Sharing my student wisdom with those who can stand it

I’m the arts editor for the Projector.

With the job comes several challenges. Three repeatedly come to mind, actually.

1. Knowing I’m not an expert editor, but having to act confident about my decisions.
2. Acknowledging and accepting the fact that there are bigger, more popular news sources than mine – this means my story lists must be extra unique to draw attention.
3. Being in charge of the arts sections often means a lot of event coverage – because we print every two weeks the news gets old fast, so it’s a challenge to try and encourage writers to find a broader way to cover an event… sometimes even I’m not sure.

This week I’m working on hiring arts editor interns. They'll run the Projector while second-year CreComms are on workplacement. The task is both exciting, because I get to play a part in scouting new talent, and overwhelming, because who am I to say who's the best? I’m also reminded that I was in their shoes last year – how much could I have possibly learned since then?

A lot actually.

This position made everything my instructors had been telling me over the past year make sense. I realized writing needed to be clear before it could be creative. I also realized no writer is perfect. Something can always be fixed. Editing is like solving a puzzle – the edges are easy, it’s completing the inside that’s tough, and that's when many people give up.

A few things I’ve learnt since working for the Projector is:

• That assuming proper nouns are spelt correctly, no matter how good the writer is, is a bad idea
• That leads and context couldn’t be more essential to a story – a writer who can do both is talented
• That formatting is an annoying thing to have to fix, but an easy thing to fix
• That no matter how hard you try to make submission instructions clear, there’s always going to be someone who gets it wrong – you just have to deal with it
• That the best stories are the hardest to edit but you have to stick with them because there’s going to be something to fix
• That it's always important to double check facts
• That it's important to understand one can never stop editing, but one needs to – it’s important to keep the original story
• That headline writing is so not my thing

When editing, I try and give students feedback as much as possible because I know I always appreciate it when people do it for me. But, while I hope they consider my advice when I'm offering it, I also hope they take it with a grain of salt – it was only a year ago I was in their shoes.

Acting confident is something I continuously work on, so I don’t have a solution for that yet. However, I think I can pull it off in front of student writers; I just have to put up with my brain’s internal arguments later.

The latter two challenges I feel are self-explanatory. Every paper, big or small, deals with competition. Every paper tries to be unique. The only thing that makes me think the Projector has particular challenges is the fact that we have a small distribution and students within the program often say it’s weak.

This is what drives me to try and be extra creative with my story lists...which leads me to my next point: you can only try so hard and then it’s up to someone else.

I hate assigning event coverage stories. I try not to. Either I’ll try and guide the assigned writer into a direction that uses an event to drive a larger story or I’ll say what the larger story could be.

It's not always successful in the end, but I have to trust the writer did their best. The writers also have to trust that I do my best, but my best still isn't perfect. Although I might've learnt the above list of things doesn't mean I'm great at it. Those writing for me and I are all students.

And at the end of the day, all we can do is fake it ‘til we make it.

I raise my hand

Why do academics write out their secondary sources in their essays but journalists don't?

Twitter: The industrial revolution of journalism

You’re probably sick of hearing about it, but here I go anyway.

Many people think social media, especially Twitter, is becoming one of the new faces of journalism. While I agree it is shaping the way we approach our news, I ask: Who really wants it to be like this?

My evidence suggests no one really, so who’s pushing so hard to make it happen?
Last weekend, the two most interesting stories in two major newspapers were lengthy investigative pieces. The Globe and Mail reported on Canada’s role in peacekeeping and the Winnipeg Free Press broke a story on the effects of no running water in Manitoba reserves. I mustn’t be the only one taking interest in these types of stories because they both made the front page.

In addition, while filming an entertainment profile for school, I got into a discussion with one of the interviewees who was saying she hates how TV news stories have been cut down so much and how there are fewer and fewer feature stories and documentaries. Those are the one’s she’s interested in, she said. Sure, it’s tough, funding for these types of projects is tricky due to the magnitude of the expense. But isn’t it worth it? If journalists only ever report on what happened that day, whether it is in their papers or via Twitter, then aren’t we only ever keeping records of events. How can we change things if we don’t look into the roots of the issues?

One of the reasons why I wanted to become a journalist was to do so. Oftentimes, I feel like that’s discouraged nowadays.

Why are journalists always trying to move quicker and quicker to get the stories done faster and faster? How much faster can we work until quality is absent and quantity becomes everything…or are we already there?

Why report on crimes?

I sat in the preliminary hearing of a murder trial today. Cool huh?

That’s what I thought at first as I sat there with my big fancy reporting pen and notepad. I felt important. I thought I might like to pursue crime reporting. And I was especially proud because I felt like a real journalist reporting on the stuff that matters.

And then I doubted myself: Does crime reporting matter?

It’s not like reporting on horrific acts like the murder trial I was in today is going to stop crimes from happening. And the details must just re-traumatize victims – I don’t want to do that.

But then again reporting on issues of crime could help keep the justice system in line. Think about Omar Khadr’s case: without the media’s constant attention to the issue, would we still know about him? Would the Canadian government still be trying (or pretending to be trying) to do something for the poor boy if it weren’t for the public outcries reported by media?

Usually, when I’m asked to explain why crime reporting might be necessary I just regurgitate one of my first year sociology class lessons. According to one of the best instructors I ever had, Helmut-Harry Loewen, society needs crime in order to function. Crime brings society together because those who hear of criminals on the loose look out for each other and start public awareness groups like MADD which in turn brings people together to help fight the acts. It gives us another reason to speak to each other and look out for one another. The repercussions from criminal acts also highlight the good and the bad people – by doing this we create ideals; we show what it takes to be accepted.

At least that’s the basis of Loewen’s point.

However, this explanation really only explains how crime reporting participates in the function of society. Is that really enough? In response I’ll choose to revert back to my initial question: why should we report on crime?

Mike McIntyre? Are you out there?

There's a time and a place for political protest

I think it’s repulsive.

Sunday’s University of Winnipeg graduation ceremony awarded Manitoba’s senior minister Vic Toews with an honorary degree, but many students in the audience and the ceremony's valedictorian, Erin Larson, didn’t agree with the offering. Fine. But take your political protests and keep them outside the ceremonies like the other polite protesters – don’t publicly humiliate someone for something they had no control over receiving.

The Winnipeg Free Press reported that during Larson’s speech, Toews sat only a few feet away from Larson keeping his eyes glued to his program and leaving through a side door “immediately” after the ceremony.

How sad.

Just because Toews doesn’t believe in the same things Larson does, doesn’t mean he should be humiliated in front of thousands of people, including his mother. He’s still human.

Larson argued Toews doesn’t support the U of W’s beliefs, but I thought universities existed to explore different belief systems and to learn how to tolerate other people who don’t necessarily believe in the same things as you. Not to mention Mary Agnes Welch’s article explains the decision to grant Toews an honorary degree was decided by faculty members and students, so clearly Toews is supporting several people from the U of W’s beliefs.

I’m not saying Larson didn’t have the right to disagree with Toews’ award; I’m saying she should have kept her protests outside the ceremony. Not only were Larson’s actions disrespectful they were immature.

(Photo from the Winnipeg Free Press)

Defining Thanksgiving through headlines

Interested to see how many ways Thanksgiving could count as a news story, I set out to compile a list of headlines written this weekend about the turkey gobbling festivity. What I didn’t expect to find is how each headline seems to define the holiday in some way or another too.

To accompany your leftovers, I present to you my list:

“A Canadian Thanksgiving” – eCanadaNow

“Stores open and closed on Thanksgiving Monday in Canada” – Business Review Canada

“Thanksgiving Surprise – A dog who raises money as an official volunteer with BC SPCA” – The Vancouver Sun

“Guide to opening, closing for Thanksgiving weekend” – Winnipeg Free Press

“Helping harvest a bountiful Thanksgiving” – Winnipeg Free Press

“Thanksgiving – as Canadian as pirates” – Winnipeg Free Press

“A Thanksgiving travesty” – Winnipeg Sun

“10 ways to add meaning to Thanksgiving” – Winnipeg Sun

“A sumptuous pork roast for Thanksgiving” – The Globe and Mail

“Siloam Mission expecting hundreds to enjoy their traditional Thanksgiving feast” – CTV News Winnipeg

“Volunteers help spread Thanksgiving cheer” – CTV News Toronto

“Students brings Thanksgiving to less fortunate” – CTV News Edmonton

“A Thanksgiving feast for vegetarians” – Canada AM

“Record breaking Thanksgiving” – CTV News

“Missions offer Thanksgiving for homeless” – CBC News Winnipeg

“Green Thanksgiving gains ground” – CBC News

The Globe Gets a Makeover

“If you don’t push yourself, if you don’t dare to make today better than yesterday; if you don’t believe in progress, you’re doomed to defeat.”

That’s the motive behind the Globe and Mail’s redesign – to attempt to reinvent the future rather than long for the old days, explained John Stackhouse editor-in-chief for the Globe and Mail.

Last Friday, the Globe launched “the most significant redesign in The Globe’s history.” It has colour on every page, some pages are printed on glossy paper, the size of the paper is narrower (which is a huge bonus for those who ride the bus to work or school everyday), the website is easier to navigate and it’ll be featuring more in-depth stories that explore the power and insight of ideas.

But the million dollar question is: Is the redesign effective and will it help save the future of the Globe’s print edition?

I think the layout portion of the redesign is effective in the sense that its use of colour helps draw readers in and because their switch in paper makes for much clearer pictures. Many readers have become lazy. They want to see pictures to peak their interest before committing to the story – so the crisper the better. And need I mention the smaller size again?

However, I question how much easier their new web design really is? I don’t think I’d have noticed the change had I not read the article in Friday’s paper. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

As to whether or not the redesign will help save the Globe’s future as a newspaper (because despite the fact that Stackhouse outlines all the ways The Globe is growing in readership, he seems to suggest saving their future is what they’re getting at when he says they’re not interested in prolonging the past but rather inventing the future) I think they’ve nailed my biggest concern for reasons why newspapers could flop – they’re trying to be what they used to be: about breaking news. The fact that the Globe recognizes print needs to be more in-depth makes them that much more competitive than other daily’s – in my opinion at least.

Overall, it’s nice to see the Globe realizes two things: (1) That print journalism should be investing in in-depth stories, because that’s where its future is heading – we have other outlets now for breaking news. (2) Hallelujah! The damn paper ain’t so clunky! Finally, a paper that realizes how many Canadians ride a bus or subway to work (excluding old fashioned, gas guzzling Winnipeg of course) and hate having to close up their paper just because someone sits next to them.

I give only checkmarks to John Stackhouse and the Globe team for realizing it’s time for a bit of tweaking.

To see what else the Globe and Mail did with their redesign, check out John Stackhouse's article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/community/digital-lab/a-new-globe-in-print-and-online/article1735935/?cmpid=rss1