1,5, & 7

CRIME & JUSTICE:

I thought it was interesting that the chapter notes that "Most reporters have no criminal justice background when assigned to cover crime. Whether a reporter plans a year or a lifetime on the beat, news organizations should help the journalist get off on the right foot by allowing adequate time and resources for training." While I do think that some training is necessary -- just so the reporter knows what the police officers and lawyers are talking about -- I think there's some benefit to going into a story a bit confused...because most of a reporter's audience will be just as oblivious to what goes on in the legal world. Not knowing too much about your subject ensures that you can report about it in terms that the general public will understand.

"Cops are leery of journalists, and many journalists are cynical about cops. Perhaps this is healthy."
This cop-reporter comment is interesting, and I think it points to the fact that reporters should ALWAYS check information that is given to them by ANY source, even a source that has been reliable in the past. The fact that the author -- who worked a crime beat in NYC -- mentions doing this when dealing with cops, in particular, is kind of funny.

A tip for developing a good relationship with your editor: Don't whine.
Thanks for that.

I liked that the author says it's okay to ask your editor for a two-week training period before starting a crime beat. I would want to shadow police officers, meet sources that my predecessor had good relations with, and do some of the other things the author suggests you do to get to know a beat before I'd start writing. Before reading this chapter, though, I might've been too afraid to ask.

Avoid making a stand-alone crime appear as if it were part of a general trend; don't downplay a trend by making it appear to be a stand-alone crime: I think this was advice will stick with me, because it's something I've never really thought about before. But it's true: Reporters need to frame their stories appropriately. Every individual story that can be used to tell a larger story should do so.

CRIME AND ITS VICTIMS

"It's not uncommon for some individuals to pass out or be unable to stand...If you see someone who is in that state, it's best to leave them alone." Made me laugh out loud.

This chapter used the term "wolfpack journalism." It was the first time I'd heard this term used. They used it in reference to an aggressive, get-the-facts approach to interviewing. But "wolfpack" also made me envision a group of journalists at a press conference, questioning the lawyer/police chief in a team effort to get the information they all need to write what will probably be very similar stories. I like the term "wolfpack journalism." It implies that journalists are primarily concerned with doing whatever it takes to get the information that readers need to know in print, even if it means sharing that information with reporters from other news agencies. "Wolfpack journalists" are aggressive for the sake of their readers, not for the sole purpose of beating out the competition.

"Focus on active listening. Constant interruptions or questions can often get the storyteller off track. You want to become a visual dictionary for your readers, describing and sharing significant details."
I think this is good advice for any interviewing situation, except in investigative journalism. I think it's important to make the interviewee feel you find the information he or she is sharing to be valuable. Reporters should ask quesitons that illicit good responses, not tell the interviewee what it is they're trying to say, what the reporter wants to hear. In investigative journalism, this is different: Sometimes reporters know more information than they let on, or have heard a side of the story that the interviewee has not -- then they can be more accusatory and try to get the truth, what the reporter has determined to be true, out of the interviewee.

COVERING THE COURTS

"More than anything else, the law shapes and holds our society together." This comment really struck me. Laws do hold our society together, I won't argue that, but I will say that most crime and court beat reporters focus on how the law tears society apart. Divorce, custody battles, discrimination in the workplace -- when reporters talk about these issues they usually talk about the shortcomings of the legal system and how the law sometimes has a difficult time "holding society together." Few court and crime stories focus on the law's ability to successfully maint peace and order in society.

"The law controls how these things affect our lives. It is crucial that reporters not only translate the often arcane into language that all can understand, but that they connect the rulings and decisions in individual cases to the everyday lives of our citizens." This bit further highlights the point I made in response to chapter 1 about going into a beat without expert knowledge.

The author stresses studying up on appropriate legal background information relevant to the case. He recommends doing this by getting in touch with men and women in the field willing to talk to you and put legalese into everyday terms. My only concern is finding these "touchstone sources." Will I inherit them from my predecessor? Will my editor recommend some names to me? Will I be on my own, and if so, what steps should I take to find these men and women? I wish the author had touched on this a little more.