I like narrative leads -- but not this one

Frank rules.

 

just because the information is in the hed doesn't mean we don't need to mention it in the story. still has to be in there - but, seriously, does it need to be in the two or three sentences right after we read it in bold, 62 point type? why? does it somehow make it mean something more if we read it right after we see the hed? I seriously am confused why this is an issue. my take has always been that the story is one part of the presentation. the hed, subhed, photo, cutline and story all work together to tell the story we want readers to see. readers got their information in one part - the first part they see - of the story. so that's out of the way. sure, remind them later in the story what happened. that's part of it. but we don't need to spit it out immediately after. the times story was the first I read, and I had no problem with it - I wanted to know the details. I wanted to know what he hell brought these people to this point. because I saw the shocking news in the headline and already knew the 'what.' I wanted to know the 'how,' and the 'why.' I wanted to know the bigger story.

 

I will continue to believe, until somebody convinces me otherwise -- and absolutely no offense, jps, but you haven't done so -- that the writer turns in the story as something that can stand on its own in telling readers what happened.

I suppose in this new newspaper world, the case could someday be made that the desk says to the writer, "Hey, John, don't sweat the big details high up in your story, we got that covered" ... but I'm not willing to accept that as the way things should be done yet.

 

SANTA'S SLAY RIDE

Skips church usher gig
to be naughty (kills 9)
instead of nice

 

You should work for the N.Y. Post.

 

You are all nice folks and everything, but at some point you will get it that anyone worth out-writing in the industry is gone. Um, sorry, but...

Yeah, we all used to have a soft spot for narrative leads, but those of us who moved on to write for non-profits _ hey, never knew what kind of Christmas bonuses they provided until this year!! _ have discovered that looking back is insane. No one I used to wrangle with for Pulitzers or APSEs is left...Only the losers are left. Sorry...but, yeah, the poster is right....narrative leads rule, just not when all the writers have fled...

 

Sorry, Flea, but there are still plenty of people in the daily print business who can write really well. Just fewer.

 

sf ... is the headline on top of your story not, essentially, part of your story? It's not always written by you (depending on the shop, of course), but that doesn't mean it isn't part of your story. Every story has a hed and every hed has a story.

 

Ah, Frank. I know your model. I've lived your model for two decades. Problem is, Frank, that we woke up one day in the past five years and our model didn't work. Not discussing the business model. The model of delivering news.
The newspaper is a mule in a thoroughbred race.
Perspective, first-hand perspective, delivered in tandem with the news accounts is our offering. Whether that works, we will see. But, clearly, it's our best shot.

(SF, I understand your point. Of course it's valid. I was hoping to address the larger picture of storytelling a story which had been properly vetted for 26 hours before a newspaper reader saw the piece the following morning.)

 

Sure...I still think the story has to stand on its own. A fair disagreement.

 

I don't really disagree with you, honestly. it should stand. but, in this instance, this was a second-day story, despite running on the 'first day.' so I don't think there's a problem with the information being a little lower in the story. readers know what they're reading about - they've already read and seen it. and, for the few that haven't, they got it in the hed, subhead and, likely, photo/cutline. it isn't like it was missing - it was there.

 

Right. I think him missing the church usher gig should have gone in the hed. Says "read me" very emphatically.

Sorry, man, I know you're a pro. But major blood-and-gore tragedy in your own backyard is not the time and place to fuck around and try to prove some point about the future of print journalism and demonstrate how cutting-edge you can be. It's the time to be extremely straightforward -- you can experiment on something else. It's common decency and common sense.