Fact-checking

In our article ‘Fact-checking and adding context‘ we looked at some of the traditional method for verifying information.

In the piece ‘Beyond fact-checking‘ we went beyond simple verification to applying critical thinking and contextual analysis to our fact-checking.

And in ‘Lateral reading for journalists‘ we looked at methods that have been used by journalist for many years but which have become easier and faster to apply thanks to the internet.

All the methods mentioned above are designed to help journalists weed out misinformation and disinformation in a bid to provide robust, accurate, and factual information.

Now we look at the SIFT method of fact-checking, research, and adding context, which has been developed by Mike Caulfield and is increasingly being used in journalism training and education.

SIFT teaches students how to critically evaluate information online through four steps: Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims, quotes, and media back to the original context.

While it’s primarily aimed at combating misinformation in the digital age, it also offers computer-assisted benefits that can enhance traditional journalism practices. SIFT has been adopted in various educational settings, including media literacy courses and journalism programmes.

The SIFT method provides a straightforward process for evaluating online information. Its four distinct elements are:

• Stop:
  • This initial step emphasises pausing before engaging with any information. It encourages users to resist the urge to immediately share or believe something, and instead, to take a moment to reflect.
• Investigate the source:
  • This involves determining the credibility and background of the source of the information. It encourages journalists to apply “lateral reading,” which means looking at what other sources say about the original source.
• Find better coverage:
  • This step advises seeking out more reliable and trustworthy sources that provide better coverage of the claim or topic. It encourages journalists to look for consensus and expert analysis.
• Trace claims, quotes, and media to the original context:
  • This involves tracking down the original source of a claim, quote, or piece of media to understand its context.

Applying the four steps of the SIFT method leads to a more informed and accurate understanding of online information. Specifically, it aims to produce these key results:

• Increased accuracy:
  • By investigating sources and tracing claims, a journalist is less likely to be misled by false or misleading information.
• Improved source evaluation:
  • The journalist develops the ability to quickly and effectively assess the credibility and reliability of online sources.
• Enhanced contextual understanding:
  • Tracing claims to their original context enables the journalist to make sure that information is not being taken out of context and misrepresented.
• Reduced susceptibility to misinformation:
  • By being aware of emotional responses and actively seeking better coverage, the journalist become less vulnerable to manipulative content.
• Development of critical thinking skills:
  • SIFT fosters a habit of healthy skepticism and critical analysis, which are essential for journalists navigating the complex digital landscape.
• More responsible information sharing:
  • By verifying information before sharing it, the spread of misinformation is reduced.

In essence, the SIFT method is yet another form of fact-checking with an emphasis on speed. It provides a rapid fact-checking framework tailored for the digital age, prioritising quick evaluation of sources, content, emotional triggers, and cross-referencing against reliable information. Its value is amplified by the sheer volume and velocity of information being shared via user-generated content, social media, and algorithmic recommendations.

Related articles

Fact-checking and adding context

Beyond basic fact-checking

Lateral reading

Disinformation and misinformation

The post SIFT for fact-checking first appeared on Media Helping Media.

But what is lateral reading? How does it differ from normal reading? How should journalists apply it to their work? And what are the benefits?

Lateral reading existed long before computers and the internet. In the days of notebooks, pens, typewriters, and paper documents, journalists would have access to a stack of reference books sitting on dusty shelves in the newsroom, which they would consult when a story broke.

These would include well-thumbed encyclopaedias, copies of Who’s Who, and various dictionaries, English language style books, and journalism guide books.

There would also be the newspaper’s own archive of previous editions, see our article on keeping records.

If a journalist didn’t have the book they needed they would put their coat on and nip down to the local library to research information. They would also call any of the newspaper’s contacts who were knowledgeable about the issue being covered.

Of course not all stories required lateral reading. A news editor would often throw a journalist a news (press) release about a forthcoming event or other non-contentious news item and order them to “knock out 250 words on that”.

The journalists might put a call in to any contact mentioned in the news release, but often they would do as they were told and rework the content to keep the news editor happy. After all, they were merely looking for material to fill vacant space on a page. That is not lateral reading.

However, if a news editor wanted a topic to be investigated then the journalist would have to do their research. The order from the news editor would probably be along the lines of “have a dig around this and see what you come up with”. At that point lateral reading kicked in.

Now, in the age of computers and the internet, lateral reading is understood to mean navigating a wide variety of online information simultaneously in order to check-facts and learn more about a topic.

It involves opening multiple tabs in your web browser to investigate the credibility of a source, rather than just reading the information on a single page (which is called “vertical reading”).

When you read ‘vertically’, you stay on the same webpage and assess its credibility based on what you can see. This can be misleading, as biased or unreliable sources often present themselves as trustworthy.

How to apply lateral reading

There are many organisations that have developed courses where journalists can learn about how to apply lateral reading such as Civic Online Reasoning (COR), the News Literacy Project and the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL).

But you don’t need to attend a course in order to start applying lateral reading effectively when working online. Try these steps:

1. Open multiple tabs
   • When coming across a claim, an article, or a source, open multiple tabs to:
     • Investigate the website or organisation publishing the information.
     • Research the author or source of the claim.
     • Find other reliable sources covering the same topic.
2. Investigate the source
   • Before trusting information, research the source’s credibility:
     • Search for the organisation on Wikipedia or in news articles.
     • Check their “About” page for affiliations and biases.
     • Look for past credibility issues (fact-checking sites might flag it).
3. Cross-check information
   • Find other reliable sources reporting on the same issue:
     • Use fact-checking websites such as Snopes, PolitiFact, or Reuters Fact Check.
     • Look for government reports, academic sources, or expert commentary.
     • Be cautious if only partisan or obscure sites are reporting a claim.
4. Manipulative framing
   • Compare how different outlets report the same facts:
     • Look at how different sources describe the same event.
     • Consider whether images, headlines, or quotes are used selectively.
     • Be aware of emotionally charged language designed to sway opinion.
5. Social media and user-generated content
   • To fact-check viral claims:
     • Reverse search images to check their origin, using tools such as Google Images and TinEye.
     • Look for verification badges on social media accounts.
     • Check timestamps – an old photo might be falsely used for a current event.

Conclusion

Lateral reading is a skill journalists need to develop in order to help them in their research, fact-checking, and context-building. This in turn helps them maintain their commitment to accuracy and credibility. In an era where misinformation and disinformation can easily mislead audiences, lateral reading remains a powerful tool in the pursuit of truth and responsible reporting.

Related articles

Fact-checking and adding context

Beyond basic fact-checking

News sources and the ‘so what’ factor

The post Lateral reading first appeared on Media Helping Media.

It’s essential for journalists to maintain precision in their use of language, especially when dealing with words that sound or look similar but which carry different meanings.

Journalists not only have to be accurate with their facts, they also need to be clear in their writing. Using the wrong words can confuse the audience and lead to the spread of misinformation.

In his article, The Power of Words, John Allen listed 26 combinations of words that sound or look the similar but have a different meaning, spelling, or both. These words are called ‘homophones’. We have taken John’s list and expanded it to 110 words by referencing several sources which we have included below.

We then fed the list into Google Gemini AI with the prompt to order the words alphabetically as well as adding a sentence to each grouping explaining the meaning of the words. The team at MHM then went through the list, checked the text and revised where necessary.

We hope you find the list helpful. It’s likely we will add to it as new combinations come to light.

• Abuse/Misuse: Abuse is to treat badly; misuse is to use incorrectly.
• Affect/Effect: Affect is to influence; effect is a result.
• Aggravate/Annoy: Aggravate is to worsen; annoy is to irritate.
• Amend/Emend: Amend is to modify; emend is to correct text.
• Amiable/Amicable: Amiable is friendly; amicable is characterised by friendliness.
• Anticipate/Expect: Anticipate is to foresee and act; expect is to believe something will happen.
• Appraise/Apprise: Appraise is to assess value; apprise is to inform.
• Assent/Agree: Assent is to concur formally; agree is to have the same opinion.
• Assumption/Presumption: Assumption is something taken for granted; presumption is an arrogant supposition.
• Assure/Ensure/Insure: Assure is to remove doubt; ensure is to make certain; insure is to protect against risk.
• Aural/Oral: Aural relates to hearing; oral relates to speaking.
• Beside/Besides: Beside means next to; besides means in addition to.
• Biannual/Biennial: Biannual occurs twice a year; biennial occurs every two years.
• Born/Borne: Born is brought into life; borne is carried.
• Breach/Breech: Breach is a violation; breech is the rear part of a firearm or lower rear part of the body.
• Broach/Brooch: Broach is to introduce a topic; brooch is an ornamental pin.
• Can/May: Can indicates ability; may indicates permission.
• Captivate/Capture: Captivate is to attract and hold attention; capture is to seize.
• Censor/Sensor: Censor is to suppress content; sensor is a device that detects.
• Childish/Childlike: Childish is immature; childlike is innocent.
• Chord/Cord: Chord is a musical combination; cord is a thin rope.
• Cite/Sight/Site: Cite is to quote; sight is the ability to see; site is a location.
• Collude/Conspire: Collude is to cooperate secretly; conspire is to plan secretly.
• Common/Mutual: Common is shared; mutual is reciprocal.
• Complement/Compliment: Complement completes or enhances; compliment expresses praise.
• Compose/Comprise: Compose is to create; comprise is to consist of.
• Compulsive/Compulsory: Compulsive is driven by an irresistible urge; compulsory is required by law.
• Comprise/Consist: Comprise is to include or contain; consist is to be made up of.
• Continual/Continuous: Continual occurs repeatedly; continuous occurs without interruption.
• Credible/Credulous: Credible is believable; credulous is gullible.
• Defective/Deficient: Defective has a flaw; deficient lacks something.
• Definite/Definitive: Definite is certain; definitive is conclusive.
• Dependent/Dependant: Dependent is an adjective meaning relying on; dependant is a noun meaning a person who relies on another.
• Desert/Dessert: Desert is a dry area; dessert is a sweet course.
• Diagnosis/Prognosis: Diagnosis is identification of an illness; prognosis is a prediction of its course.
• Discreet/Discrete: Discreet means tactful; discrete means separate.
• Disinterested/Uninterested: Disinterested means impartial; uninterested means not interested.
• Distinctive/Distinguished: Distinctive is characteristic; distinguished is renowned.
• Draft/Draught: Draft is a preliminary version; draught is a current of air or a drink.
• Dual/Duel: Dual means having two parts; duel is a contest between two people.
• Economic/Economical: Economic relates to the economy; economical is thrifty.
• Emotional/Emotive: Emotional relates to emotions; emotive arouses emotions.
• Emigrate/Immigrate: Emigrate is to leave a country; immigrate is to enter a country.
• Empathy/Sympathy: Empathy is understanding feelings; sympathy is feeling pity.
• Emulate/Imitate: Emulate is to strive to equal; imitate is to copy.
• Epidemic/Pandemic: Epidemic is a widespread disease; pandemic is a global epidemic.
• Equable/Equitable: Equable is steady or even; equitable is fair.
• Exhausted/Exhaustive: Exhausted is tired; exhaustive is thorough.
• Fair/Fare: Fair means just or light-coloured; fare is a cost or food.
• Farther/Further: Farther refers to physical distance; further refers to metaphorical distance.
• Fewer/Less: Fewer refers to countable items; less refers to uncountable items.
• Flounder/Founder: Flounder is to struggle; founder is to fail or sink.
• Flout/Flaunt: Flout is to disregard; flaunt is to show off.
• Forbear/Forebear: Forbear is to refrain; forebear is an ancestor.
• Forego/Forgo: Forego is to precede; forgo is to abstain from.
• Fortuitous/Fortunate: Fortuitous is accidental; fortunate is lucky.
• Grand/Grandiose: Grand is impressive; grandiose is exaggeratedly impressive.
• Hang/Hung: Hang is to suspend; hung is the past participle of hang.
• Heroin/Heroine: Heroin is an opiate; heroine is a female hero.
• Hoard/Horde: Hoard is to accumulate; horde is a large group.
• Imaginary/Imaginative: Imaginary is unreal; imaginative is creative.
• Imply/Infer: Imply is to suggest; infer is to deduce.
• Innovation/Invention: Innovation is a new method; invention is a new device.
• Innuendo/Insinuation: Innuendo is an indirect suggestion; insinuation is a subtle hint.
• Inflammable/Inflammatory: Inflammable is capable of catching fire; inflammatory causes inflammation or arouses anger.
• Its/It’s: Its is a possessive pronoun; it’s is a contraction of “it is.”
• Junction/Juncture: Junction is a point of intersection; juncture is a point in time.
• Knell/Knoll: Knell is a sound of a bell; knoll is a small hill.
• Lama/Llama: Lama is a Buddhist teacher; llama is a South American animal.
• Latitude/Longitude: Latitude is distance north or south; longitude is distance east or west.
• Lay/Lie: Lay is to place something; lie is to recline.
• Livid/Lurid: Livid is furiously angry; lurid is shockingly vivid.
• Loose/Lose: Loose is not tight; lose is to misplace.
• Loathe/Loath/Loth: Loathe means to hate; loath/loth means unwilling.
• Luxuriant/Luxurious: Luxuriant means abundant; luxurious means opulent.
• Macho/Manly: Macho is aggressively masculine; manly is having traditionally masculine qualities.
• Majority/Most of: Majority is more than half; most of is the greater part.
• Masterful/Masterly: Masterful is domineering; masterly is very skilled.
• May/Might: May indicates possibility or permission; might indicates possibility or past possibility.
• Medical/Medicinal: Medical relates to medicine; medicinal has healing properties.
• Metal/Mettle: Metal is a substance; mettle is courage.
• Meter/Metre: Meter is a measuring device; metre is a unit of length.
• More Than/Over: More than is for quantities; over is for spatial relationships.
• Naked/Nude: Naked is without clothes; nude is unclothed for artistic purposes.
• Negligent/Negligible: Negligent is careless; negligible is insignificant.
• Niceness/Nicety: Niceness is pleasantness; nicety is a fine detail.
• Objective/Subjective: Objective is unbiased; subjective is based on personal feelings.
• Official/Officious: Official is authorised; officious is overly assertive.
• Ordinance/Ordnance: Ordinance is a law; ordnance is military weapons.
• Peddle/Pedal: Peddle is to sell; pedal is to operate a lever with the foot.
• Perpetrate/Perpetuate: Perpetrate is to commit a crime; perpetuate is to cause to continue.
• Phenomenon/Phenomenal: Phenomenon is an observable fact; phenomenal is extraordinary.
• Pitiful/Pathetic: Pitiful evokes pity; pathetic evokes contempt or pity.
• Populous/Populist: Populous is densely populated; populist appeals to ordinary people.
• Precipitate/Precipitous: Precipitate is to cause to happen suddenly; precipitous is steep or sudden.
• Prevaricate/Procrastinate: Prevaricate is to avoid telling the truth; procrastinate is to delay.
• Quash/Squash: Quash is to suppress; squash is to crush.
• Respective/Irrespective: Respective relates to each individually; irrespective means regardless.
• Restive/Restless: Restive is uneasy or impatient; restless is unable to relax.
• Shall/Will: Shall is used for future with “I” and “we” or to express obligation; will is used for future with other subjects or to express intention.
• Should/Would: Should indicates obligation or expectation; would indicates a conditional or habitual action.
• Simple/Simplistic: Simple is easy or basic; simplistic is overly simplified.
• Stationary/Stationery: Stationary means not moving; stationery is writing materials.
• Suggestible/Suggestive: Suggestible is easily influenced; suggestive implies something indirectly.
• Temerity/Timidity: Temerity is excessive boldness; timidity is lack of courage.
• That/Which: That is used for restrictive clauses; which is used for non-restrictive clauses.
• Tortuous/Torturous: Tortuous is winding or complex; torturous involves severe pain.
• Underlie/Underlay: Underlie is to be the basis of; underlay is to place something under.
• Valuable/Invaluable: Valuable has great worth; invaluable is priceless.
• Who/Whom: Who is a subject pronoun; whom is an object pronoun.
• Who’s/Whose: Who’s is a contraction of “who is”; whose is a possessive pronoun.

Our list is by no means a complete list of homophones but it includes many words commonly misused in journalism. If you want to browse through almost 450 examples you might want to visit Singularis.

Sources used

• Collins English Dictionary and Thesaurus
• The Guide To Better English – Gooden
• The Longman Guide To English Usage – Greenbaum/Whitcut
• The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage – Burchfield
• The Simple Subs Book – Sellers
• A Journalist’s Guide To The Use of English – Bottomley/Loftus

The post Frequently confused words first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Many militaristic words have several meanings and are used in everyday language, so it’s not necessarily wrong to use them, but journalists might want to consider using alternatives for several reasons.

In his two articles ‘The power of words‘ and ‘Clichés, journalese, and jargon‘, John Allen  looked at the importance of using the right word when writing. He set out why some words are better than others for conveying accurate information.

Choosing the wrong words when writing a piece of journalism can influence how the reader, listener or view interprets the story. Choosing the right words can provide accuracy and clarity and enhance understanding. Here are some examples:

1. Avoiding sensationalism and fear-mongering

Militaristic language often exaggerates the reality of a situation, making ordinary events sound more dramatic or combative than they really are. For example, saying a politician was “ambushed by reporters” implies aggression when “asked tough questions” would be more accurate. Using neutral language helps maintain credibility and avoid unnecessary alarm.

• Militaristic: “Retail giant under siege as competitors launch price war.”
• Neutral alternative: “Retail giant faces strong competition in pricing battle.”
• Why? “Under siege” and “price war” create unnecessary drama, making it sound like an actual attack rather than market competition.

2. Promoting constructive dialogue over conflict

Words shape perceptions. Militaristic language could make people think in terms of battles, enemies, and winners versus losers. This fosters an “us versus them” mentality, which can lead to a polarising of discussions. For instance, calling a political disagreement a “war” makes compromise seem impossible, while calling it a “debate” encourages reasoned discussion.

• Militaristic: “The president fired the first shot in the battle over tax cuts.”
• Neutral alternative: “The president introduced a new proposal for tax cuts.”
• Why? Framing a political decision as a “battle” encourages divisiveness, while “introduced a proposal” emphasises discussion and policymaking.

3. Ensuring accuracy and clarity

Military terms often have precise meanings that don’t fully align with the topics they’re used to describe. “Collateral damage” in war refers to unintended civilian deaths, but using it for a business closing a store due to losses minimises the human impact. More accurate wording, such as “unintended consequences,” keeps reporting clear and honest.

• Militaristic: “The CEO’s decision caused collateral damage among employees.”
• Neutral alternative: “The CEO’s decision led to unintended consequences for employees.”
• Why? “Collateral damage” is a war term for unintended deaths, which minimises the impact on real people when used in business reporting.

4. Reducing desensitisation to violence

Overusing military language in everyday contexts could normalise warlike thinking. If everything is a “battle” or “attack,” real violence may start to feel routine or acceptable. By reserving militaristic terms for actual military-related stories, journalists can help maintain a healthy distinction between competition, debate, and real warfare.

• Militaristic: “The mayor dropped a political bombshell today.”
• Neutral alternative: “The mayor made a surprising announcement today.”
• Why? Using “bombshell” unnecessarily equates politics with explosions and destruction, making actual violence seem less serious.

5. Encouraging empathy and nuance

Militaristic words often strip people of their human individuality and community identity, reducing groups to “targets” or “enemies.” This dehumanisation makes it easier to dismiss concerns or justify hostility. Describing a group as “frustrated” rather than “rebelling” allows for a more nuanced and empathetic portrayal of their situation.

• Militaristic: “Activists launched an all-out assault on the new housing policy.”
• Neutral alternative: “Activists strongly opposed the new housing policy.”
• Why? “All-out assault” portrays activists as aggressors rather than engaged citizens, which may bias the reader’s perception.

6. Fostering a less aggressive public mindset

Language influences culture. A constant barrage of war-like terms can make people more combative in their interactions, from politics to workplace discussions. Choosing non-militaristic language encourages cooperation and thoughtful engagement rather than hostility and defensiveness.

• Militaristic: “Companies are arming themselves with new technology in the AI arms race.”
• Neutral alternative: “Companies are investing in new technology to stay competitive in AI development.”
• Why? “Arming” and “arms race” turn innovation into warfare, encouraging a mindset of conflict rather than progress.

List of commonly used militaristic words

We have compiled a list of militaristic words that are regularly used in journalism along with their intended meaning, their militaristic meaning, and alternatives words journalists might want to consider using instead.

• Ambush
  • Intended meaning: A surprise challenge (e.g., “The interviewer ambushed the politician with tough questions”).
  • Military meaning: A surprise military attack.
  • Alternative: Surprise, catch off guard.
• Battle
  • Intended meaning: A struggle or intense effort (e.g., “The battle against climate change”).
  • Military meaning: A fight between opposing forces.
  • Alternative: Struggle, challenge, effort.
• Bombshell
  • Intended meaning: A shocking revelation or event.
  • Military meaning: An explosive device dropped from the air.
  • Alternative: Shocker, revelation, surprise.
• Campaign
  • Intended meaning: A strategic effort to achieve a goal (e.g., “An advertising campaign”).
  • Military meaning: A series of planned military operations.
  • Alternative: Initiative, effort, movement.
• Casualties
  • Intended meaning: Losses in a non-military context (e.g., “Economic casualties”).
  • Military meaning: People killed or injured in war.
  • Alternative: Losses, affected individuals.
• Combat
  • Intended meaning: To struggle against something (e.g., “Combating misinformation”).
  • Military meaning: Engaging in battle.
  • Alternative: Fight, address, tackle.
• Deploy
  • Intended meaning: To strategically use something (e.g., “Deploying resources”).
  • Military meaning: To position troops or equipment for battle.
  • Alternative: Utilise, implement, distribute.
• Explosive
  • Intended meaning: Something intense or dramatic (e.g., “Explosive growth”).
  • Military meaning: A device that detonates violently.
  • Alternative: Intense, dramatic, rapid.
• Firepower
  • Intended meaning: Strength or influence.
  • Military meaning: The destructive capability of weapons.
  • Alternative: Influence, resources, strength.
• Flagship
  • Intended meaning: The most important or prominent item.
  • Military meaning: The lead ship in a fleet.
  • Alternative: Premier, leading, top-tier.
• Frontline
  • Intended meaning: The most active or important position in a situation.
  • Military meaning: The forward-most part of a battlefield.
  • Alternative: Forefront, leading position.
• Guerrilla tactics
  • Intended meaning: Unconventional strategies.
  • Military meaning: Small, irregular combat operations.
  • Alternative: Unconventional methods, innovative strategies.
• Launch
  • Intended meaning: To begin or introduce something.
  • Military meaning: To fire a missile or initiate an attack.
  • Alternative: Start, introduce, roll out.
• Miss the target
  • Intended meaning: To fail in achieving an objective.
  • Military meaning: A missed shot in combat.
  • Alternative: Fall short, fail to meet expectations.
• Onslaught
  • Intended meaning: A strong or overwhelming attack (e.g., “An onslaught of criticism”).
  • Military meaning: A fierce and sustained military attack.
  • Alternative: Wave, flood, barrage.
• Overrun
  • Intended meaning: To overwhelm or take over something.
  • Military meaning: To capture an area by force.
  • Alternative: Flood, overwhelm, inundate.
• Retreat
  • Intended meaning: To withdraw from a situation.
  • Military meaning: A withdrawal from combat.
  • Alternative: Step back, withdraw, regroup.
• Salvo
  • Intended meaning: A forceful verbal attack (e.g., “A salvo of accusations”).
  • Military meaning: A simultaneous discharge of artillery or gunfire.
  • Alternative: Burst, outburst.
• Shell shock
  • Intended meaning: A state of shock or disbelief.
  • Military meaning: A psychological condition caused by prolonged combat stress.
  • Alternative: Shock, trauma, distress.
• Stronghold
  • Intended meaning: A place of dominance or support.
  • Military meaning: A fortified military position.
  • Alternative: Hub, centre, strong base.
• Target
  • Intended meaning: A goal or focus.
  • Military meaning: An object aimed at in warfare.
  • Alternative: Objective, focus.
• Torpedo
  • Intended meaning: To deliberately ruin something (e.g., “Torpedoing a deal”).
  • Military meaning: A self-propelled underwater missile.
  • Alternative: Sabotage, undermine, derail.
• Troops
  • Intended meaning: A group of people working together.
  • Military meaning: Soldiers or military personnel.
  • Alternative: Team, workforce, staff.
• Under siege
  • Intended meaning: Under intense pressure or attack.
  • Military meaning: A location surrounded by enemy forces.
  • Alternative: Facing pressure, under scrutiny.
• War chest
  • Intended meaning: A reserve of resources or funds.
  • Military meaning: A stockpile of funds for warfare.
  • Alternative: Reserve, resources, budget.
• War of words
  • Intended meaning: An intense verbal dispute.
  • Military meaning: A metaphor based on real warfare.
  • Alternative: Heated debate, verbal conflict.
• Wipe out
  • Intended meaning: To completely remove or eliminate something.
  • Military meaning: To destroy completely in combat.
  • Alternative: Eliminate, eradicate, remove.

Conclusion

While militaristic terms can be powerful when discussing actual conflicts, their overuse in everyday journalism distorts reality, encourages division, and numbs audiences to real violence. By opting for precise, non-militaristic alternatives, journalists can provide more accurate, engaging, and responsible reporting.

Language shapes how people think, so making thoughtful word choices helps foster a more accurate and constructive public dialogue.

The post Militaristic words used in journalism first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Journalists need to recognise and then avoid using journalese, jargon, and clichés. Their writing must be clear, easy to understand, and informative.

Clichés

It’s a cliché to advise writers to avoid clichés. Every time you have a story about a child being left unattended you can reach for the phrase ‘home alone‘; every time two motorists exchange angry words it’s obviously a case of ‘road rage‘; escapes from prison are always ‘daring‘ and inquiries always ‘in depth‘.

The regular use of these predictable words and phrases is numbing and indicates a lack of thought and effort.

In themselves, clichés are a form of shorthand and we would be hard pressed to do without them altogether.

There are probably some lurking within the pages of this site. However, in the final analysis, Clichéville is a town which bears all the hallmarks of the angry clashes which occur with monotonous regularity.

Journalese comes from newspapers, which have developed a particular style to meet their own needs. Some of them have moved a long way from standard English.

Some journalists assume that newspaper English is the language of all journalism. It is not.

Broadcast journalism, written for the ear, requires a different approach. Writing has to be simpler, clearer and more natural.

“Hello Tim. Have you heard that Matt’s job has been axed and he’s pledged to fight on in a bid to block the move.”

You do not often hear people in conversation use words like bid, probe, pledge, axe, plea and all the other short words in the headline writer’s sack. Good radio and television writers avoid them.

“One man’s meat is another man’s poison”, and one man’s list of clichés might be another man’s list of useful sayings and phrases.

However, if you find yourself including any of the following in your script or summary, take yourself to one side and ask yourself if it really is the best you can do.

• a question mark hangs over
• conspicuous by its absence
• the situation remains confused
• leaves much to be desired
• combing the area for clues
• leave no stone unturned
• grind to a halt
• point blank range
• quiet but tense
• moving the goalposts
• full-scale search
• level playing field
• the bottom line
• armed to the teeth
• blessing in disguise
• spread like wildfire
• calm before the storm
• horns of a dilemma
• wealth of experience
• in the final analysis
• in the pipeline
• hail of bullets
• shrouded in mystery
• reign of terror
• ripe old age
• last-ditch effort
• rushed to the scene
• vanished into thin air
• beginning of the end
• limped into port
• burn the midnight oil
• emotions ran high
• moment of truth
• riot of colour

This is a sample – there are lots more where these came from.

Uninspired journalists are also very fond of nouns and adjectives which go together so inevitably that they have lost any force or colour they might once have had. Feel free to add your own favourites to this list.

• glaring omission
• bated breath
• weighty matter
• blissful ignorance
• bitter end
• hot pursuit
• serried ranks
• breakneck speed
• sweeping changes
• true colours
• chequered career
• daylight robbery
• whirlwind tour
• brutal reminder
• marked improvement
• absolute rubbish
• foregone conclusion
• strife torn
• wreak havoc
• open secret
• luxury yacht
• cherished belief
• gory details
• deafening crash
• psychologically important
• blazing inferno

The words and phrases in these lists are not banned. There will be occasions when you choose to use some of them, but at least be aware that when you do you are straying into the superficially attractive word store which produces second-hand, second-rate writing.

A large part of your personal style comes from the vocabulary you use, so choose wisely.

Journalese

Journalese is a specialist form of cliché writing. People who use it presumably want to sound urgent, to make an impact and to be, well, journalistic.

Even though you are a journalist, whether in the field or in the office, try to avoid it. How often have you heard something like this?

“The beleaguered President Humboldt’s grip on power in strife-torn Benguela is weakening. The ailing leader of this oil-rich desert country is said to be literally fighting for his political life.”

“An uneasy peace was brokered after a marathon negotiating session with leaders of the
breakaway Gulf rebels, but it’s almost inevitable that the once undisputed strongman of the region is heading for a bloody confrontation which will plunge Benguela into chaos.”

Please resist the temptation to write like this. It is a style that goes with a trench coat and a trilby hat with a card saying ‘Press‘ tucked in the brim.

Here are some examples of journalese for your consideration.

• Aim – rarely heard in real life except at shooting or archery clubs.
• Amid – does anyone ever use this, or its close relative amidst, in normal conversation.
• Axe – the jobs axe remorselessly falls in much journalism.
• Bid – another one straight from the Hack’s Book of Wee Words.When was the last time you said to a colleague: “Leaves on the line foiled my bid to get to work”?
• Blaze – a potentially useful synonym for fire, but not all fires are blazes.
• Blow – try setback or disappointment.
• Blunder – a word that seems to exist only in journalese, along with its close friend bungle.
• Boost – nearly always accompanied by major, and much the worse for it.
• Boss – a catch-all short word that covers everyone from the director general to the football club manager.
• Centred around – makes no sense, but is much heard.
• Chaos – a hardy perennial in the hack’s garden of delight.
• Chiefs – and their deputies remind us of Hollywood westerns.
• Clash – still hugely popular in news and sport.
• Crucial – often used to suggest significance, often misused.
• Death toll – why not simply say how many people have been killed?
• Dramatic – see crucial.
• Eleventh hour – somehow makes time stand still.
• Emerged – often used when we are late on a story or to suggest spurious journalistic endeavour.
• Fighting for his/her life – the subject is probably unconscious in a hospital bed and making no attempt to do anything.
• Full scale – often added to search or inquiry for no good reason.
• Garner – as in She garnered three awards. Only ever used by hacks.
• Gunned down – probably first used in the Tombstone Sentinel.
• Gunshot wounds – what are they? Bullet wounds or shotgun wounds?
• Hammered out – leave it for metalwork, not negotiated settlements.
• Helping police with their inquiries – being questioned or interviewed is shorter and to the point.
• House fire – most people would say a fire at a house.
• Inferno – this is a really serious state of affairs, not just a fire.
• Joyriding – can lead to death and great anguish.
• Key – heard too often to mean much.
• Launched – barely a day goes by without some report, initiative or investigation being launched.
• Literally – if you mean it literally, it’s not really necessary to say so.
• Mandarins – leave them to the greengrocer. The phrase civil service mandarins is not compulsory.
• Manhunt – police search or murder hunt.
• Marathon – talks which go on for a long time do not demand this adjective.
• Mercy dash – good grief.
• Miraculous – nothing to do with religious belief or theological teaching.
• Oust – top class journalese.
• Plea – ditto
• Pledge – properly belongs in a wedding service or a pawnbroker’s.
• Probe – best left to doctors or one of those tiny cameras.
• Quit – another ditto.
• Quiz – the noun is fine, the verb is an abomination.
• Row – not all differences of opinion justify the use of row.
• Rush – especially to hospital. Use it only when you really mean it.
• Scheme – a great favourite, but what about plan, proposal, idea, project?
• Set – as in A is set to do B. A useful but overworked expression.
• Spark off – would anyone but a journalist use this?
• Spree – shopping or killing?
• Sustain fatal injuries – or die.
• Sweeping changes – the bristles on this must be worn out by now.
• Today – broadcasters should hardly ever need to say this.
• Tracker dogs – specially trained? Or just sniffer dogs. Or even simply dogs.
• Trigger off – see spark off.
• Vital – are you sure?
• Vowed – when was the last time you vowed anything?
• Walked free – from court. This phrase is not compulsory after successful appeals.

Jargon

From doctors to decorators, lawyers to lorry drivers – any group of people working together or in the same field is likely to develop a specialised, shared vocabulary.

As journalists, we can become honorary members of these groups if we use the language correctly.

The danger is that we become so familiar with the jargon that we use it in our writing, which is at odds with our aim to be understood as clearly and universally as possible.

So, the obvious advice is: avoid jargon. Unfortunately, this is often not as easy as it sounds.

Journalism is littered with supply-day motions, three-line whips, the usual channels, corporate governance, collateral damage, affirmative action, throughput, and constructive dismissals.

Police officers say they have attended the scene (been there), that twelve people were apprehended (caught), that evidence was detected (found), and that death was due to immersion (drowning).

The hospital press officer says the driver was fatally injured (killed) and a passenger received a broken leg (his leg was broken) and is undergoing surgery (having an operation).

And what does comfortable mean when someone is lying in hospital? And also describing a patient as critical; does this mean they don’t like the food, the nurses, or the colour scheme in the ward, or is the patient critically ill?

There is a lot of jargon about, but if you recognise it, you can do the audience a favour and substitute real, accessible language instead.

Here are some examples from business:

“The chairman said he was bullish on the company’s sales” (he believed they would increase).

“They can charge more because of tight supply and demand” (prices are going up because demand is high and supplies are low).

“The company says the new model will cause a paradigm shift” (it’s a big change in the generally accepted point of view).

“They are currently evaluating their health care delivery system” (they are looking at the medical services available to staff).

“She was concerned about the granularity of the deal” (she had worries about the details).

Journalists must learn to recognise journalese, jargon and cliches and try their best to avoid them and, instead, use words that help explain and deliver information to the audience.

By John Allen

The original text for this article first appeared in a BBC Style Guide. The BBC gave Media Helping Media permission to rework this material and publish it.

In the relentless pursuit of delivering timely and accurate information, journalists wield immense power. Their words shape public perception, influence policy, and ultimately, contribute to the fabric of our understanding of the world.

However, this power comes with a critical responsibility: to communicate with clarity, precision, and authenticity.

That’s why the pervasive use of clichés, journalese, and jargon is a disservice to both the audience and the profession itself.

The plague of clichés

Clichés, those overused phrases that have lost their original impact, are the antithesis of insightful reporting.

“At the end of the day,” “a perfect storm,” “thinking outside the box” – these phrases, once perhaps vivid, now serve as linguistic placeholders, requiring minimal thought from the writer and offering little substance to the reader. They dull the senses, stifle originality, and suggest a lack of effort.

Instead of relying on tired tropes, journalists should strive for fresh, evocative language that paints a clear picture. For example, instead of saying “it was a perfect storm of events,” a journalist could describe the specific contributing factors and their interplay, allowing the reader to understand the complexity of the situation.

The murky waters of journalese

Journalese, the specialised language often used within the news industry, can be equally problematic. Phrases like “slammed,” “tapped,” “panned,” and “inked a deal” may be efficient shortcuts for journalists, but they often obscure meaning for the average reader.

They create a sense of exclusivity, alienating those unfamiliar with the industry’s vernacular.

Clear, accessible language is paramount. Journalists should aim to explain complex events and concepts in a way that is understandable to a broad audience. This doesn’t mean “dumbing down” the news; it means respecting the intelligence of the reader by providing context and avoiding unnecessary jargon.

The exclusionary nature of jargon

Jargon, the specialised vocabulary of a particular field or profession, poses a similar challenge. While it may be essential for communicating with experts, its use in general news reporting can create a barrier to understanding. Terms like “quantitative easing,” “algorithmic bias,” or “net neutrality” require careful explanation for a general audience.

Journalists have a responsibility to demystify complex topics. This involves breaking down jargon into plain language, providing definitions, and illustrating concepts with relevant examples. By doing so, they empower readers to engage with critical issues and form informed opinions.

The importance of clarity and authenticity

Avoiding clichés, journalese, and jargon is not merely a matter of style; it’s a matter of substance. Clear, precise language fosters trust and credibility. It allows journalists to convey information accurately and effectively, ensuring that their reporting has the intended impact.

Furthermore, authentic language reflects genuine thought and engagement with the subject matter. It demonstrates respect for the reader’s intelligence and a commitment to providing meaningful insights. When journalists rely on tired phrases and industry jargon, they risk sounding detached and formulaic.

In conclusion

In an era of information overload, the demand for clear, insightful journalism is greater than ever. By ditching clichés, journalese, and jargon, journalists can elevate their craft, build trust with their audience, and fulfil their vital role in informing and empowering society. It’s time to move beyond buzzwords and embrace the power of authentic, impactful language.

Questions

1. What is the main focus of the text concerning journalistic writing?
2. Define “journalese”.
3. Why should journalists avoid using clichés?
4. Identify two examples of journalese and explain their typical usage.
5. How should journalists should handle jargon in their writing?
6. Discuss the impact of using clichés and journalese on the quality of journalistic writing.
7. Analyse the difference between broadcast journalism and newspaper journalism in terms of the use of clichés, journalese and jargon.
8. What are some challenges journalists face when trying to avoid jargon?
9. Evaluate the statement: “One man’s list of clichés might be another man’s list of useful sayings.” What does this imply about language use in journalism?
10. Sum up the main strategies for journalists to improve their writing style.

Answers

1. The primary purpose is to guide journalists in avoiding journalese, jargon, and clichés to ensure their writing is clear, easy to understand, and informative.
2. Journalese is a style of writing used in newspapers that often includes clichés and sensational language to sound urgent and impactful.
3. Journalists should avoid clichés because they are predictable, numbing, and indicate a lack of thought and effort in writing.
4. Examples include “axe” (used to describe job cuts) and “bid” (used to describe an attempt). These words are often used in headlines but are not common in everyday conversation.
5. Journalists should recognise jargon and replace it with clear, accessible language to ensure their writing is understood by a broad audience.
6. Using clichés and journalese can make writing seem second-hand and second-rate, reducing its impact and clarity.
7. Broadcast journalism requires simpler, clearer, and more natural language because it is written for the ear, unlike newspaper journalism, which can use more complex language.
8. Journalists may become so familiar with jargon that they inadvertently use it, making their writing less accessible to the general audience.
9. This statement implies that language use is subjective, and what is considered a cliché by one person might be seen as a useful expression by another, highlighting the importance of context in journalism.
10. The text recommends avoiding clichés, journalese, and jargon, and instead using clear, precise language to improve journalistic writing style.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Clichés, journalese, and jargon‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

The post Clichés, journalese, and jargon first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Basic literacy is a core element of the job of a journalist. Words are powerful and they need to be used properly.

Words are classified according to the job they do in a sentence.

Word classifications

The following are the most important word classifications that journalists will use in their work. It is important to understand their role in sentence construction:

• Noun
  • Common nouns are naming words (editor, television, albatross).They can be singular or plural.
• Proper noun
  • Proper nouns are names which usually start with a capital letter (Denmark, Mars, Angela). Nouns which refer to collections of people and things are called collective nouns (the team, the Cabinet).
• Verb
  • Verbs express action or a state of being (write, hit, be).
• Pronoun
  • Pronouns take the place of nouns (he, her, we, them).
• Adjective
  • An adjective is a describing word (Welsh, big, blue).
• Adverb
  • An adverb describes a verb or adjective (clearly, gracefully, finally, suddenly).
• Preposition
  • Prepositions are the little words which hold a sentence together, often by showing direction or location (in, to, from, by, with, beyond).

Word usage basics

The first rule of writing is to know what you want to say. This may seem a statement of the obvious, but items are often broadcast and published which are not exactly what the writer intended

“For the second time in six months, a prisoner at Durham jail has died in his cell.”

The ability of some people to die more than once is also illustrated in this headline:

“A suicide bomber has struck again in Jerusalem.”

The key to good writing is simple thoughts simply expressed. Use short sentences and short words. Anything which is confused, complicated, poorly written or capable of being misunderstood risks losing the listener, viewer, or reader, and once you have done that, you might just as well not have come to work.

In broadcasting, the basic sentence structure Subject-Verb-Object works every time. The
audience grasps what you are saying straight away. Anything more flamboyant, such as a subordinate clause, is a potential barrier to understanding.

• Do not describe news as good, bad, shocking or horrendous. Tell the story and let the listener/reader decide.
• Do try to get a strong active verb in the first sentence. You want to make an impact and keep people listening.
• Do not start a news report with a question. The audience wants to be informed, not take part in a quiz.
• Do not begin a story with “As expected…‘ If your item was predictable and you have nothing new to say, why should the listener or viewer pay attention?
• Be positive. Make assertions wherever possible, and try to avoid negatives. It is more direct to say “The plan failed” than “The plan was not successful“.

The most interesting writing often involves creating something unexpected, and rules tend to get in the way, but daily journalism has its discipline that should be observed.

Frequently confused words

English is full of traps for the unwary. Words which sound similar can mean very different things. The audience expect the right words to be used.

Consider these examples:

“A boy of twelve is in intensive care in hospital after a group of teenagers doused him in inflammatory liquid and then threw a lighted match at him.”

The writer did not mean this. She meant inflammable, capable of being set on fire, not inflammatory, tending to stir up trouble.

This writer of the sentence below also chose the wrong word.

“The union’s decision will mitigate against a settlement.“

The word required was militate, working against. Mitigate means to appease, to soften, as in mitigating circumstances, which means circumstances that reduce the seriousness of an offence.

Here is a list of frequently confused words. If you are not confident about their meanings, look them up. If you want a longer list, along with definitions, see our article ‘Frequently confused words‘.

• Affect/effect
• Alternate/alternative
• Appraise/apprise
• Biannual/biennial
• Continual/continuous
• Dependent/dependant
• Discreet/discrete
• Disinterested/uninterested
• Distinctive/distinguished
• Flounder/founder
• Flout/flaunt
• Fortuitous/fortunate
• Inflammable/inflammatory
• Loathe/loath/loth
• Luxuriant/luxurious
• Meter/metre
• Militate/mitigate
• Peddle/pedal
• Practical/practicable
• Principle/principal
• Refute/rebut
• Regretful/regrettable
• Repel/repulse
• Resistant/resilient
• Stationary/stationery
• Titivate/titillate

Confusing sentence structure

There are some topics which seem to have an inexhaustible ability to cause confusion and sow doubt in people’s minds.

Fewer and less

Fewer means not as many, less means not as much. A commonly quoted example used to highlight the distinction is “There are fewer cars on the road”, which means there is less traffic.

These two sentences offer another useful reminder of the difference:

“The fewer people know about this the better.”

“The less people know about this the better.”

The rule does not work if the number is counted as a quantity or as a unit.

“She paid less than ten pounds for it.”

“His last jump was less than fifteen feet.”

Over and more than

Over refers to height, more than refers to quantity.

Consider these sentences:

“Over 10,000 people attended the first day of the festival.”

“More than 10,000 people attended the first day of the festival.”

The second sentence is correct.

That and which

This is not something to get too concerned about. It is not right to suggest that which is somehow grander than that, and on many occasions you can miss out the pronoun altogether, as “The car she was driving”, or “This is the outfit I’ll be wearing tonight“.

When you do use it, a useful guide is that defines, which informs. This is not a cast iron rule but it can help:

“This is the house that Jack built, but I think the one next door, which Jack also built, is more attractive.”

This is another example which illustrates the point:

“The police stopped the second car that was driven by a woman.”

“The police stopped the second car, which was driven by a woman.”

Split infinitive

There is no grammatical rule which says you cannot split an infinitive, but there are people who get almost upset if they hear one.

Sometimes, it is definitely better to split:

“Can dot.com companies ever hope to fully recover their share values?”

This sounds much better than moving fully in front of to recover or behind it. The main consideration is not to write anything which is ambiguous or inelegant.

May or might

The difference between these two words is gradually being eroded and there are many occasions now when they are quite interchangeable.

They offer varying and subtle degrees of certainty.

“The governor might resign” – suggests a possibility.

“The governor may resign” – indicates a little more probability.

May have and might have cause even more difficulty.

“We may have beaten Australia” suggests a lack of knowledge; perhaps we did, perhaps we didn’t, I’m not sure.

“We might have beaten Australia” suggests that if things had been different (wetter, drier, breezier), if that disputed try had been given, or if our forwards had been a little more effective, there was a chance that victory could have been ours.

Superlatives

If you are ever tempted to use a superlative, think about it. Are you absolutely confident that you are right? The audience is an enormous reservoir of information, and it does your reputation no good if you write about things which are incorrect.

Do not try to add impact to your stories by using superlatives you cannot justify, so make sure of your facts before you use words such as:

• exceptional
• exclusive
• fastest
• first
• greatest
• heaviest
• inimitable
• irreplaceable
• largest
• last
• least
• longest
• matchless
• most
• only
• record
• slowest
• smallest
• sole
• tallest
• unique
• unmatched
• unprecedented

If possible, it is best to attribute claims: “A Bridlington man has made what he says is the world’s biggest model of the Empire State Building using only matchsticks”.

If he is challenged, he can slug it out with the competition.

Simple words

Simplicity is the central to understanding. Short words in short sentences present listeners, viewers, and readers with the fewest obstacles to comprehension.

In many cases there are longer, more decorative alternatives but think twice before you use them. They take up more time and they can give the audience more to think about.

Here are some examples:

• approximately = about
• apprehend = catch
• ameliorate = improve
• ascertain = learn
• assistance = help
• attempt = try
• commence = start
• exceedingly = very
• discontinue = stop
• magnitude = size
• manufacture = make
• numerous = many
• possesses = has
• purchase = buy
• remuneration = pay
• requested = asked
• residence = home
• subsequently = later
• terminate = end
• utilise = use

Troublesome words

Some words are often misused. Using the wrong word detracts from your journalism, and prevents you from saying what you really wanted to say. Here are some words to look
out for:

• Anticipate and expect are thought by some people to be interchangeable, but that takes away a useful distinction. If I am playing chess and I anticipate my opponent’s next move, I see it coming and act accordingly. There is action as well as expectation. So if you think Liverpool will beat Manchester United, say you expect a Liverpool victory rather than anticipate one. It is simpler and more direct.
• Assassination should be kept for the violent deaths of royalty and seriously prominent members of society, such as political or religious leaders. Everyone else is murdered or killed.
• Cohort originally meant the tenth part of a Roman legion, and when statisticians use it, they mean a group with a shared characteristic. Despite recent American usage, it does not mean a group of colleagues, cronies, friends, Romans or countrymen.
• Crescendo is a gradual increase culminating in a climax, so it is wrong to say that something rose to a crescendo.The word you want is climax.
• Decimate originally meant to kill every tenth person but is now often used to indicate the destruction of a large part of something. Devastate or destroy are just as good.
• Disinterested means impartial; uninterested means not interested in.
• Draconian is much overused, usually by people with no idea who Draco was. (If asked, say he was an Athenian judge who ruled that the penalty for almost everything should be death.) Try severe or harsh instead.
• Effectively is often confused with in effect. If something is effective, it produces a satisfactory result, so effectively means with a satisfactory outcome. “The outbreak of plague in Birmingham has been effectively contained” means the rest of us are safe. In effect means in practice, and often indicates an unplanned outcome, as in “The new tax has in effect made it more sensible for Jane to remain on benefits”.
• Electrocution means death by electric shock. As such, it is always fatal.
• Enormity does not mean large size. It means great wickedness or outrage, although the correct usage seems to be under attack from all sides.
• Evacuate The rule used to be that only places or buildings were evacuated, not people (unless they had been given an enema). This is at odds with common usage so let the people be evacuated.
• Execute means to put to death after a legal process. Terrorists or criminals do not execute people, they murder them.
• Fatwa is often misused. It is a formal legal opinion handed down by a Muslim religious leader or court. It may or may not be a death sentence.
• Forensic does not mean scientific. It means belonging to courts of law, so a forensic expert knows a lot about the legal process. Forensic scientists produce evidence that might be useful in court cases. Avoid forensic tests; you probably mean scientific tests.
• Fulsome is not a close relative of full, and does not mean generous. It means gushing, cloying, effusive or sickeningly fawning. If that’s how to want to describe a speech or tribute, then this is the word for you.
• Go missing is inelegant and unpopular with many people, but its use is widespread. There are no easy synonyms. Disappear and vanish do not convince and they suggest dematerialisation, which is rare.
• Historic is a popular word with journalists. It is nice to think that the events we are describing will resonate down the decades, but who are we to judge? Use with great care, and never confuse with historical, which means belonging to history.
• Hopefully generates much heat in some quarters. It certainly means in a hopeful manner, as in “It is better to travel hopefully than to arrive”, but it is now generally also used to mean it is to be hoped that, as in “Hopefully there will be an improved train service to London”. There is no confusion, so it can justifiably be used in both senses.
• Immolate is not another word for burn. It means to sacrifice or give up something in exchange for something else.
• Infer does not mean the same as imply. If I imply (suggest indirectly) that my programme has an interview with Elvis Presley, and you believe me, you infer (come to the conclusion) that we have the greatest showbiz scoop of all time. Put simply, the inference follows the implication.
• Innocent bystanders and their close friends perfect strangers should not be in your contacts book.
• Ironically does not mean by an odd coincidence. Irony is using words to say the opposite of what they literally mean, and something is ironic if it is the opposite of what might have been expected. It is a subtle concept and is probably best avoided.
• Major is so overused as to be almost meaningless. Think at least twice before you write major operation, major speech, major incident or major changes.
• Massive is regularly misused.As the word implies, it concerns mass, weight and bulk, not quantity.
• Momentarily properly means for a moment, not in a moment, but its misuse is common. If the aircraft pilot says he’ll be landing momentarily, does he mean the plane will touch the ground briefly and then take off again? Probably not.Try to be one of those who uses it correctly.
• Near miss is understood by everyone, even though some people argue that near collision is more accurate. Think of it as shorthand for a miss that came very near to being a collision.
• Refute has a particular meaning. To refute a statement means to prove it wrong. So do not write “The Chancellor refuted opposition claims that he had mishandled the economy”, because it is very unlikely that he did so. Refute is not a synonym for deny, disagree or contradict.
• Surrogate means substitute, so it is the mother who is a surrogate, not the baby.
• Transpire means to come to light or become known, as in “It transpired that the editor had been to school with his secretary’s brother”. It does not mean happen or occur.
• Unique has a unique meaning, and it is that there is only one of something (uni as in unicycle, unicorn or unisex). Nothing can be almost unique. You should be saying distinctive or unusual.
• Viable gets knocked around by many journalists and is often misused. It does not mean workable or feasible, but capable of living and surviving, capable of normal growth and development. If a foetus is not viable it means it cannot survive outside the womb.

Other words are a problem because they are tendentious. For example:

• Ethnic cleansing. This apparently inoffensive term covers a multitude of sins, including massacres, murders, concentration camps, and the forced removal of people from their homes. Not to be used lightly.
• Pro-life is used in the United States to denote the lobby which opposes abortion. In the UK, there is an implication that if you are not pro-life then you are anti-life or pro-death. Avoid this moral minefield by using anti-abortion.
• Reform can also cause problems because it carries a suggestion of improvement, of making things better. When politicians call for the reform of the health service, local government, or the police force, there is no guarantee that their proposals will be positively received by the people directly involved. One man’s reform is another man’s misguided, ill conceived, impractical, vindictive political interference.
• Modernisation is another word to be wary of. It can be used to mask a lot of unpleasant things like job losses, changes in working practices, and getting employees to do more for less. But there’s just a chance it can also mean improved working conditions, new equipment or premises, more flexible hours and a better life for everyone.

Vogue words

There is fashion in language as in most things, and some words are suddenly everywhere. Islamist is regularly used as a synonym for Muslim and seems set to have a long and happy life in stories about terrorism and the threat posed by terrorists.

A raft used to mean a flat structure made up of planks or logs tied together so they formed a floating platform, but journalists and politicians have seized on it as a synonym for a lot of, and they are doing it to death.

• “We are putting together a raft of measures to tackle homelessness.”
• “The bill has attracted a raft of amendments.”
• “The government has unveiled a sweeping raft of proposals.”

What is a sweeping raft? When was the last time you heard someone in the pub say I must get home. I’ve got a raft of ironing to do?

Another word much loved by politicians, diplomats and journalists is broker. Again, do you hear people saying We have brokered a good price for our house? They would be much more likely to say negotiated.

Some people use vogue words because they think it shows they are clever and up with the times. Others believe it demonstrates a lack of original thought and individuality.

Good writers will try to avoid vogue words because they know everyone else is using them.

Here is a brief list of words and phrases. None of them is banned, and nor should they be, but you should approach them with care.

• asymmetrical
• caring
• dichotomy
• ecosystem
• epicentre
• eponymous
• exponential
• fashionista
• infrastructure
• interface
• kickstart
• leading edge
• lifestyle
• meaningful
• overarching
• parameter
• pivotal
• quantum leap
• scenario
• step change
• surgical strike
• synergy
• take on board
• traumatic
• underpin
• warfare

Superfluous words and phrases

English is full of groups of words which go round together filling up sentences. We know them and we are comfortable with them.

But if you want to be concise and clear in your writing you might want to discard them. Here are some examples:

• At this moment in time = now
• By virtue of the fact that = because
• In the absence of = without
• Made good their escape = escaped
• Leaves much to be desired = poor
• Was of the opinion that = thought
• Put in an appearance = appeared
• On account of the fact that = because
• In conjunction with = and
• A large proportion of = many
• Placed under arrest = arrested
• In the event that = if
• With the exception of = except

There are lots more, and none of them should earn a place in your text.

Another way to save time is to be aware of words which go together but actually mean the same thing.

For example, an added bonus does not need the word added because by definition a bonus is something additional.

An aircraft need not plummet down to earth because plummet means falling down. Nothing plummets in any direction other than down.

Here are some more repeater phrases. You can add your own examples.

• New innovation = innovation
• Surrounded on all sides = surrounded
• Red in colour = red
• Razed to the ground = razed
• Exactly the same the = same
• Close proximity = close
• Free gift = gift
• In the field of biology = in biology
• Collaborate together = collaborate
• Temporary reprieve = reprieve
• Consensus of opinion = consensus
• Personal opinion = opinion
• Oblong in shape = oblong
• Future plans = plans
• Close scrutiny = scrutiny
• Minute detail = detail
• Shorter in length = shorter
• Prior experience = experience
• Combine together = combine
• Revert back = revert
• Patently obvious = obvious
• Exact replica = replica

By John Allen

The original text for this article first appeared in a BBC Style Guide. The BBC gave Media Helping Media permission to rework this material and publish it.

Questions

1. What is the primary role of a noun in a sentence?
2. How do proper nouns differ from common nouns?
3. Define the term “collective noun” and provide an example.
4. Explain the difference between “mitigate” and “militate“.
5. Why is it important for journalists to use short sentences and simple words?
6. Analyse the sentence structure of “The plan failed” and explain why it is preferred over “The plan was not successful.”
7. Discuss the significance of using active verbs in the first sentence of a news report.
8. Evaluate the use of the word “unique” in journalism and explain why it should be used cautiously.
9. Synthesise the guidelines provided in the text for avoiding confusing sentence structures.
10. How does the text suggest journalists handle the use of superlatives in their writing?

Answers

1. A noun primarily serves as a naming word in a sentence, identifying people, places, things, or ideas.
2. Proper nouns are specific names that usually start with a capital letter, while common nouns are general names for a class of objects or concepts.
3. A collective noun refers to a group of individuals or things considered as a single entity. An example from the text is “the team.”
4. “Mitigate” means to make less severe or to appease, while “militate” means to work against or hinder.
5. Short sentences and simple words help ensure clarity and prevent misunderstanding, keeping the audience engaged and informed.
6. “The plan failed” is direct and assertive, making it clearer and more impactful than the passive and less direct “The plan was not successful.”
7. Active verbs in the first sentence create impact and engage the audience immediately, encouraging them to continue reading or listening.
8. “Unique” should be used cautiously because it implies that something is one of a kind, and misuse can lead to inaccuracies or exaggerations.
9. The text suggests avoiding complex structures such as subordinate clauses and using clear, direct language to prevent confusion.
10. Journalists should ensure they can justify the use of superlatives with facts, as incorrect use can damage credibility and mislead the audience.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Word power‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

Related article

We have another article covering this topic which you might want to read.

The post The power of words first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Journalism is about far more than simply gathering information then passing it on. An essential part of the editorial process is to examine everything we are told to make sure it is factual.

We then add context so that any facts that are uncovered are considered alongside existing knowledge.

This is the first of two articles on this site about fact-checking. The other is ‘Beyond basic fact-checking‘ which we recommend you read after finishing this piece.

Journalists have a responsibility to apply editorial values to every piece of information that comes our way before we pass it on to others (see the material in our ethics section).

Once a piece of journalism is in the public domain it will be referenced, quoted, and possibly plagiarised as it becomes part of the global conversation. If that piece of journalism is untrue or flawed in any way, then lasting damage will have been done.

But let’s first agree what is meant by the word ‘fact’.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a fact is something that is “known or proved to be true”. It is also “information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article”. In legal terms, a fact is “the truth about events as opposed to interpretation”.

And that last definition is interesting, because journalists ‘interpret’ events by adding context – but more on that later. For now, let’s refer to facts that have not yet been fully tested as ‘claims’.

Here are a few tests that should be applied to information that a journalist receives from someone who ‘claims’ that what they are passing on is factual.

The first three tests are about source verification and fact-checking, the fourth is about adding context.

Is the source credible?

• What do we know about the source?
• What is their motive for sharing the information?
• Could the source have an agenda about which we are not aware?

Recommended: Research the background of the source, their connections, any previous record of sharing information.

Has it happened?

• Could there be a simple explanation?
• Has your source been misled? If so, by whom?
• Is there a history of such an event taking place?

Recommended: Research the chronology of events. Check your own news organisation’s archive. Search the web.

Where is the evidence?

• Is the information available elsewhere?
• What is the evidence to support the claim?
• Has that evidence been tested?

Recommended: Seek out a second, independent and trusted source.

What is the context?

• What are the implications if the claims are true?
• How many people are affected and how?
• Gather data and statistics for comparison purposes.

Recommended: Paint the bigger picture, understand the importance of the event in relation to other news stories.

Examples of adding context

• Economic context: When reporting on rising unemployment rates, provide context by including historical unemployment data, comparisons to other countries, and expert analysis on the economic factors contributing to the trend. For example, ‘While the current unemployment rate is 6%, this is a 2% increase from the previous quarter and the highest rate seen since the 2008 financial crisis.’
• Political context: When covering a new policy announcement, explain the policy’s history, its potential impact on different groups, and the political motivations behind it. For example, ‘This new environmental regulation is the latest in a series of measures aimed at reducing carbon emissions, following years of lobbying from environmental groups and facing opposition from industry leaders.’
• Social context: When reporting on a crime, provide context by discussing the social and economic factors that may have contributed to it, without excusing criminal behaviour. For example, ‘This incident occurred in an area with high rates of poverty and limited access to social services, which experts say can contribute to increased crime rates.’
• Historical context: When covering a protest, give the background of the reasons for the protest, any past protests concerning similar issues, and any key players in the organisation of the protest.

Those of you who are new to journalism might want to print out the following checklist and put it on the wall in your newsroom as a reminder.

If the results of your research make you feel uneasy you might want to drop the story. However, even a false claim, presented as fact, but, on investigation, found to be untrue, could still be a story. It could point to a political, commercial, or social conflict that might require investigation.

Never rule out a possible news story because the initial evidence presented proves to be shaky.

Now let’s look at point four ‘the context’ more closely.

Adding context

One dictionary definition of ‘context’ is: “the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.”

That word, ‘understood’, is important.

The role of a journalist is to enhance understanding. We do that by surrounding proven facts with data, statistics, history, and circumstances that, together, help paint a fuller picture of what has happened.

Think of it this way.

Imagine you are at home watching a series on TV. It’s the final episode of six. Just as the programme is reaching the conclusion there is a knock at the door. It’s a friend you haven’t seen for some time. You welcome them in.

As they walk through the door there is a scream from the lounge. One of the characters in the TV series has discovered the gruesome remains of a body. Your guest is shocked, but fascinated.

You offer to turn the TV off so you can chat, but they are so intrigued by what they saw on the screen that they ask you whether they could watch the programme with you, particularly as it’s reaching its conclusion. They want to know what happens next.

So you pause the programme, put the kettle on, make a cup of tea, and tell your guest about what has happened so far.

You explain who the characters are, what has taken place in previous episodes, how the situation has developed, the relationships between the characters, what clues you have picked up along the way, and how the plot has thickened to reach the point where your guest heard the scream.

And explaining the background proves to be important because your friend thought you must be watching a murder mystery, when, in fact, the series you were watching was a documentary about archeology. The scream was from an archeologist who had unexpectedly found mummified remains. It was not a modern-day crime thriller.

Now your guest has the context, so you can watch the end of the final episode together, with your guest informed about the background to the story and better able to understand events.

The same is true with journalism.

A colleague who was working as an intake editor on a news desk remembers receiving a call from an off-duty reporter who had just passed an overturned red double decker bus on  a London street. People were wandering around with blood pouring from wounds. Two camera crews were mobilised, but before they’d even left the building the reporter discovered that it was a film crew making a movie. The story had changed once the reporter had checked his facts and explored the context.

I made a similar mistake when reporting on a fire at an inner city block of flats in Liverpool. I reported live into the 4pm news bulletin saying that residents were trying to salvage what they could from their burning homes. I was wrong. Had I checked my facts, not made assumptions, and taken time to establish the context of events I would have discovered that I was witnessing rioting and looting. You can read about that experience and the lessons learnt here.

The challenge all journalists face is not just to report the news but to also set out the background to an event as well as all related events in order to help the audience understand the elements of a story which they might otherwise find hard to comprehend – or even reach the wrong conclusion.

Perhaps it involves researching and setting out the chronology of events that have led to the current breaking news story. These can be presented as related stories.

You might need to research the backgrounds of the characters involved as you look for any social connections to anyone else involved. These can be presented as profiles.

Essentially, what you are doing is gathering as much information as possible in order to put together the most detailed, in-depth, and informative account of what has happened.

All this illustrates that journalism helps people make sense of the world – not just what’s happening, but why it’s happening. Stories that raise questions without even attempting to address those questions are weak stories.

• A bridge has collapsed. Why?
• A racing driver stops his car while leading the race. Why?
• A politician resigns. Why?

A news story without context can never be completely understood. A news source that is not verified can never be completely trusted. A claim, left unchecked, might not necessarily be a fact. And a news story without fact-checking and context could add more to the cacophony of confusion than to the enhancement of understanding.

The evolving nature of truth

Beyond revisiting and revising, it’s important to acknowledge that “truth” itself can be complex and contested, particularly in stories involving social issues or conflicting narratives.

Fact-checking isn’t just about verifying isolated facts; it’s about understanding the different interpretations of those facts and how they contribute to larger narratives.

Journalists should strive for accuracy and fairness, acknowledging where interpretations diverge and avoiding presenting a single, definitive “truth” when it doesn’t exist.

Examples

• In reporting on a controversial trial, present the prosecution’s and defences arguments fairly, even if they contradict each other. Clearly label each perspective and avoid presenting one as the definitive truth. For example, ‘The prosecution argued that the defendant acted with malice, citing X evidence, while the defence maintained that the defendant acted in defence, citing Y evidence.’ 
• When covering a historical event with multiple interpretations, acknowledge those differing interpretations and provide sources for each. For example, ‘Historians disagree on the exact causes of the civil war, with some emphasising economic factors and others focusing on social tensions. Both perspectives are supported by historical evidence, as seen in the works of [source 1] and [source 2].’
• When reporting on a scientific study that has conflicting results from other studies, make the audience aware of those conflicts, and if possible give reasons for the conflicts.

Source evaluation in the digital age

Lateral reading is crucial, but so is understanding the motivations and potential biases of sources, especially online. Lateral reading is a technique for evaluating online information by opening multiple tabs in your browser to investigate the credibility of the source, rather than just reading the information on the page itself (which is called ‘vertical reading’).

• Is the source trying to sell something?
• Do they have a political agenda?
• Are they affiliated with a particular group or organisation?

These questions should be part of the fact-checking process.

We should also consider the rise of synthetic media (deepfakes) and the challenges they pose to verifying information.

Examples

• When encountering a website claiming to have groundbreaking scientific findings, use lateral reading by checking reputable scientific journals and organisations to see if those findings are corroborated. For example, searching for the study’s author or institution on Google Scholar.
• To verify the authenticity of an image, use a reverse image search tool such as Google Images or TinEye to see if the image has appeared elsewhere online and in what context. This can help identify manipulated or misattributed images.
• When a source quotes statistics, check the original source of those statistics. For example, if a source cites a statistic about poverty rates, look for the original report from a government agency or reputable research institution.
• Use tools such as whois to check who owns a website, and when it was created. This can help to determine the validity of the website.

Fact-checking as a collaborative process

Fact-checking shouldn’t be solely the responsibility of individual journalists. Newsrooms should foster a culture of fact-checking, where everyone is encouraged to question and verify information.

This can involve dedicated fact-checking teams, collaborative editing processes, and clear guidelines for source evaluation.

The limits of fact-checking: Fact-checking can verify specific claims, but it can’t always address broader issues of interpretation or framing.

A story can be factually accurate but still misleading if it’s presented in a way that distorts the overall picture. This highlights the importance of context.

Examples

• Always verify the date of information, especially in rapidly evolving situations. Outdated information can be misleading. For example, a study from 2010 on climate change may not reflect the latest scientific consensus.
• Consider the ongoing validity of information. A source that was credible in the past may have changed its stance or credibility over time. For example, a political organisation’s website may have been updated with new, potentially biased, information.
• When using archive material, always make the date of the material clear to the audience. For example, ‘In a 1960 news report…’

Deepening the discussion of context

Context and power: Context is not neutral. Those in positions of power often have greater control over the narrative and can shape the context in ways that benefit them.

Journalists should be aware of these power dynamics and strive to provide context that challenges dominant narratives and gives voice to marginalised perspectives.

The “how” question: In addition to “why,” exploring the “how” is crucial. How did this event happen? What were the processes and mechanisms involved?

Understanding the “how” can reveal systemic issues and prevent similar events from occurring in the future.

Context and time: Context is not static; it evolves over time. A story that is accurate and contextualised today might be incomplete or misleading tomorrow as new information emerges.

Journalists need to be prepared to update their reporting and provide ongoing context as the story unfolds.

The ethics of context: Providing context can sometimes involve revealing sensitive information or information that could be harmful to individuals or groups.

Journalists must carefully weigh the public’s right to know against the potential harm and make ethical decisions about what context to include.

Adding perspective

The business model of misinformation: The spread of misinformation is often driven by economic incentives. Clickbait headlines, sensationalised stories, and emotionally charged content can generate more clicks and revenue, even if they are not accurate.

Understanding the business model of misinformation is crucial for combating it.

The role of technology platforms: Social media platforms and search engines play a significant role in the dissemination of information, both accurate and inaccurate.

Journalists should be aware of how these platforms work and how they can be used to spread misinformation.

They should also advocate for platform accountability and transparency.

The importance of media literacy education: Empowering the public with media literacy skills is essential for creating a more informed and engaged citizenry.

Media literacy education should be taught in schools and made available to people of all ages.

Journalism as a public service: At its best, journalism serves the public interest by providing accurate information, holding power accountable, and fostering informed debate.

By prioritising fact-checking and context, journalists can uphold these values and contribute to a more just and democratic society. We need to reinforce the idea that journalism is a vital public service, not just a business.

Questions

1. What is the primary role of journalism according to the text?
2. How does the author define a ‘fact’ in the context of journalism?
3. What are the four tests mentioned in the text that should be applied to information received by journalists?
4. Why is it important for journalists to add context to the facts they report?
5. How does the text illustrate the importance of context with the example of the TV series?
6. What mistake did the reporter make when reporting on the overturned bus, and what lesson does it teach about context?
7. How does the text suggest journalists should handle claims that are found to be untrue?
8. In what ways can journalists enhance the audience’s understanding of a news story?
9. What is the significance of verifying news sources according to the text?
10. How does the text differentiate between a claim and a fact?

Answers

1. The primary role of journalism is to gather information, ensure it is factual, and add context to enhance understanding.
2. A ‘fact’ is something known or proved to be true, used as evidence or part of a report, and distinct from interpretation.
3. The four tests are: source credibility, occurrence verification, evidence availability, and context understanding.
4. Adding context helps the audience fully understand the circumstances and implications of the facts reported.
5. The TV series example shows how context changes the understanding of events, illustrating the importance of background information.
6. The reporter mistook a film set for a real event, teaching the importance of verifying facts and understanding context.
7. Even untrue claims can be stories if they reveal underlying conflicts or issues that require investigation.
8. Journalists can enhance understanding by providing background, chronology, and profiles related to the news story.
9. Verifying news sources is crucial to ensure trustworthiness and accuracy in reporting.
10. A claim is an untested assertion, while a fact is verified and proven to be true.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: Fact-checking and adding context which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

If you found this helpful you might want to check our related training module ‘Beyond basic fact-checking‘.

The post Fact-checking and adding context first appeared on Media Helping Media.

This article sets out the basics for creating a news package for TV. It’s been created for those starting out in TV journalism.

No pictures, no story

The golden rule for all TV news is “no pictures, no story”; pictures provide the “what” – words provide the “why”.

Storytelling in pictures

• Three skills are necessary: Reporting, camerawork and editing
• You need at least a basic knowledge of all three
• The guiding principle: let the pictures tell the story

First steps – what is the story?

• Who is the subject?
• What are they doing?
• Why, and what is their motive?

Research – the evolution of the story

• Find out what has happened
• Uncover the who, why, when, where, and how of the story
• Ensure you understand fully all the elements

Next steps – plan your news-gathering

• Be sure you know what story you want to tell
• Discuss it with your camera operator
• Decide what shots you are going to need

How the elements work

• The hook – grabs the attention
• The context – gives essential background
• The unfolding – the details of the new story
• The wrap – reiterates the main points or throws the story forward

At the scene – get enough shots

• Anything showing action: arrivals, establishing shots, walking shots, noddies, cutaways, sitting-at-a-desk shots, interesting locations etc
• Film faces, especially those showing emotion
• Avoid getting to the edit suite without the shots you need

Interviews – what are we looking for?

• You will need only one or two short clips
• What will tell the story best? Emotion, analysis, an eye-witness account?
• Be neutral in your tone

Interviews – the skill is in the questions

• Don’t ask questions that can be answered with yes or no
• Don’t ask two questions in one
• Use the old favourites: who, what, when, where, why, and how

The stand-up – piece-to-camera

• Why are you doing it?
• How does it help with the story-telling or the editing?
• If it is really necessary, keep it short

Back at the office – consult and agree

• Make a shot-list
• Show your editor the pictures
• Agree on the treatment of the story

At the edit station – choose the pictures first

• Identify the shots which best tell the story
• Decide their optimum length
• Choose the right sequence (not necessarily in which they were recorded)

Editing dos

• Make sure each shot joins up smoothly with the next
• Keep points which attract the eye in the same area of the screen at changes
• Remove anything that can be cut without damaging the flow of the story
• Make a shot list of the finished edit
• Try to let the pictures tell the story
• Let the images speak and add as few words as possible
• With walking shots, end with them walking out of the picture if you can

Editing don’ts

• Don’t use the same shot twice in a package
• Don’t use jump cuts
• Don’t use the first question from an interview – start with the answer
• Don’t start or end a moving shot with a static shot
• If you cut away from an interview or a press conference, do not go back to it
• Don’t use noddy shots in edits; it could come across as agreement
• Don’t split clips and use them out of sequence

Packaging – putting it all together

• Understand – the story and the pictures you will need to tell it
• Capture – action, emotion, atmosphere, editing shots
• Discuss – agree the treatment with your editor
• Edit – use pictures to tell the story
• Script – add as few words as possible to complement the picture

Creating a compelling TV news package requires proficiency in three core skills: reporting, camerawork, and editing.

While specialisation is common, a basic understanding of all three is crucial for effective collaboration and a holistic approach to storytelling.

The guiding principle remains: let the pictures tell the story.

However, this doesn’t diminish the importance of strong reporting and thoughtful editing; rather, it elevates the visual element to its rightful place as the primary driver of the narrative.

Understanding your story

The first step is always understanding the story you intend to tell. This involves asking fundamental questions:

• Who is the central figure(s) in the narrative? Consider their background, motivations, and perspectives.
• What is the core event or issue being covered? What are the key developments and their implications?
• Why is this story important?
• What is its relevance to the audience?
• What are the underlying causes and consequences?
• When did the events occur, and what is the timeline of the story?
• Where did the events take place, and what is the significance of the location?
• How did the events unfold?
• What are the different perspectives on the situation?

Research: Unearthing the narrative

Thorough research is essential to understanding the evolution of the story. Don’t just scratch the surface; delve deeper to uncover the complexities and nuances. This involves:

• Background research: Explore existing news reports, articles, and other relevant materials to gain context and identify key players.
• Source verification: Critically evaluate the credibility of your sources and ensure the accuracy of your information.
• Multiple perspectives: Seek out diverse viewpoints to provide a balanced and comprehensive account.

Planning your news gathering

Once you have a solid understanding of the story, collaborate with your camera operator to plan your news gathering strategy. This involves:

• Defining the narrative arc: Determine the central theme and how you will structure the story to engage the viewer.
• Shot list development: Create a detailed list of the shots you will need to capture, considering different angles, perspectives, and compositions.
• Visual storytelling: Think about how you can use visuals to convey emotion, create atmosphere, and enhance the narrative.

The elements of a news package

A well-structured news package typically includes the following elements:

• The hook: A compelling opening that grabs the viewer’s attention and introduces the story’s central theme. This could be a striking visual, a powerful soundbite, or a thought-provoking question.
• The context: Provides essential background information and establishes the relevance of the story.
• The unfolding: Presents the main details of the story, including facts, figures, and different perspectives.
• The wrap: Summarises the main points and may offer a look ahead at future developments.

At the scene – capturing the story

When filming at the scene, aim for a variety of shots to provide flexibility in the editing process. This includes:

• Action shots: Capture the main events as they unfold.
• Establishing shots: Provide context by showing the location and setting.
• Walking shots: Add dynamism and movement to the story.
• Noddies: Record reaction shots of interviewees listening to questions. But be careful with noddies. They could suggest to the audience that you agree with the interview and enforce their point of view. Best not to use noddies.
• Cutaways: Use related visuals to break up interview footage and add visual interest.
• Emotional shots: Focus on faces and expressions that convey the emotions of the people involved.

Interviews: Gathering insights and perspectives

Interviews are crucial for gathering information and different viewpoints. Important points to consider are:

• Quality over quantity: Focus on obtaining a few powerful clips rather than a large number of mediocre ones.
• Open-ended questions: Ask questions that encourage interviewees to elaborate and provide detailed answers. Avoid yes/no questions.
• Active listening: Pay close attention to what the interviewee is saying and ask follow-up questions to probe deeper.
• Neutral tone: Maintain objectivity and avoid leading questions (and avoid noddies).

The stand-up (Piece-to-camera)

The stand-up should only be used when it adds value to the story. It can be used to:

• Provide context: Explain complex information or offer analysis.
• Bridge gaps: Connect different elements of the story narrative.
• Add a personal perspective: Share your insights or observations, but be careful not to lead of try to influence – that is not your job. Your job is to observe and report.

Collaboration and review

Before heading to the edit suite, consult with your editor to discuss the story’s treatment and agree on the main messages. Create a shot list to organise your footage.

Editing: Weaving the narrative

The editing process is where the story truly comes to life.

• Prioritise visuals: Select the shots that best tell the story and use them as the foundation of your edit.
• Smooth transitions: Ensure that each shot flows seamlessly into the next.
• Concise storytelling: Remove any unnecessary footage that doesn’t contribute to the narrative.
• Visual sStorytelling: Let the images speak for themselves and use words sparingly.

Editing dos and don’ts

• Do: Use a variety of shots, maintain visual continuity, and prioritise the narrative flow.
• Don’t: Use the same shot twice, create jump cuts, or start or end moving shots with static shots.

Packaging: The final product

The final stage is packaging all the elements together into a cohesive and compelling news package. Important considerations:

• Understand: The story and the visuals you need to tell it.
• Capture: Action, emotion, atmosphere, and editing shots.
• Discuss: The treatment with your editor.
• Edit: Use pictures to tell the story.
• Script: Write a concise script that complements the visuals.

By following these guidelines and continuously honing your skills, you can create impactful TV news packages that inform, engage, and resonate with your audience.

Storytelling is a craft that requires practice, patience, and a passion for sharing compelling narratives.

Questions

1. What is the golden rule for TV news, and why is it important?
2. Identify the three skills necessary for storytelling in pictures.
3. Explain the guiding principle of letting pictures tell the story in TV news.
4. Describe the initial steps in planning a news story according to the text.
5. What are the main elements to consider when planning your news-gathering process?
6. How do the elements of a news story—hook, context, unfolding, and wrap—contribute to effective storytelling?
7. Discuss the importance of capturing emotion in interviews and how it enhances the story.
8. What are some editing dos and don’ts mentioned in the text, and why are they significant?
9. How does the role of a stand-up, or piece-to-camera, contribute to storytelling or editing?
10. Explain the process of packaging a news story and the role of each step in creating a cohesive narrative.

Answers

1. The golden rule for TV news is “no pictures, no story.” It is important because pictures provide the “what” of the story, while words provide the “why.”
2. The three skills necessary for storytelling in pictures are reporting, camerawork, and editing.
3. The guiding principle of letting pictures tell the story emphasises the importance of visual elements in conveying the narrative, allowing images to communicate the story with minimal verbal explanation.
4. The initial steps in planning a news story include identifying the story, determining the subject, understanding their actions and motives, and conducting research to uncover the who, why, when, where, and how of the story.
5. Key elements to consider when planning your news-gathering process include knowing the story you want to tell, discussing it with your camera operator, and deciding on the necessary shots.
6. The hook grabs attention, the context provides essential background, the unfolding details the new story, and the wrap reiterates main points or advances the story, all contributing to effective storytelling.
7. Capturing emotion in interviews is important because it adds depth and relatability to the story, making it more engaging and impactful for the audience.
8. Editing dos include ensuring smooth transitions between shots and maintaining visual continuity, while don’ts include avoiding repeated shots and jump cuts. These practices are significant for maintaining the flow and coherence of the story.
9. A stand-up, or piece-to-camera, contributes to storytelling or editing by providing a direct connection with the audience, offering context, or summarising key points, but should be used sparingly and kept short.
10. Packaging a news story involves understanding the story and necessary visuals, capturing action and emotion, discussing treatment with the editor, editing with a focus on visuals, and scripting minimally to complement the images, creating a cohesive narrative.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: How to construct a TV news package which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

The post Constructing a TV news package first appeared on Media Helping Media.

This is a short training module setting out the basics for creating a news package for radio. It’s been created for those starting out in radio journalism.

Technique – using sound to tell a story

• Imagine your voice going into a listener’s ear
• Use your voice expressively – plenty of variation
• The tone should be sympathetic to the story

Actuality – enriches your script

• Find good people to interview
• Look for complementary sounds which are relevant to the story
• If it’s a story about dogs, you need barking

Chronology – the evolution of the story

• Find out what has happened
• Uncover the who, why, when, where, and how of the story
• Ensure you understand fully all the elements

Atmosphere – sound effects

• Record enough wild track at the scene
• Wild track is background noise
• It’s useful because you may need it later in the editing process

Sensing – being there

• At the scene, explain what you are sensing
• Describe what can you see, hear, smell and touch
• Avoid explaining how YOU are feeling

Feeling – emotional impact

• Ask your interviewees what they feel
• Find out if they are afraid, sad, hopeful, happy
• What YOU feel doesn’t matter

Perspectives – what people think

• Seek out multiple perspectives
• Look for diverse voices
• Never ignore conflicting opinions

The so what factor – what happens next

• Find out what are the next steps
• Explain why those steps are important
• Note any future events & meetings for follow up purposes

Putting it together – sounds in harmony

• Use short clips from your wild track and interview
• Use your script to bind them together in a logical way
• Keep your links short

Technique – using sound to tell a story: Think of your voice as the primary instrument in your storytelling. It’s not just about conveying information; it’s about creating an intimate connection with the listener.

Imagine your voice traveling directly into their ear, painting pictures and evoking emotions.

Vary your pace, tone, and inflection to match the narrative. A somber story demands a different vocal approach than a celebratory one.

Authenticity is important; let your voice reflect the genuine emotion of the story. Consider vocal delivery coaches or exercises to develop a more expressive and engaging voice.

Actuality – the voice of reality: Actuality, the recorded sound of events and voices, is the lifeblood of radio news. It’s what separates radio from print. Don’t just tell the story; let the listener experience it.

Seek out interviewees who can offer unique insights and perspectives.

Beyond the obvious interview, capture ambient sounds – the “soundscape” of your story.

If it’s a story about dogs, barking is essential, but also consider the sounds of a dog park, a leash jingling, or even the soft panting of a contented canine. These details bring the story to life.

Chronology – the narrative arc: A compelling news package follows a clear narrative arc. Begin by establishing the core facts: who, what, when, where, and how.

But go beyond the surface. Uncover the why – the motivations, the context, the underlying issues. Understanding the chronology of events is crucial.

Think of it as building a timeline, ensuring each piece of the story fits logically. This thorough understanding allows you to guide the listener through the unfolding narrative.

Atmosphere – painting with sound: Wild track, or ambient sound, is more than just background noise; it’s the atmosphere that immerses the listener in the story. Record ample wild track at the scene.

Capture the subtle sounds – the murmur of a crowd, the rustle of leaves, the hum of traffic. These sounds can be invaluable during editing, allowing you to create smooth transitions, establish location, and enhance the overall listening experience.

Think of wild track as the sonic equivalent of establishing shots in film.

Sensing – immersive storytelling: Go beyond simply reporting; transport the listener to the scene. Describe what you are sensing – the sights, sounds, smells, and even textures.

What do you see as you walk through the marketplace? What do you hear above the din of the city? What do you smell in the aftermath of a fire?

These sensory details ground the listener in the reality of the story. While your personal feelings are less important, your observations are crucial.

Feeling – the emotional core: While your personal feelings are secondary, the emotions of those involved are paramount. Seek out the emotional core of the story by asking your interviewees how they feel.

Are they hopeful? Devastated? Angry? Their authentic emotions resonate with listeners and create a powerful connection.

Don’t be afraid to ask direct questions about their feelings, but do so with empathy and sensitivity.

Perspectives – a tapestry of voices: Strive for fairness by presenting multiple perspectives. Seek out diverse voices, even those that conflict with your own or the dominant narrative.

Presenting conflicting opinions is not about creating false equivalence; it’s about providing context and allowing the listener to draw their own conclusions.

Actively seek out marginalised voices and perspectives that might otherwise be overlooked.

The “so what?” factor – relevance and impact: Every news story should answer the fundamental question: “So what?” Why should the listener care?

Explain the implications of the story and its potential impact on their lives or the community. What are the next steps? Are there future meetings, hearings, or events related to the story?

Highlight any follow-up opportunities for the listener. This provides closure and demonstrates the ongoing relevance of the story.

Putting it together – the art of audio weaving: Crafting a compelling news package is like composing a piece of music. You’re weaving together different elements – interviews, wild track, your narration – to create a cohesive and engaging whole.

Use short, impactful clips from your interviews and wild track. Your script serves as the glue that binds these elements together, providing context and narrative flow.

Keep your links – the segments where you speak – concise and focused. They should seamlessly bridge between the actuality and the ambient sound, guiding the listener through the story.

Editing is crucial. Pay attention to pacing, transitions, and the overall flow of the package.

A well-crafted package is more than just a collection of sounds; it’s a story told through sound, engaging the listener’s imagination and leaving a lasting impression.

Questions

1. What is the role of voice in storytelling according to the text?
2. How can actuality enhance a script?
3. Why is it important to find complementary sounds relevant to the story?
4. Describe the significance of chronology in storytelling.
5. What is the purpose of recording wild track at a scene?
6. How should a storyteller convey their sensory experiences at a scene?
7. Why is it important to focus on the interviewees’ feelings rather than the storyteller’s own emotions?
8. Explain the importance of seeking multiple perspectives in storytelling.
9. What is the “so what factor” and why is it crucial in storytelling?
10. How can a storyteller effectively integrate wild track and interview clips into a cohesive narrative?

Answers

1. The role of voice in storytelling is to use it expressively with plenty of variation, ensuring the tone is sympathetic to the story.
2. Actuality enriches a script by providing real-life sounds and voices that add authenticity and depth to the narrative.
3. Complementary sounds are important because they enhance the realism and engagement of the story, making it more relatable and vivid for the audience.
4. Chronology is significant because it helps in understanding the evolution of the story by uncovering the who, why, when, where, and how.
5. Recording wild track is useful because it provides background noise that can be used later in the editing process to create a more immersive atmosphere.
6. A storyteller should convey their sensory experiences by describing what they see, hear, smell, and touch, without focusing on their personal feelings.
7. Focusing on the interviewees’ feelings is important because it provides an authentic emotional impact and perspective, which is more relevant to the story.
8. Seeking multiple perspectives is important to ensure a balanced and comprehensive narrative that includes diverse voices and opinions.
9. The “so what factor” involves explaining the next steps and their importance, ensuring the story has relevance and a clear direction for future developments.
10. A storyteller can effectively integrate wild track and interview clips by using a script to bind them together logically, keeping the links short and coherent.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: Constructing a radio news package which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

You might want to read a related training module: How to write a radio news script.

How to write a radio news script

The post Constructing a news package for radio first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Journalists should not waste words. Their writing should be concise and tight. Adjectives and adverbs clutter up news stories and should be avoided wherever possible.

When it comes to writing – not just news writing but any kind of writing – adjectives and adverbs have a bad reputation.

Mark Twain said: “When you catch an adjective, kill it.” Stephen King said: “The road to hell is paved with adverbs”.

For many decades, the conventional wisdom in journalism has been that you do not, usually, need adjectives and adverbs. Your sentences will be better if you cut them out.

But wait! I just used “usually”, an adverb, and “better”, an adjective. If I cut them out, the first sentence will no longer be accurate, since I am trying to say that there will, occasionally, be a need. And the second sentence does not work at all if I remove “better”.

So you cannot ban the use of adjectives and adverbs.

But you should keep them to a minimum. Mark Twain, in fact, modified his advice:
“I don’t mean utterly, but kill most of them (adjectives) – then the rest will be valuable. They weaken when they are close together. They give strength when they are wide apart.
“An adjective habit, or a wordy, diffuse, flowery habit, once fastened upon a person, is as hard to get rid of as any other vice.”
Instead, make a virtue of economy: use as few words as possible. The newspaper guru, Leslie Sellers, in his 1968 guide, “The simple subs book”, put it this way: “fewer words, better sense”. Apply this across the board, but especially (a permissible use of the adverb in this case) with adjectives and adverbs.

Adjectives and adverbs are words that modify. Adjectives change the meaning of nouns. Adverbs change the meaning of verbs, phrases, clauses or sentences. You should always test whether the modification is necessary.

Here are a few examples of commonly-used but unnecessary modifiers, in which the first word can always be cut:

• completely untrue
• strictly necessary
• broad daylight
• considerable difficulty
• firm decision
• together with
• along with
• grateful thanks
• high-speed car chase

Adjectives to do with size are often too broad to add any useful meaning, like “big”, “huge”, “massive”, “astonishing” . They can be cut or replaced with something that adds to the understanding of the story.

Adjectives like “tragic”, “improved” “sad”, “incredible” “unfortunate” are especially dangerous since they include value judgements. Leave it to your readers or listeners to make their own judgements.

Two of the most objectionable words are “really” and “very”. They seldom add any meaning. Mark Twain suggested that every time you are tempted to write the word “very” in your story, substitute the word “damn” – then, as he put it, “your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be”.

Mark Twain was also down on adverbs. He said they were the tool of the “lazy writer”. In their most common form they end in “ly” and are attached to verbs. Here are some sentences which would be better without their adverbs:

“She tiptoed silently into the room.”
“He glared aggressively at the traffic warden.”
“She knew perfectly well he was lying.”
“He completely rejected the allegation.”

In all these cases, the adverb states the obvious. The verb does the job without needing modification. Always try to let the verb stand alone – if it needs strengthening with an adverb, it is the wrong choice of verb.

Journalists choosing their words are the same as carpenters choosing a piece of wood or tailors choosing a length of cloth. We are all craftspeople and our success depends on using the right raw materials – in our case, words.

So be sparing in your use of adjectives and adverbs. It is one of the qualities that marks a professional.

Journalists, like any craftsperson, wield words as their tools. Just as a sculptor chisels away excess stone to reveal the form within, journalists must prune unnecessary words to expose the core of their story.

This principle of concision isn’t merely about brevity; it’s about clarity, impact, and respect for the reader’s time.

While the conventional wisdom in journalism cautions against the overuse of adjectives and adverbs, the issue is more nuanced than a blanket ban.

Using adjectives and adverb properly requires an understanding of their function, and then careful and precise usage.

A single, well-chosen adjective can illuminate a noun, while a cluster of them obscures it.

The same holds true for adverbs. They can add subtle shades of meaning to verbs, but often they merely state the obvious or, worse, mask a weak verb choice.

The problem with excessive modifiers isn’t just wordiness; it’s that they often introduce subjectivity and weaken the writer’s authority.

Words such as “tragic,” “incredible,” or “astonishing” tell the reader how to feel, rather than letting the facts speak for themselves.

Similarly, adverbs such as “really” and “very” rarely add substantive meaning; they are intensifiers that often intensify nothing.

The real skill lies in choosing strong verbs and nouns that carry their own weight.

This isn’t to say that adjectives and adverbs are inherently evil. They have a legitimate role to play in adding detail and nuance.

The job for the journalist is to understand their purpose.

A well-placed adjective can sharpen an image, while a carefully chosen adverb can clarify an action.

The key is to ask: Does this modifier add essential information, or is it merely decorative? Does it enhance the reader’s understanding, or does it simply clutter the sentence?

The journalist’s craft is to choose each word with care, considering its weight, texture, and purpose.

A journalist shouldn’t rely on a weak verb propped up by an adverb when a stronger verb would do the job better.

The pursuit of concision isn’t about stripping language bare; it’s about using it with precision and power, allowing the story to resonate with clarity and impact.

It’s about showing, not telling, and trusting the reader to draw their own conclusions.

By mastering the art of economy, journalists can elevate their writing from mere reporting to compelling storytelling.

Questions

1. What is the main argument presented in the text regarding the use of adjectives and adverbs in writing?
2. How do Mark Twain and Stephen King view the use of adjectives and adverbs, according to the text?
3. Identify two examples from the text where adjectives or adverbs are deemed unnecessary. Explain why they are considered unnecessary.
4. What is the role of adjectives and adverbs in modifying language, as described in the text?
5. Discuss the potential impact of using adjectives that include value judgments, such as “tragic” or “incredible,” in journalism.
6. How does the text suggest journalists should approach the use of adjectives and adverbs in their writing?
7. Analyse the metaphor comparing journalists to carpenters and tailors. What does this metaphor suggest about the craft of writing?
8. What criteria does the text provide for determining whether an adjective or adverb is necessary in a sentence?
9. Evaluate the effectiveness of Mark Twain’s suggestion to replace “very” with “damn” in writing. What is the intended outcome of this advice?
10. Synthesise the text’s recommendations into a set of guidelines for writing concisely and effectively without overusing adjectives and adverbs.

Answers

1. The main argument is that journalists should write concisely and avoid unnecessary adjectives and adverbs, as they often clutter writing.
2. Mark Twain and Stephen King view adjectives and adverbs negatively. Twain suggests eliminating adjectives, while King warns against adverbs, implying they lead to poor writing.
3. Examples include “completely untrue” and “high-speed car chase.” They are unnecessary because the first word does not add meaningful information to the sentence.
4. Adjectives modify nouns, and adverbs modify verbs, phrases, clauses, or sentences. They change the meaning of the words they modify.
5. Using adjectives that contain value judgements may unduly influence the reader towards the journalist’s view, instead of simply presenting the facts and letting the reader form their own opinions.
6. Journalists should be sparing in their use of adjectives and adverbs, ensuring that each one adds necessary meaning to the sentence.
7. The metaphor suggests that writing, like carpentry or tailoring, requires careful selection of materials (words) to create a quality product.
8. The text suggests testing whether the modification is necessary by seeing if the sentence retains its meaning without the adjective or adverb.
9. Twain’s suggestion aims to highlight the redundancy of “very” by replacing it with “damn,” which would be removed by an editor, thus simplifying the writing.
10. Guidelines include: use adjectives and adverbs sparingly, ensure they add necessary meaning, avoid value judgments, and let verbs stand alone when possible.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Adjectives and adverbs in journalism‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

For further reading on this subject, you might want to read the excellent “A journalist’s guide to the use of English”, by Ted Bottomley and Anthony Loftus. It was written in 1971 and has been updated for this website by Ted’s son John.

The post Adjectives and adverbs in journalism first appeared on Media Helping Media.