Indonesia Crash
The article titled "U.S. picks up missing jet signal," found on CNN.com discusses how a U.S. Navy ship picked up signals from the black box of an Indonesian plan that crashed on New Years Day. The article also gives a re-cap on the previous accident explaining the crash; the evidence of the plane going down into the ocean and the 102 deaths.
The reporter wrote a very clear and straightforward lead for this article, stating what the event/news was right off the bat. It includes the most recent news about the even in general, but also relates it to the previous event. This helps remind the reader why this is relevent. The most important thing in this case - what happened - is the question the reporter answered in the lead; he did not answer the questions how, why, when, where, etc. The reporter also included the fact that 102 people on board the Indonesian plane died when it crashed. That fact will grab the readers' attention.
This article can be found here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/01/25/indonesia.plane/
The second article, titled "Black Boxes From Indonesia Crash Found," on the CBS News website has a lead similar to the first article in terms of language and form; however, it seems a bit more wordy than the first. The CBS article uses "jetliner" instead of "plane" and explains that flight date recorders are "black boxes." The second article also explains where the plane, or "jetliner" crashed ("into the sea") and indicates that this information was given on Thursday. It is informational and straightforward.
This article can be found at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/25/ap/world/mainD8MSAAB80.shtml
Personally, I think the first article's lead is better than the second because it concentrates only on the important facts. Like I stated above, the reporter decided that what happened was the most important, not the when or where necessarily (although he mentions this later). The fact that the first article notes the deaths involved in the event is intriguing. The second article, in my opinion is a little too wordy. The details that are given is still valuable information; however it seems to be a lot of words and information for a lead, and one sentence. The fact that people died in the crash is not mentioned, which would potentially grab the reader's attention the most.
Comments
Nice job.
Something caught my eye about those leads you pointed out.
Why are they nearly exactly the same?
CNN:
A U.S. Navy ship has picked up signals from the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder of an Indonesian plane that crashed on New Year's Day, killing all 102 people on board, the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta said.
CBS:
The U.S. Navy has picked up signals from the flight data recorders, or black boxes, of an Indonesian jetliner that crashed into the sea on New Year's Day with 102 people onboard, the U.S. Embassy said Thursday.
It's almost like one of the leads is the original and then the other plagarized or something. I guess this is the first time I have really read and looked closely at articles on the same issues from different publications.
Is this a common practice? Should we expect leads to be this similar across the board, or is it just a rare instance?
I just find it weird because they are strikingly similar...
Posted by: Kyle J Pendergast | January 26, 2007 12:23 PM
Allison, please review Page 36 of Strunk and White regarding punctuation and quote marks.
Regarding Kyle's comment... I wouldn't attribute such similarity in leads to plagiarism. When people have great skill and lots of practice writing the news, and strive for objectivity, sometimes very similar stories result. Note, for example, Dan's comparison of coverage in the Star Tribune to the Pioneer Press.
This tendency toward similarity is not limited to the journalistic profession. Many times, except with a truly complicated diagnosis, doctors will come to the same conclusion and prescribe the same meds. Generals will engage in similar tactics on the battlefield. A certain degree of similarity can be attributed to mastery of a craft, and coming to nearly identical conclusions about how something should be handled. This happens in all kinds of crafts, and right now you are learning the craft of journalism. :)
Posted by: John Hoff | January 31, 2007 3:09 AM