versions of events were due to post-traumatic stress disorder brought on by the rape.

Ballenger, who earned $125,000 for examining the cadet, basically sells his testimony to whoever pays him, High-field said.

“He sings whatever you want – like a jukebox,” Highfield scoffed.

That brought a rejoinder from Willis, who told the jury that Ballenger – who she said was a nationally prominent PTSD expert – had also been hired as an expert witness at times by Highfield’s law firm.

Willis had used Ballenger to explain to the jury that people who suffer traumatic events such as rape often have memory impairments of the event.

The jury began deliberating early Tuesday evening.

Over four weeks of trial, there were dozens of witnesses and numerous exhibits presented to the federal jury, composed of eight men and two women.

The State does not generally identify victims of alleged sexual assaults.

After the jury’s verdict, Highfield told The State newspaper in an interview, “It was a hard-fought case, a serious case, and we always believed in Camden Military Academy.”

Willis said, “The issues of bullying and violence in schools are important ones, and Nexsen Pruet (Willis’s Columbia firm) is proud to have represented our client in this battle. We believed in him, and continue to believe.”

Cam Walters, head of Camden Military Academy’s board of trustees, said, “We’ve got a fine school, and a fine tradition, and we’re happy to continue.” 

My suggested version (541words)

A federal jury took 1½ hours Tuesday evening to find in favor of Camden Military Academy and three of its leaders in a lawsuit over whether the school was negligent in an alleged 2008 rape of a cadet.

 “The Lord was with us, and we’re just so glad,” said Camden headmaster Col. Eric Boland, 55, choking up with emotion as he walked out of the Matthew J. Perry Jr. Federal Courthouse in Columbia as night fell. He was one of the three school administrators who were sued.

The plaintiff, now 18, was seeking up to $7 million in punitive damages, his lawyer Marguerite Willis told the jury in her closing arguments Tuesday afternoon. Other cadets were accused of raping the teen when he was 13. [It is unclear whether Willis is his only lawyer – if so, commas around her name.]

The State does not generally identify victims of alleged sexual assaults.

Willis told the jury it should find the school and its three officials responsible for not cracking down on a “climate of violence.”

 “You are here to stop what is going on,” she said. “Unless you punish these people, you will never know whether this will happen to another child.”

In his closing argument, defense attorney Duke Highfield assailed Willis’ version of the events, reminding the jury that Willis’ client had changed his stories about the alleged rape and other alleged traumatic incidents numerous times before testifying.

The teen is “an admitted liar” whose allegations about suffering sexual trauma at the hands of two other cadets only came into focus as he got closer to suing the school and thought of winning a lot of money, Highfield said.

He also said the three officials are exceptional people who have spent years developing a safe and nourishing environment at the 55-year-old school.

Along with Boland, commandant of cadets Lt. Col. Pat Armstrong and Command Sgt. Maj. Vertis Wilder were defendants.

 “Do you think any of these educators would allow this to go on if they knew about it?” Highfield asked the jury. He saved his most slashing attack for a key plaintiff’s expert witness, Dr. James Ballenger, who had testified that the teen’s different versions of events were from post-traumatic stress disorder brought on by the rape.

Ballenger, who earned $125,000 for examining the cadet, basically sells his testimony to whoever pays him, Highfield said.

“He sings whatever you want – like a jukebox,” Highfield scoffed.

But Willis told the jury that Ballenger was a nationally prominent PTSD expert who had also been hired as an expert witness at times by Highfield’s law firm.

Willis, a member of the Nexsen Pruet law firm, had used Ballenger to explain that people often have trouble remembering traumatic events such as rape.

The jury of eight men and two women began deliberating early Tuesday evening after four weeks of trial with dozens of witnesses and numerous exhibits.

After the verdict, Highfield told The State newspaper, “It was a hard-fought case, a serious case, and we always believed in Camden Military Academy.”

Willis said: “The issues of bullying and violence in schools are important ones, and Nexsen Pruet  is proud to have represented our client in this battle. We believed in him, and continue to believe.”

Cam Walters, head of Camden Military Academy’s board of trustees, said, “We’ve got a fine school, and a fine tradition, and we’re happy to continue.”

Editors (what's left of them at least) need to take special care to help. It's not fair to expect a reporter pounding out copy on deadline to be a master of conciseness. It's human nature -- as Mark Twain said, I would have written shorter, but I didn't have time.

Columbia killing: And that she's a mother is relevant why?

So this is a story from my morning paper today:

Columbia police are asking for the public’s help in identifying three suspects who killed a baker and mother of four.

Kelly L. Hunnewell, 33, of Pineneedle Drive, was found dead Monday morning at the bakery kitchen where she worked at 93 Tommy Circle.

The woman died from complications from gunshot wounds to the upper body, Richland County Coroner Gary Watts said.

From the outside, no one would know that a bakery is inside the white, cinder-block building just off Beltline Boulevard. There are no signs anywhere on the building, only two windowless doors and a larger bay door. The building is surrounded by fences, and the backyard is full of overgrown weeds.

Police found Hunnewell’s body after receiving a call from someone near the bakery who heard a woman screaming and gunshots, according to Columbia Police spokesman Jim Crawford.

Later, investigators discovered surveillance footage that showed three armed men entering the shop through a propped-open door. Seconds later, the men are seen leaving the scene hurriedly.

Officers are still trying to determine a motive, Crawford said.

“It’s truly a whodunnit at this point,” Crawford said Tuesday. “We’re working on some remote leads right now, but nothing concrete.”

Tommy Circle is off Beltline Boulevard, near an ale house, a bail bond company and a hair salon. The bakery is the last building before Tommy Circle turns into a residential area.

There has been no recent crime around the bakery, Crawford said.

And I'm still left wondering why her being a "mother of four" is relevant, especially in the lede when it is not referenced or backed up elsewhere in the story.

We really do have to stop doing these knee-jerk, sexist ledes. That's not to say there should be a blanket ban on such things. There actually can be justification for mentioning these things in context -- and the local TVs got it, instead of dwelling on the building and surrounding scenery:

Family members say Hunnewell had four children. They say she was working early morning hours at the bakery so she could spend time with her kids. 

Bingo - all it takes is a little reporting! (And consider* a hyphen after "early" while we're at it.)

The State's online story has this lede: A search for three suspects in the killing of a baker entered its second day Tuesday. I can't tell if someone had the good sense to change it online or the poor sense to change it for the paper. (In one of the many continuing examples that newsrooms still don't totally get online, while the site date-stamps its entries, it does not time-stamp them.) And that story still has a headline "No suspects in killing of baker, mother of 5" (so maybe there's a numeracy problem too?).

----
*I've added "consider." Ah, nothing like throwing a hyphen into a roomful of journalists to watch the fun begin. My old friend Royal Calkins, over on Facebook where this post also appeared, declares it non-negotiable -- no hyphen with -ly words, be they adjectives or adverbs. Would that it were so clear-cut. As an example, the AP, following many newsrooms' recent aversion to hyphens, comes down on the side of not using it, but with blowback from commenters. So does National Geographic and Cambridge. On the other hand, "Working With Words," a standard guide in journalism classes and newsrooms, says this: "Use a hyphen in a compound modifier after any word ending in ly other than an adverb, such as the adjectives friendly, likely, seemly, timely and ugly or the noun family." Bill Walsh, in "Lapsing Into a Comma," generally follows the same path, and you can find style guides on either side of the issue. And there is vigorous debate among copy editors I respect (the latter is Gramarphobia, by Patricia O'Connor, and note the use of the hyphen in the text on another subject). I've written before about the unloved hyphen and the journalistic move away from it (though the Wall Street Journal still cherishes the little buggers). So my best advice is to make your own decision or follow your favorite style guide. But, please, do not call it non-negotiable as Royal has. Very little in language is when it comes to usage and style (this is not a grammar issue) and punctuation. (And if it were, there wouldn't be so much dang debate on the Oxford comma - journalists would have to use it because it is the predominant American style. Not endorsing it, just sayin' ...)