What makes a good lede?

In a gamer, I want to know what the main cause of the win/loss and the score within the first graf, if it fits.

In a feature, I want to know why I should continue reading and what makes that person's story different than the 1,000s of others I have/will read.

 

The second person question is one of preference, but what I would like to know is how many column inches were used setting all of that up?

Some people really are space conscious. But some days, I know, there is tons of space to fill.

 

That was pretty much it, scoop. I was playing enough basketball (playground ball, sure, but still playing) back then to have an idea of what goes through your mind when you're guarding somebody tough. What you look for, what your reaction is when you realize somebody is just flat-out better than you and there's nothing you can do about it. Then, I tried to put the reader in those shoes.
And what actually gave me the idea for that lede was watching one of the kid's games. He was bringing the ball up the court, got about two steps past halfcourt, and absolutely juked a guy out of his shorts with a flick of the wrist (like he was going for a crossover, but didn't) that I and maybe five other people in the gym saw. I felt lucky to have noticed it, it was so quick.
As for not missing? Well, at that point he wasn't missing much. Like I said, he was averaging just under 30 a game at the time.
I see your point on second person, though, and it's not something to use often. Just felt it worked in this case, as a different way to suck the reader into a long feature story.

Again, FWIW, this story placed second in the state press awards that year behind another story I wrote. Either this board is one tough crowd, the judging was done on arts and crafts day at the state mental hospital, or everything else in our division sucked ass.

 

Pretty funny Batman that a second-person lede that seems to specifically address a group of readers, is short and to the point, doesn't work in your mind.
Yet your rambling piece of fictional "you" lede -- what was that, about 10 graphs with no point? -- is an award winner.

I have no problem with where you were trying to go with the second-person lede. It just didn't get where you wanted it to go. I think the "you" is vague, and I think it rambles on way too long.

 

I'm 31, Grimace. Guess I was under 30 when that was written, it's been a couple years now.
It could have been rewritten, sure. Maybe watch him during a shootaround or something when he's on, and describe that scene, the reactions of his teammates and coaches. But would it draw the reader in as well? Did that one draw the reader in?
I like to think this one did it better than the other way. If it didn't, if I didn't feel comfortable with it, I wouldn't turn it in.

That's why I like my shop and my editor. Even though we're small (15K), we have the freedom to stretch our legs and do that sort of thing once in a while. A couple times a year we'll have stories that are worth those 40 or 50 inches, and we'll give it what it deserves. In those cases, I like to use long, storytelling ledes like that, hit a stopping point and then break the story into two or three sections.
That lede was 6 or 7 inches, IIRC, out of a 50-inch feature. It ran on Christmas Day, when nothing else was going on and we had an early deadline. So we had the space.

 

A good lede provides the most information in the least number of words.

A great lede is indefinable, since it's a work of art and thus judged subjectively. For one story it might be a quote, for another an anecdote, for another even a question. The more rules you put into it the more you restrict yourself.

I think it's important to mix it up and take chances from time to time but go with the good, basic lede more often than not. If you can't come up with something you really like there's always a simple, effective lede that will do the job.

 

I like that...."act like you care."
That makes a heckuva difference in writing any story.
Caring doesn't mean liking the team or the game, but caring about your story, about your readers.
Don't fake it.

 

A straight up lead probably wouldn't have caught my eye in the allergy story. Considering the subject, it probably would have bored me to tears.

I believe style should be a guideline. For new writers, it should be the bible they go by. But I don't think it should be so rigid that there's no room for maneuver in a story that isn't a breaking hard news story.

Is a second person lede ideal style? No. But in my opinion, the lede worked for the reason that it gave me vivid imagery that roped me in to read the rest of the story -- and use a wire story when I normally try to avoid running wire.

 

Ick.

What if the reader has never played basketball in his/her life? Then it doesn't make sense and as stated previously, a lede should bring the casual reader as well.

I'm with the people who oppose using "you."

I really think it would've added more to the story to replace "you" with an actual person or example in this case. Why write "you" when you could've wrote something like, "Rottencrotch has the skills no one in the Gigantic 12 conference can compare with ... the shooting skills comparable to a sniper ... the quickness of a cheetah ... etc., etc." Corny, I know, but just examples.

 

The more I look at the allergy lede, the more it grows on me, Forever. You're right about how it makes you read at least the first bit of what could be a rather dull story. I think, at first glance, the "sad sacks" line just came across like a drill sergeant barking at me.
And I'd be with everybody who says it's not ideal for a hard news story or a gamer. If my example had been from a gamer where the guy scored 50 points, I'd be retching along with everyone else. Done right, though, it can work in features.
It's like farting -- in the right setting, it's OK and some people even enjoy it. In the wrong one, it's a disaster and you become an outcast.

 

Yes, you're wrong. Jimmy Cannon used it.

 

I'm a little torn on the second-person debate.

I don't mind Batman's lede, although I think it could have been written sharper, more vividly. If you're writing second person, I think the goal should be for your reader to feel as though it is him in the scene -- that if it's done right, "you" somehow really does feel like you. That you're right there.

I've used it once, at the suggestion of my editor -- never would have used it in a million years otherwise -- and I think it made the piece. I think it worked because it was describing situations that we all deal with -- homesickness, loneliness -- but in an extraordinary setting that none of us has experienced. I think there it might have helped put the reader in the same situation as the subjects, made it easier to relate to their predicament.

Then again, I'm not going to name it, but I can remember reading one story, by a big writer in a big magazine, that was written entirely in the second person, and I couldn't finish it. I found it exhausing and distracting and terrible.

So, I can see both sides of the debate here. I'd say that the second person can be used effectively, but only in a very specific circumstance and even then, when used sparingly and with a light touch.

You are staring at your computer in a press box... You are trying to explain what you mean, trying to write about writing, and you're just not nailing it... So you say fuck it and go watch batting practice...