| |
|
... Publishing Emerging Writers
...
Opt-In Publication for
Author-Me.com (23rd year)
Comment Boxes on Author-Me.com. If you have published on author-me, check the comment box under your text.
============================================================
In This issue...Organizing, Revising, and Storytelling: Thoughts from a Former Reporter by Renée Chmiel (USA)
============================================================
s a former journalist, I not only reported the evening (or morning) news, I was also a writer and storyteller. While working at three different television stations in two states, I used both words and video to tell stories about what was happening in the local community.... (continued below)
Note: As of Oct 30, 2025, this newsletter ("Publishing New Writers") has over 15,224 subscribers on Linkedin.com
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Organizing, Revising, and Storytelling: Thoughts from a Former Reporter
By Renée Chmiel (USA)
Renée Chmiel is a writer and former journalist who spent nearly a decade in television news. She was a reporter and fill-in anchor at stations in North Dakota and Connecticut, covering everything from politics and crime to weather and human interest stories. She has also been featured on multiple television true crime shows as well as a web-based video series that educated young adults on how to support a friend after a cancer diagnosis. A member of the San Diego Science Writers Association, Renée lives in San Diego, California.
As a former journalist, I not only reported the evening (or morning) news, I was also a writer and storyteller. While working at three different television stations in two states, I used both words and video to tell stories about what was happening in the local community. Although I often shot and edited my own stories, I was always a writer at heart.
The television news writing style differs greatly from, say, a newspaper story, as well as other forms of writing. One of the most obvious differences is that it is deliberately conversational. As a young journalist I was taught to “write like you talk,” as the script was supposed to contain simple language and be accessible and easy to understand - all while conveying the urgency and timeliness of the story. (One former news director famously forbade all reporters and anchors from using the expression “the white stuff” while on air during winter weather coverage. He insisted that meteorologists were the only ones who referred to snow in that way;
“real people” never said that. Alas, even if my colleagues and I shook our heads at his rigidity, I’ll admit he was right about that one.)
The emphasis on simplicity goes beyond the words themselves - it informs the structure of news stories. Think, for a moment, of when you’ve had the news on at home. Were you watching the broadcast intently, keenly absorbing every word with your undivided attention? Probably not - at least not consistently. Many people have the morning news on in the background as they’re getting ready to go to work. The evening news serves as the soundtrack to dinner preparations or a chat with a family member. As a result, people don’t often hear every detail of a story; rather, they often catch snippets. Stories, therefore, must be easy to follow, even from a distance. Also, broadcast journalists must remember that they’re writing for a very broad and diverse audience. Viewers have myriad educational levels and backgrounds, and some prefer another language to English. Stories must be crafted to be compelling yet easily understood by all viewers - even those who may be only partially paying attention.
This, of course, guides how stories are organized and written, yet these principles don’t only apply to news stories. You have perhaps heard someone mention burying the lede. This comes from the world of journalism. Suppose your friend is telling you a story about their day. They tell you about getting a parking ticket, finding a $10 bill on the ground, buying some groceries, and getting engaged. Which of these events do you think they’d mention first? Would you expect them to excitedly tell you that they bought groceries, tell you how they found money, complain about the parking ticket, and then later casually mention their engagement? Or would you expect them instead to come to you and excitedly tell you of their upcoming nuptials? Probably the latter, no? If not, you might tell them they’ve buried the lede!
As journalists, we are taught to mention the most important information first. Lead with that. That’s the first line of the story, and the other details will follow. Even the newscast itself follows this structure: The lead story is the first story in the newscast. The first block of stories before the first commercial break, known as the A block, contains the most newsworthy stories. Don’t make your audience wait for the most critical information - give it to them first.
Many of the main points of a story come in the answers to the questions of who, what, where, when, why, and how. This is the information the viewer or the reader wants the most, and it should come first. The headline and the most relevant information go first, and the supporting details will follow. The story should answer all of the relevant and important questions a reader will have without creating any additional questions it does not answer. If some pertinent information is not available, it’s important to let the viewer/reader know that - don’t simply leave it out. I used to put myself in my audience’s position: What would I want to know if I were reading/watching this story? A piece will end with what’s known in the news business as a “tag.” This is a last bit of information that will wrap up the story. I always liked to include an element of the future here - perhaps what’s expected to come next as the story continues to unfold.
Let’s say I was covering a fire, as, unfortunately, this was a story I covered with some frequency at all three stations. To start off, it’s important to share where and when the fire occurred and if anyone was hurt or displaced. Then there are the details of the story. Did the fire spread to any additional homes or structures? Were there any factors that made fighting the fire particularly challenging for firefighters? Was it so massive that nearby municipalities had to assist? What caused it? (This information was typically not available immediately after a fire, and we’d simply report that the fire was still under investigation.) What happens next? Mentioning that the fire marshal will be investigating or that the Red Cross will be helping the family would be great for the tag.
Ultimately, a news story is just that: a story. It needs to be organized like any story. Does it flow? Are the facts presented in a logical order? Does it make sense, or is it scattered or confusing? That’s where the review process comes in. My method has always been to write, write, write, then revise. When I first write anything, whether it’s a news story or a piece of fiction that I’m working on for fun, I like to get it all down first in a bit of a brain dump. I don’t worry too much about perfection. I aim for completion. I then step away - ideally, for a day or so (although, of course, in television news this is not possible!). The distance enables me to look at what I’ve written with fresh eyes as I begin the revisions. I’m able to more easily spot ways to improve my work or changes that need to be made, and I know I wouldn’t be able to identify them nearly as easily if I were to begin revising too soon. I have found this to be very effective. Depending on what I’m working on and how much time I have, I’ll then step away again and repeat this process the next day. I don’t exceed three or four revisions, however, as I haven’t found that to be particularly productive. There always has to be a time to step away for good.
What if there isn’t time to take time away? In news, a producer always reviews story scripts before they are aired. I’ve always appreciated having another person review what I’ve written. I once heard that the most difficult mistake to catch is one’s own, and I know this to be true. Have you ever noticed that you overlooked a fairly obvious mistake in your own work that someone else picked out right away? Or that you might easily identify the same error in another’s work? It’s like our brains autocorrect as we read our own work, making errors or opportunities for improvement much more difficult to catch. If it’s an option, I always try to have someone else review my work, and I encourage other writers to do the same. Never underestimate the importance of a good editor! Meanwhile, it’s time for me to put this piece away. I’ll be back tomorrow to revise.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/organizing-revising-storytelling-thoughts-from-former-bruce-cook-5xubc
Visit our sister web sites..
http://www.author-me.com/
http://www.reservebooks.com/
http://www.johnoryem.com/
http://www.innisfreepoetry.org
We have developed world peace websites:
www.wwpo.org
www.icpglobal.org
Publishing New Writers,
October, 2025 (vol. 26, no. 10)
Publisher:
Dr. Bruce L. Cook
1407 Getzelman Drive
Elgin, IL 60123
Submissions/comments
Send mail
Links and article submissions are welcome. To subscribe and/or review our archive of past newsletters, go to
http://www.author-me.com/newslist.htm
| |
|
|
|
|
| |