CDeutsch News Entries

For my CAR analysis I chose to look at "The Informant" from the Star Tribune.

This story focused a lot on previous court cases and the outcomes of these cases, so the reporters needed to dig up all of the cases that seemed connected with this story and understand both what they were about and their outcome. The story also said that the reporters looked extensively at other police documents, as well.

Much of the computer reporting done for this story was likely that used to piece together parts of the story of Taylor Trump. The information about where he went to high school and college likely all came from extended computer reporting through looking at information about the schools and from the schools. Trump also had an Internet group at one time, and the reporters likely found out how to access information about this group online or were able to see actual content from the group.

For this story, the reporters needed to know where they were most likely to obtain the information they were looking for, specifically where to find information about former web sites or from schools. Basically, the reporters needed to have a good understanding and idea of where to go to find the information they were looking for.

Posted by deuts076 at 8:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The story I chose for diversity analysis is "For Somalis, schism of mistrust widens" from the Star Tribune.

This story talks about FBI talking to member of the Minnesota chapter of Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), specifically Somalians, about whether terrorists from their home countries may have recruited missing Somali men from Minnesota. The story talks about both how non-Somali people in Minnesota view those who are Somali, as well as how they may view each other based on whether or not they talk to the FBI. The story seems to move past stereotypes and touches on emotions and feelings that people generally have when part of a group, whether by choice or by circumstance.

This story told me about an issue I didn't know about - that the FBI is looking into the possibility that terrorists are recruiting Somali men - but also reveals information about the loyalty of the Somali community, and both information about how outsiders view them and how they view outsiders.The story operates predominantly through quotes of people, many not identified by name, who have talked to the FBI about this issue. Data and observation aren't important components of the story. The story focused more on FBI-Somali interactions and involvement than on actual cultural, ethnic and racial issues faced by Somalians.

Posted by deuts076 at 8:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I'm analyzing the use of numbers in "Leaks, wasteful toilets cause cascading water loss" from USA Today.

The reporter has used numbers to help the reader understand how much water traditional toilets use compared to how much water WaterSense toilets use. He also uses numbers to help readers understand what percentage of water used in these systems, and the percentage the water from them makes up on an average homeowner's water bill. The way the numbers are presented are quite straightforward, and I found them very easy to understand. It also made the story easier to understand because there were concrete examples, instead of general statements with very little solid material to back them up.

I was unable to tell if the reporter used math to use the numbers or not, because I don't know what information the reporter had. The reporter may have had to work out the percentages from raw numbers, but the percentages may also have been included in the report. But the percentages did help tell the story more effectively.

The sources of the numbers are the Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Government Accountability Office and Phoenix Water Conservation Office. However, some of the numbers do not have sources listed.

Posted by deuts076 at 8:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I am analyzing "Archie Green, 91, Union Activist and Folklorist, Dies" from the New York Times.

The sources in this obituary were Archie Green's son, Derek Green, Simon Bronner, a folklore professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Peggy Bulger, the director of Washington's American Folklife Center, and Roger D. Abrahams, a retired folklore professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

The story has a standard obituary lead, introducing Green with his claim to fame and including where and when he died and his age. This lead is effective because it lets the reader know enough about the person to decide whether or not they want to continue reading.

The obituary differs from a resume because it details what he did outside of his job and how his passions addressed larger issues in the world. It describes not only what he got paid to do and what he chose to do for his career, but what he chose to do with his free time as well, and how that has made a difference in America. The obituary gives the reader a clearer idea of who he was as a person, not just what he did in the world, as well.

Posted by deuts076 at 1:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I chose to analyze "Stoppard, Ruhl, Shakespeare will play at Park Square" from the Star Tribune to look at event coverage.

The main source of this story is the Park Square Theater, presumably by way of a public relations representative. The story, for the most part, simply announces the 2009-10 season for the theater. The focus of the story is not the shows themselves, but rather the people involved in the shows, either focusing on writers, directors or actors. It also names many of theses people's past awards or past projects they are well-known for. Outside of detailed information about the people involved in these shows, the story is little more than a listing. Without a greater focus or story to tell, it doesn't seem likely to capture a reader's interest, unless he or she is already interested in theater. However, it certainly gets to the heart of the news and what the reader would be interested in, specifically which shows will be performed and who is involved in them.

Posted by deuts076 at 9:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The story/press release I am analyzing for this entry is "Chris Coleman and other mayors protest plans to cut local government aid" from the Pioneer Press and the press release from the city of St. Paul about the same event.

The press release and the story contain many of the same elements. They both what funding will be slashed under Gov. Tim Pawlenty's proposed budget and what this will mean for the cities affected. They also both mention what St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman and other Minnesota mayors think is an important program to help support local governments, that of local government aid. The reporter did not put as much information about the program as was available in the press release, however. The story was more focused on numbers and also the bigger picture for the Minneapolis/St. Paul area, whereas the press release was more focused on the effect in St. Paul. The story also contained information about how cuts were already affecting police officers, something the press release didn't mention at all. The reporter clearly made a choice to find out more information about the issue than simply what was provided in the press release.

Posted by deuts076 at 12:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The story I am analyzing the first- and second-day reports of is "Courageous rescuers saved lives in Hastings, fire chief says" from the Star Tribune. The first story, which I briefed on Tuesday, Feb. 17, is no longer available online.

The lead of the first story was a straight news lead, telling the reader when and where the fire happened. The second story began with a more feature-style lead, putting the reader in the moment by showing him or her what a specific police officer was doing during a moment in the story - specifically knocking on doors and trying to get people to safety. The main news in the first story was that there was a fire in a Hastings apartment building. The main news in the second story was the bravery of police officers in getting people out of the apartment building during the fire. While both of them centered around the fire, they had slightly different focuses in doing so.

The second story advances the news by telling readers more about the fire and people's actions during the fire. It also reports how the fire was started, as that wasn't known at the time the first story was written. There were also many more people in the second-day story than there were in the first-day story, as the reporter had more time to talk to people and find out just what they saw and what was going on.

The second story doesn't seem to be a response to a report from a competing news organization, it just seems focused on giving a more accurate and personal account on what happened in the fire and who was affected by the fire. It seems like a pretty basic follow-up written to let readers know more about what was going on as more information became available.

Posted by deuts076 at 4:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I chose to analyze the structure of "Venezuelans Voting on Lifting Term Limits" from the New York Times.

The reporter began by telling the reader what the issue was in the lead - that Venezuelans were voting to lift term limits specifically so President Hugo Chavez could be elected again after his term ends in 2013. Information about the pros and cons of this idea and process, and how citizens feel about Chavez, was conveyed primarily through quotes of citizens. This way, the reader could get a brief taste of what others were feeling without the reporter actually writing "some people say this..." and "others say this..." and so on. The reporter then summarized some of the campaigning that had gone on leading up to the vote Sunday, such as protests and attacks. The reporter then included information about Chavez's relationship and views of the U.S. and of President Barack Obama. The story ended with a citizen opinion quote about Chavez.

This seemed to be a very effective way of structuring and ordering the story, because the reader understood the issue right away and why it was important to Venezuelan government. Both sides of the issue were presented fairly clearly and precisely. The reporter then took a step back and let the reader look at how this could affect the U.S. and why citizens here should care about what's going on in Venezuela. In the end, the reporter brought the story full circle back to the elections and how Venezuelan citizens feel about them, thus leaving the reader with what the actual facts and news value of the story. It could have been done differently in that the reporter could have re-ordered the information and perhaps moved the information about U.S.-Venezuelan relations up to earlier in the story and condensed it down a bit more, and moved all of the Venezuelan citizen reactions together, either at the beginning or the end of the story, but the way the reporter structured it was very effective, and perhaps just as effective as it could be if the story was structured a different way.

Posted by deuts076 at 1:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The story I'm analyzing for attributions is "Death Toll in Australia Fire Climbs to 108" from the New York Times.

In the story, the reporter names an Australian resident affected by the fire, John Ryan, Victoria state police, hospital officials, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, news media reports, authorities and John Brumby, the Victoria state premier. The information from all of these sources is scattered throughout the story, it isn't simply all clumped together.

The only sources specifically named in the story are Ryan, Rudd, and Brumby, although most of the information is from people, such as police or hospital officials. The only information that is specifically sourced from records is that from news media reports. The reporter primarily sets up attribution by stating information he received from a source and then attributing it to that source at the end of the sentence. It is quite effective and fairly easy to follow. At the end of the article, I had no questions about which information came from which source.

Posted by deuts076 at 5:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following is the lead from the Pioneer Press:

"A St. Paul man was shot to death Saturday doing what family members said he'd always done — looking out for one of them."

This lead immediately tells the readers some critical information right away in the lead. The "who" is a St. Paul man, the "what" is that he died, the "when" is Saturday, and the "how" is that he was shot. This lead doesn't answer the "where" question - where the man died - although it does address where the man was from.

The first part of this lead is pretty general. "A St. Paul man was shot to death Saturday" doesn't go beyond the bare facts of what happened. However, the second part of the lead, "doing what family members said he'd always done - looking out for one of them" is more detailed. It gives us more information about what kind of person this man was before he died, and why we as a community should care that he'd been shot and killed.

This lead has the elements of a straightforward hard-news lead, though it has a little more detail added to it than a hard-news lead usually does. The reporter likely chose this approach so readers don't just focus on what happened - a man was shot and killed - but also on who this man was, and why the loss of his life is a loss for the whole community. This lead makes the story more personal and important to the community than would a hard-news lead.

Posted by deuts076 at 2:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)