"To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible;
to be credible we must be truthful." - Edward R Murrow
Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interviews. Show all posts

Trashy Tabloid Analysis: Star Sources




Star Magazine is the "trashy tabloid" that was first analyzed. Life & Style and in Touch Weekly were purchased at the same time (by a very brave man named Dennis Rose) in order to assist in the Trashy Tabloid Analysis that was previously explained.

It is very hard to get through a single tabloid from cover to cover due to the amount of analysis that needs to be done. There are many things than can be focused on, but from pages 1-39 (out of the 84 pages) the biggest thing noticed within this specific tabloid (this may be true of the others, but the analysis is going to be of each single tabloid and then at the end there can be comparisons)is that there are no sources to the stories.

The pages that have been analyzed thoroughly and read are pages 1-39, so this analysis is only for Star Magazine December 27, 2010 issue pages 1-39 with a focus on credibility of sources.

The magazine claims to have so many "Exclusive Interviews," but the only interview that falls under that category is the interview with Kristen StephensonPino. She tells the magazine all about how Johnny Depp is into her and all sorts of things. Of course, the only other sources credited within that article (titled "Johnny Hits On Teen Model") are anonymous sources. Unfortunately, the magazine mentions that she is a "full natural C-cup" before informing readers that Kristen is 19-years-old. So, the fact that she is a full natural C-cup is clearly more important than how old this "teen model" is. Maybe pages 39-84 will be more impressive.

The other articles all had quotes from "insiders" or "pals." How about going out and finding someone who will go on record so that the article can be credible. That's not journalism - that's laziness. Why should anyone trust what is being said by someone who won't even reveal the name publicly. For all we know the "inside source" is some random person on the street that the "reporter" found.

Then there's the cover story about Ashton Kutcher being involved in a "MURDER SCANDAL."
All right - his ex-girlfriend from many years ago had been murdered, and he will apparently be making statements in court regarding what he knew about her and the alleged killer. Also, the magazine calls the alleged killer a "cold-blooded serial killer" without ever saying "allegedly" or anything that could save face.

The entire article has not even a single interview with Ashton Kutcher. So, it's an article about Ashton Kutcher "being involved in a murder scandal," but the only interviews are a Detective and a "friend."

At least attempt to get an interview from someone credible and then put "*CREDIBLE PERSON* was unable to be reached for comment" or "*CREDIBLE PERSON* refused to comment." Something that shows that the reporter isn't just a lazy person who sits around listening to gossip and interviewing random people on the street. Seriously, I feel bad that Dennis had to pay money for this publication. I am glad that the analysis will be thorough, but honestly. This isn't journalism.

The quote from the friend is: "Ashton's worried sick about taking the witness stand."
That is according to "a friend."
Really? Why don't you go ask Ashton himself.
Why doesn't the friend have a name?

This drove me crazy throughout the entire analysis process - which is why I stopped on page 39. I haven't even gotten to the big Tom Cruise - Katie Holmes cover story yet. Fingers are crossed that there is an actual interview done with Tom or Katie and included within the article. Seriously.

If the only "sources" that your publication has are "friends," "pals," "insiders" and "guests" then either your reporters are lazy or no one wants to go on record - if no one wants to go on record and have their name associated with a quote then GO FIND SOMEONE WHO WILL. Go find someone who is willing to have their name printed in the magazine in attribution to the quote. It's understandable to have maybe one anonymous source every so often, but if the ONLY source in your article is an ANONYMOUS source - then you don't have an article. The blogs on the internet have more research and credible sources than that publication which has a paid staff and has a nice readership.

It would be nice to see demographics and statistics of the readership of Star. There is also an article within the first 39 pages regarding one of the stars of MTV's Teen Mom - something to do with her being pregnant again and not knowing who the father is - that didn't have any sources either...

Nikky Raney reading Star Magazine
That's all for pages 1-39.
This magazine was the most expensive of the three. This one was $3.99 and the other two were $2.99, but don't worry there's no sales tax in New Hampshire.

Is this publication trying to be a respected news source or is it content with being filled with gossip and unreliable information? It's sad that magazines like Newsweek are faced with tough times in publication - but magazines like Star are selling no problem. There's something wrong with this picture -- and the Future of Journalism needs to fix it.

Read Users' Comments (0)

Journalism 101: Nikky Raney's Actual Notes





This video shows my actual notes. These are the notes from interviews I have done so that viewers can get a look and see a sneak peek of how I take notes and all that good stuff. After this, I will be transferring all those notes from interviews from that notebook to word documents. This will be lots of fun - Luckily I type 120 words per minute. The only problem could be deciphering certain chicken scratches and deciding whether or not each note is essential to be typed up and included - it may end up being perfect in the end result. Enjoy.



"Journalism is not a profession or a trade. It is a cheap catch-all for fuckoffs and misfits -- a false doorway to the backside of life, a filthy piss-ridden little hole nailed off by the building inspector, but just deep enough for a wino to curl up from the sidewalk and masturbate like a chimp in a zoo-cage." Hunter S Thompson

Read Users' Comments (0)

Sources for articles: Hard News By Nikky Raney

When writing a hard news piece (for print or web) it seems as though quite a few news outlets are publishing and producing stories with few sources.

Hard news is timely and usually also involves proximity. Some examples include fires, murders, business, politics, international affairs, etc.

With hard news the inverted pyramid structure (more about that here) is very useful.

Hard news generally will involve the reporter going out and obtaining interviews first hand. Although the news is timely and up-to-date that does not excuse laziness with sources. More and more there are news outlets serving stories that could easily be confused as blog posts - meaning the sources used are usually aggregated from other news sources. With blogging that is fine - bloggers are not held to the same standards as journalists.

With a hard news story there should always be a first hand interview included with someone directly involved with the story.

For example: If the reporter was assigned to cover and report about a local drug bust a source that is essential to the story would be a police officer or any other authority involved (it will later be discussed how to deal with those type of stories in terms of semantics). Another person who would be ideal to interview would be neighbors or friends that would be willing to go on record. If there is a family member that would be willing to contribute to the story that would be great.

Interviewing the police officer is essential, because that is where the information that will be in the lead is obtained. Finding out the who, what, where and when can all be done by an interview with the authority who was at the scene.

In some scenarios secondary sources are also good to add to go along with the first hand sources. Secondary sources would include information gathered via another news source or outlet that the reporter did not go out and directly get first hand (like citing another news source or web site).

The next blog posts will go into detail for the sources essential to features, columns, reviews, editorials, etc.

For the record, blog posts will most likely include side commentary and opinions from the blogger as well as news obtained from secondary sources (other web sites), and in some cases (like this entry) the information provided comes directly from the blogger.

Read Users' Comments (0)

Interview DOs and DON'Ts explained by Nikky Raney

After viewing the video of Journalism 101: Interview DOs and DON'Ts there may be some who are looking for further explanation. This is the blog post where the dos and don'ts are better explained. Please understand these are all relating to interviews for a print or web story. Interviews for broadcast are similar, but there are more restrictions.


1) Do not ask yes or no questions.

Don't ask questions that will only result in one word answers. Granted there are some instances where there needs to be background information obtained that may only require a one word answer, but it is always preferable that the questions asked require a longer answer. The purpose of an interview is to obtain quotes for the article. In addition to quotes any facts or statements included within the article can be attributed to the source in instances where the source has given information.

2) Don't ask misleading questions.

Misleading questions are when the question is looking for a specific answer that could possibly make the source say something negative or something that could come off as negative. An example would be when interviewing someone who is pro-abortion and asking, "What is the joy of an abortion like for one who has one?" The person is coming off saying that an abortion is a joyous experience, or asking a presidential candidate, "What about his plan is most unnecessary?" The quotes given can be misconstrued and the person can come off looking bad.

3) Don't rely on a voice recorder.

Yes, it's good to have a voice recorder to play back and make sure the quotes were correct. It also saves time on fact checking so instead of needing to call up the person and go over the quotes - the voice recorder is proof. Taking notes is necessary to write down the key points and quickly jot down quotes. The recording can be fast forwarded to the specific part so that the quote can be accurate. Without taking notes one would need to sit and listen to the entire recording again and write things down - where as taking notes saves from that hassle. It also shows the person that they are actually being listened to and that specific details are being noted.

4) Don't ask irrelevant questions.

This may seem obvious, but many reporters do this. Interviewing a source for an article is just that - interviewing for the article. Taking the time out of the day to make time for an interview with a reporter is something that should be appreciated. Do not waste the person's time rambling or asking things that aren't of any relation to the article. Getting some background information on the person is one thing, but asking personal questions that have no relation to the article is just a waste of time.

5) Don't interrupt.

So sometimes there are questions that need to be asked and limited time to ask them, but even when the source goes off on a tangent talking about things that have no relevance to the article and could not be used as quotes for the article do not interrupt. Interrupting is rude and when someone is taking time out of the day to squeeze in an interview respect is necessary. Especially when a time comes in the future when the source will need to be contacted again. Of course keep some questions prepared, but make sure to have follow up questions in your mind while the person is speaking. Never interrupt, because the irrelevant rambling could sometimes lead to a better quote than could be acquired from any question asked. A subject that was not thought of before could be touched upon, and there's also a lot of information that could be obtained.

6) Ending the interview by asking for additional information.

Make sure the source is given the opportunity to add any additional information that he or she finds important. There may be some things that he or she wanted to discuss, but the questions asked were never directed toward the topic. Asking at the end of the interview shows caring and gives the source a chance to open up freely and talk about things that may not have been covered during the interview. This is where the best quotes will come from.

7) Ask questions that only that person can answer.

Broad questions that could be answered by anyone aren't worth it. Ask questions that are personal and specific to the source. Ask questions that could not be answered by anyone other than that source.


That's all for now - there are more things to touch on, but the most important are there. More explanation will be posted within future blog posts.



"When I interview people, and they give me an immediate answer, they're often not thinking. So I'm silent. I wait. Because they think they have to keep answering. And it's the second train of thought that's the better answer." -- Robin Leach

Read Users' Comments (0)

Journalism 101: Interview DOs & DONTs

Read Users' Comments (0)

Upcoming video: Interview DOs & DON'Ts by Nikky Raney

The next Journalism 101 video will discuss and act out the dos and don'ts of interviews. The interviews are specifically for print or web - not the type of interviews a broadcast journalist would conduct for a television show or any other sort of broadcast.


The video will help show how to conduct interviews with a few small but important tricks to getting the best experience & best information out of every interview.

A preview of a few of the dos and don'ts include:

  • Don't interrupt your source.
  • Don't ask misleading questions.
  • Ask questions that only that person can answer.
  • Don't rely on digital recorders - make sure to take notes.
  • Prepare questions beforehand, but don't feel like you need to stick to those questions.
More to come. Josh Grattan will assist in acting out and showing how the dos and don'ts apply.

"An investigation may take six months. A quick interview, profile, a day." -- Diane Sawyer




Just a quick preview/catch up video:

Read Users' Comments (0)

Nikky Raney: Weekly Update




Today is my mom's birthday so I won't be able to update much.

But, I am going to give a quick run down of what I am going to be blogging about this week - June 13 - June 20. It's good to give myself a schedule since I am still new to this blogging thing & writing for two blogs can get confusing.

The Future of Journalism's Blog Expectations For 6/13 - 6/20:

-Post regarding interviews via Skype
-Post regarding what questions to ask in interviews
-Post comparing interviews done by separate sources on the same topic.
-A video regarding interviews.
-A quick journalism history lesson (think Hearst vs Pulitzer).
-The future of Newspapers
-Comparing news magazines
-Video of my interview with Till We Die.
-Planning on how to collaborate with Rob from Blogington.com (Big Deal)
-WORD OF THE WEEK


That is what I have planned so far.
If you have any requests for what I should cover you can leave a comment or send me an e-mail.


P.S. All the Tila Tequila divulgence and revelations will be reported on Zennie62.com. I am working with Tila Rot Spot & people who know her personally. I am not trying to do sensationalist blogging or some strange investigative reporting piece. What I am trying to do is take all the pieces of the puzzle - what she has stated (proof from her blog posts, videos, tweets), and the proof from other publications, interviews, videos, posts. I will make sure that there is credibility behind every interview that I do and every potentially defamatory statement will be backed up with a credible source - I say this in regards to what the interviewees may say about her. I am not trying to attack her in any way, but I think the lies she has told and the way she presents herself as a role model for teenagers is unacceptable. The reason she gets away with all the lies is because the big news outlets do not have a reason to cover her, and if I worked for CNN, Newsweek, etc. I definitely wouldn't pay any time writing about her. Hell, I don't even think Fox would. But I am going to spend the time to go back down memory lane and show every claim she has made, and see the flaws and cracks within the stories. The claims made previously that have been proven lies. And I think that once and for all there needs to be all of her lies exposed and everything put on the table. I want to show it in a way that there is no way Miss Tila can argue or try to defend herself, because I will purely use facts. All of that will be done with Zennie. This blog is strictly Journalism related.

My very close friend Josh Grattan will begin reporting and blogging for Zennie62.com. I am hoping that we will do some collaborative work, but he will also be blogging on his own. I think his blog posts will focus on music (Eminem), movies (The Karate Kid), and Poker (online vs. live). Grattan will also be featured in many of my upcoming videos.



Follow me on Twitter
For my update on what's next for my blogging at Zennie62.com click here

YOU CAN LEAVE COMMENTS NOW!

Read Users' Comments (0)

Interviews -- Part 1


I am sorry for delaying this blog entry. With my birthday just passing, and some other very personal/upsetting situations arising it has been hard for me to keep my head on straight. I have been somewhat of an emotional train wreck, but I am going to attempt to at least begin this blog entry and see what comes of it.


Who to interview?

You want to interview people who can give you the information and quotes that NO ONE else can. Ask the person the question that only THAT PERSON can answer. That is really important.

So, if you are doing an article about the Dover, New Hampshire police station laying off police officers there are many different interviews to obtain and questions to ask.

The chief of police would be asked much different questions than one of the newest rookie cops. You would need to do research to find out who is at the top of the "food chain." Find out WHO made this decision and WHY this decision was made. Ask those people questions that can ONLY be answered by that person.

There are many angles to take on the story.
Whether it be the angle of why the downsizing is happening, how this is going to affect the crime rate, the impact this is having on the families, etc. You would not ask one of the police officers being laid off (as a first question), "What is your favorite memory of being on the job?" No, that is not the right question to ask in this sort of situation. A better question would be, "What was your reaction when you found out you were one of the police officers being let go?"


Actually, I think I want to move to another topic about interviews.
HOW TO CONDUCT INTERVIEWS.

Face-to-Face is the #1 best way to conduct an interview. That way you are speaking straight to the person. You see all the NON-VERBAL communication, and you can notice the tone of voice. You can "feel the presence" of the person and the vibes of the situation. Whether or not the person is feeling tension or relaxed. You are able to re-word and pose your questions differently in order to keep your source feeling at ease. You are able to get the best quotes straight from the person on the spot. You can ask follow up questions and you are really able to connect with the person and form somewhat of a "bond" with one another. The reporter always wants to protect the sources, and the sources need to know that they can trust the reporter.

Phone interviews may not always be great, because you never know who is in the room with that person telling them what to say. You don't get to see the look on the person's face. You may not even be speaking with the right person. Even if you know the person's voice you can never be 100% certain that the person you are speaking with is the person he or she claims to be.

E-mail interviews should be LAST resorts. The person cannot interpret your questions the way you may intend them to be interpreted. They could be perceived in a negative way. The person has time to backspace, reword, rephrase and PRACTICE the quote that will be given and published. The person is able to "rehearse" the quote and make sure that it sounds great.

The person could also be having someone ELSE write the e-mail for them. Someone ELSE could be typing the answers. The e-mail account could also be hacked, and in that case the person responding is not the person that the interview was intended to be with.

That's all I have for now.
My brain is in shambles right now, and I am sorry that I am allowing my personal problems interfere with my blogging personality.

It's actually a big stress reliever when I go on Zennie62.com and blog and expose Tila Tequila's lies. Guilty pleasures are still pleasures.

Cheers, I'll continue you this later.

I will discuss SKYPE in my next part of the interview blogs.

(p.s. Tom from Myspace is following me on Twitter!)

Read Users' Comments (0)

Nikky Raney Video Update:

Read Users' Comments (0)

Nikky Raney: Journalist & Blogger


"There is no substitute for face-to-face reporting and research." -- Thomas Friedman

I recently received an e-mail from a Professor of Communications from a University in Oregon. I do not feel that it is important to name him or to name the university he represents. Anyway, he found my blog and thought it would be good to interview me for a book he is writing about "Social Media and Journalism."

I was very happy to receive this e-mail with the interview questions, but I think that interviews should never be done through e-mails. E-mails should be a last resort to the way to interview a source. I will do a blog entry about interviewing next, because I think that the future of journalism needs to not rely on technology for everything. Face-to-face interviews or phone interviews are the best way to get credible and accurate information, because you can hear the tone of voice, and you are able to ask follow-up questions. When you interview via e-mail you are limited. You cannot hear the tone of voice, and you cannot pick up on any other non-verbal communication, which is critical to interpersonal communication.

Anyway, I was deeply offended by one of the questions I was asked. It was not even a question, really.

"You have many pictures of yourself on your page and was wondering if you could comment about how your public persona may or may not be perceived as someone interested in so-called "serious" journalism.
I could be missing this here but this could be part of the "celebrity" journalism you are also writing about."

I think that I need to make this clear and concise to those who read my blog entries for both web sites. So, here is the answer I gave him:

"Okay, I am into serious journalism and my track record can prove that to you. I was apart of the Hillary Clinton campaign, and I am extremely interested with political and governmental affairs. Newsweek is my favorite magazine. My public persona may not seem that way, but my experience speaks for itself. As for the "celebrity" blogging. That is blogging, not reporting. That is not journalism, that is blogging. I was given an offer from Zennie Abraham, and I would never turn down an offer to write for a blog that was recognized and on TMZ's blogroll. It was a great opportunity to put my name out there and to slowly build my way up. It's baby steps. I am slowly trying to incorporate journalism into those blog posts. If you go to my website Nikkyraney.com, The Future of Journalism, you will see that the blog entries I write on that site will archive back and show that I truly am apart of "serious" journalism. I like to use photos of myself, because I like to be original. I don't want to just steal photos from google images and post them as my own. I did modeling for a while, and I quit modeling for journalism. This is also why I am interested in PRINT journalism. I do not to be judged by my looks. My public persona on Zennie62.com is mostly being critical of those who claim to be journalists (such as Perez & Tila) I was given this opportunity from Zennie, and I am thankful and glad. But it is a blogging opportunity. I would hope that I wouldn't be judged by that, but if I am then anyone can link back to my own website and see the truth. That question actually offended me a bit, because I would like to break the mold and be able to write about everything. I am a 19-year-old (soon to be 20), and I think that it is okay for me to do the celebrity blogging, because it is not easy to get those hard hitting investigative stories without a degree to show. I was a paid freelance columnist my senior year of high school for Foster's Daily Democrat. I would hope that people would not judge me based on my "celebrity blog entries," but on my actual articles that I have done, and for all the hard work and dedication I obviously have put into my career. If you read my blog entries for my own website you will see how highly critical I am of the media and sensationalism."


The reason I posted this was because: if he has that opinion of me - then he must not be the only one. When I started doing the celebrity blog entries, I knew that I would get some flack for it. If you actually read those posts though, the one entry in which I completely let loose and show the side of a true blogger is the recent blog entry that dealt with Tila Tequila calling herself a journalist. That outraged me.

I am extremely grateful and love being able to blog for Zennie62.com, but I don't want the role of "celebrity blogger" overtake my public persona. I am going to take that information, and I will try to show a more serious side to my blog posts. It is difficult to blog about the serious hot topics, because I want to go in and get my own interviews. I want to be at the scene. I want to go out and get my own photos. I want to be out there doing everything that a journalist does, because journalism is my passion.

I hope that this will clear the air. I want to be able to have recognition for being able to blog about the "entertainment" side of things, but also that I can report & write about the other matters. I would like to be able to serve all audiences.

The blog entries I have done on "Facebook Privacy" are definitely directed at a different audience than the blog entry I wrote about "Tila Going To Rehab." Just as the sources I cite for each are different. I make sure that I cite and use credibly sources within my blog entries.

I will keep this in mind during my future blog posts.

My next blog post for this blog will be about INTERVIEWS.
The way to conduct interviews, who to interview, etc.
I think that a big part of the future of journalism is being able to conduct the proper interviews with the reliable and credible sources, and the way to get in touch with these sources.

I do feel honored that I was chosen to be interviewed for this book - don't get me wrong. I also attribute that to the traffic and exposure I have received due to writing for Zennie62.com. I am not ashamed of any of my blog entries. I put all my blog entries into a document before I post it onto the web. I think that a better way to conduct the interview would have been to ask if it would be possible to call me, and to better explain why I am being chosen. I give him credit for the way he phrased the "question." So, if you would like to give me a follow-up interview I am willing to talk to you on the phone and discuss any further questions you may have.

I respect anonymity, and I did not think it would have been respectful or necessary to post who wrote the e-mail, because I could be wrong on his intentions. I may have gotten it all wrong, but the phrasing and way I perceived it made me feel offended. That is another part of why e-mail is not a good way to get interviews. I mean, what if my e-mail was hacked? Then the hacker would have e-mailed him back all sorts of random crap.

This is part of the reason why I admire Hunter S. Thompson. He could report and write whatever he pleased, and he was still known as a serious journalist. I can read Fear and Loathing in America over and over again, it is my all time favorite book. I love seeing the faxes and letters sent back and forth. I love how you can see his personality and the behind the scenes of what he was thinking as he wrote. I strive to reach that level, but I would like to be able to instill a bit more objectivity into reporting.

P.S. "Celebrity" news (Entertainment) is not any less news than sports, health, political, international, etc. It is a different beat, but that does not mean it is not important. The way the articles/blog entries are written are crucial to the understanding of what is being written about. Don't judge an article by its headline or topic. Actually read through and see what sort of interviews and information is being presented, and if there has been a credible source. I am sick of seeing the "an insider says" or "a friend close to the family." I want there to be a name. Find someone who will go on record and give a reliable quote.



That's all for now.

"In seeking truth you have to get both sides of a story." --Walter Cronkite

Read Users' Comments (0)

VISITOR COUNT