Back to archive

Dec. 4, 2006

Dear AP Sounding Board members,

We asked editors of afternoon newspapers nationwide about AP's presentation of major news taking place later in the day, after PMs papers have gone to press.

AP has traditionally taken a featurized or analytical approach to such stories, putting the hard news element lower in the story. We wondered whether that approach is still the most effective, or whether a straighter approach focused on the upcoming event might have more appeal to readers.

Of the 17 editors who responded to the survey, about two-thirds preferred the straight approach over the featurized phrasing.

But the responses were almost evenly divided on two other questions: whether a newspaper headline on such a story would cite "today" and whether staff-written stories about same-day events would use a featurized or hard-news approach. In each case, about a third of the editors said the approach depends on the story.

Factoring in these responses and various other demands, AP has came up with this guidance to editors responsible for the PMs report:

Headlines will focus on the "today" angle – "Fed meets Tuesday to set interest rates"; the leads of stories will continue to emphasize the effect or context; and we'll put the time element no lower than the 3rd graf, preferably in the second – instead of burying it further down, as we've sometimes done in the past.

Full responses to the survey, along with your elaborating comments, make a very interesting forum. The issues raised cut across many of the challenges shared by every newsroom in America, including brevity and focus for greater appeal; improved approaches on second-day stories; getting photos out faster; emphasizing the human element; reducing typos and other errors.

Thank you for very valuable input, which will be posted at the Sounding Board link of the APME Web page.

— Dave Minthorn

Hope Stephan, executive editor, The Sentinel, Carlisle, Pa.

We much prefer the analytical lede. By the time our readers get the paper, they probably recall hearing something about the Fed (to use your example) planning to do something, and this gives us a chance to show them why they should care – and we'll direct them to the Web site for updates.

The hede has a 50/50 chance of saying "today." It depends on the story and how it's being played.

For local stories, we'd be more likely to use a time element, especially if we know our competitors don't have it. Of course, we'll be careful on how we coach it: "is expected to," "plans to" and the like. The debate we're having now is whether to continue The Sentinel's custom of writing stories in present tense ("The Fed will review rates today," Bernanke says.)

What would really help us is getting the budgets earlier. I'm told we used to receive the final state budget at 6 a.m. Now we get one at 4:30, which hasn't changed much from the day before, and a final one at 8:45, which is not helpful at all, because that page is long gone by then and it's pretty late to be ripping up A1. The national budget is moving around 3:20 and 7:15, with the A1 advisory at 8:10.

Our final page has to be off the floor at 9:32. We have papers in our hands at 10 a.m.

Thanks for asking.

Bill Felber, executive editor, The Mercury, Manhattan, Kan.

1. My general reaction is that deadline space is generally so tight that shorter is almost always better.

2. No.

3. Tend to be straight.

James A. Rousmaniere Jr., editor and president, The Keene Sentinel, Keene, N.H.

I don't recommend changing a thing. The news is in the lead already.

The lead on the Fed story is good as it is, given the complex nature of monetary policy affairs where some explanation and context is extremely important. Even if the substance of the story was more potent – say, the nation's central bank were to announce it was going to start pegging interest rates to the movement of the yen or rupee – the general reader would still benefit from a lead that explained so what.

The same line of thinking applies to local events: if context is needed, we will use it in the lead, sometimes in feature form. That's because, for many people, the fact of the actual news event may already be known, through Web, radio, text-message, cell or word of mouth.

We would probably emphasize the "today" element in the headline.

Rick Doyle, Editor, Walla Walla (Wash.) Union-Bulletin

1. Generally speaking, we are more interested in a feature or analytical approach to stories breaking later in the day. We aren't going to be the ones breaking the news. It will already be on television, radio and the Internet before our readers sit down after work to read the paper. We don't want to give them what they already know.

2. We probably wouldn't use the "today" headline because it will be old. We would want to focus on some other aspect than the specific action.

3. For local stories, it depends on the story. However, more and more we are adopting a featurized approach.

4. Under other thoughts: As we discuss stories for that day's paper more and more we are rejecting stories because our readers will already have read or heard the story if it is approached from a straight-news angle. We will refer readers to our Web site if they want that approach, but we are looking for stories they haven't seen for the printed version. This has led us to use more L.A. Times/Washington Post stories that haven't been all over the news or that are more people-oriented, analytical or useful to people's daily lives. Readers want to feel that they learn something they didn't know – or find something enjoyable to read – if they invest the time to read our paper. They don't want to say "seen that," "heard that," "read that."

Hasso Hering, editor, Albany Democrat-Herald, Albany, Ore.

1. Generally we prefer the straight approach. In many cases, though, we would probably leave out the story, knowing it it would be outdated by the time our readers look at the paper.

2. If we do run the story, "today" might very well appear in the headline. I wish it would also appear in the story itself. "Analysts expected the Fed to raise interest rates again today. The board was set to meet this afternoon ..."

3. In local stories, we try to report something that has actually happened, then refer to the pending action later today. Such as:

"The city staff has asked for a 10 percent increase in sewer rates effective Dec. 1. The City Council planned to consider the issue at a meeting this afternoon. (For the latest on that meeting, check democratherald.com)." Or something like that.

Ernie Schreiber, editor, Lancaster New Era, Lancaster, Pa.

1. For events later in the day, we prefer AP to dig out the story and break at least a piece of it before the event. If Bush is giving a speech at 1 p.m., we'd like AP to get hold of an advance text and move a story on at least one key part of it. "President Bush intends to tell the nation's veterans that he will increase pension benefits ..."

If the Federal Reserve is meeting at 3 p.m., we'd like: "The Federal Reserve is expected to halt its two-year campaign to raise interest rates, its chairman (or three board members or knowledgeable financial analysts) said today."

Given a choice only between a feature lede and a hard-news lede for a story on an event later in the day we'd prefer the brief, hard-news lede for our national briefs package. But quite likely, if there is no news beyond the fact of an upcoming event, we'd probably not use either version.

As a PM, we deal with this situation daily. We don't run a "City Council will decide on tighter gun regulations tonight." story. We call the council members, mayor, or council president, and figure out what they intend to do. Then we write a story on that impending action.

"City lawmakers, outraged by a string of drug-related shootings, say they will ban handguns from the streets of Lancaster. In interviews today, four of the five-member council said."

"For six weeks, southeast Lancaster residents have pleaded with lawmakers to stop the daily gun battles between drug gangs in their neighborhoods. Tonight they'll get their wish."

We prefer people-oriented, feature ledes to hard-news ledes. But we prefer solid news most of all.

2. We almost never use the word "today" in a headline, because it dates our stories. Many of our readers are reading us when they get home. If the headline reads "Federal reserve to act today," the reader knows this story is out of date. So we always focus on the news, not the time.

On my hypothetical gun story, our head might say: Council to druggies: We're taking your guns.

3. Four times out of five, we will use a featurized approach. Here are two examples from our front page on Friday:

Hot seller: local spinach

Shoppers buy home-grown supply after e. coli danger forces California spinach off shelves

Between customers this morning in Central Market, Ruth Thomas bagged fresh, local spinach. Lots of it. About 100 bags or more.

"This is the first day for it," she said at the Thomas Produce market stand. "We'll have no problem selling it."

In fact, it was all scooped up before lunchtime.

19 sought in heroin, coke bust

Wired informants bought drugs on city streets

They waited for more than a year. For months, they listened to phone conversations and recorded drug transactions. Undercover officers watched as informants bought heroin, crack cocaine and powdered cocaine on city streets. And then, this morning, dozens of law enforcement officers, armed with search warrants, swept across town ...

4. a) On major stories, we prefer 15- to 18-inch stories that round up all the major developments, keeping the most interesting news on top, and fresh smaller developments lower in the story.

Most mid-size papers do not have the room for two or more stories on one issue – Iraq, the United Nations, whatever. We end up rewriting the stories into one lede story.

Typically we'll take the latest death count from Iraq and combine it with other, more interesting Iraq stories.

When new developments occur, we do not necessarily want them to top the story, not unless they really are worth the lede.

Example: When the kidnapped baby was recovered this week, the appearance of the hero nurse on the Today show topped the story, pushing the most interesting part of the story – the nurse's discovery of the hidden birthmark – lower into the text. We had to rewrite to get that element back into the lede. (Or maybe we used an older version.)

b) On second-day stories, we do not want reaction, or follow-up, to push the entirety of the original event to the bottom of the story. If Bush gives an evening speech, our readers will expect a story that mixes what he said and the reaction to it. A story that has largely reaction on top, and original speech at the bottom is a weaker presentation of the news for our purposes.

c) We would appreciate if you move photos with the same urgency that you move breaking news. When Meredith Vieira appeared on the Today show last week, you moved the story rapidly. But the photographer hung around the studio until the show was over and barely got a photo on the wire in time for PM publication. Why can't a photographer shoot such an event for 15 minutes, transmit for 15 minutes and then return to shooting?

We faced the same situation when the kidnapped-baby nurse appeared on the Today show. No live photos moved in time for our use.

d) As newspapers transform themselves into Web-savvy multi-media news companies, the importance of getting news stories on the wire, on the air, on the net, throughout the morning/afternoon cycle is more important than ever.

The majority of news readers are tuning in to Web news sites between 9 and 5. Peak readership is around noon. AP should deploy its newsgathering and dissemination resources to capture that audience.

We have the feeling, perhaps erroneous, that AP news delivery peaks in late afternoon/early evening for the AM newspaper cycle. It may be time to reconsider staffing hours.

These opinions are far afield from your original inquiry. Still, I think it worthwhile to point out that the cycle of PMs is the cycle of greatest Internet readership. What benefits one, benefits both.

Bobby Allen, Snyder Daily News, Snyder, Texas

1. Straighter approach.

2. Yes

3. Depends on the story.

Steve Begnoche, managing editor, Ludington (Mich.) Daily News

1. I'd prefer the more direct approach. It's shorter, quicker and reflects how I'd headline it. By the time the announcement is made, readers could go the Web or they might be watching TV or listening to radio any ways.

2. My headline would likely include the time factor. If there is still an element of analysis in the story it might containing wording or a subhead that suggests what they may do.

3. My favorite response: It depends on the story. If we are fairly certain what the announcement will be we will already by looking for reaction, carefully couched to note the circumstance. If the outcome or announcement or issue is unclear, we might take a more feature/ analysis approach about what the possibilities are and what they might mean, or go through the issues in question.

4. If it was a big enough story, we would be noting in a pullout that it would be updated on our Web site. We have had good luck driving traffic to the Web for stories readers feel are important.

(Sometimes, stuff we think is important isn't as successful – but almost always a story with a note of a Web update later can expect some traffic.) On the interest rate story, I'd typically only use a few graphs – unless a major change was anticipated. I've generally decided a brief is enough because by the time readers see it, the decision has been made.

As our news hole tightens, my AP news hole has dramatically been reduced. I'm using more briefs and editing stories down. Then when you add the need to add design elements – pullouts, quote boxes, explainers, photos, graphs and so forth – space for the news tightens even more.

Stu Samuels, assistant managing editor, The Capital, Annapolis, Md.

1. The Capital may be somewhat unique as an afternoon paper, in that we can update such "advances" in our last edition as late as noon. That allows us to top many morning breaking wire stories. For such stories, the approach is somewhat moot, although I suppose a straight news lede would be easier to top from your point of view, and therefore faster for us to plug in. But for events later than that, I don't think we would want to remind our readers that we can't tell them what the news is because it broke after our deadline. A featurized or analytical approach at least makes the case for why it may be important news for them to follow the next day. Driving them to our Website is not an issue for us, at least not yet, since we currently only post locally generated stories.

2. Again, we don't normally advertise in headlines what we can't deliver in a story.

3. Since we always try to provide "tomorrow's news today," we tend to try to cut right to the chase in breaking local news; it is our bread and butter, since we often get the first shot among print media in this market at overnight police and government meeting news, as well as morning events.

4. Where we need help in staying ahead of the curve is second-day AP stories about major events or disasters. While AP generally does a good job of trying to featurize follow-up stories, it seems that often after a big plane crash, for example, we don't see that second-day color story describing the last minutes inside the plane or dramatic heroism on the ground until it is too late in our cycle (our wire pages go first). It seems the reporting ended with the A.M. deadlines the night before, and will resume once the bureaus return to work in the morning. Obviously, in our 24-7 world, we are always looking to offer our readers something more from a story than the morning papers or Good Morning American had (rather than a recap pegged on a morning FAA news conference in which officials say it's too early to tell why the plane crashed). Usually, emphasizing the human element is a priority for us in such stories, since by the time our readers receive our paper that evening, they have seen or heard all the breaking news about that crash.

Steve McClure, managing editor, Moscow-Pullman Daily News

1. I would prefer the straight approach, especially if a time reference (as in decision expected at 6 p.m. tonight) is incorporated fairly high in the story. That would help send people to our Web site to see what has changed.

2. Our headline likely would depend on when a decision was expected. As an afternoon newspaper in the West (read Pacific Time zone), a decision expected at 4 p.m. EST means what leaves our newsroom at noon PST is no longer the most recent information. That likely would be reflected in our headline.

3. Whenever possible, we will use a people-focused lead. Call that featurized if you want, but the news still will be in the first two graphs. If we can't find people we'll start with a straight summary lead, and then wonder whether we tried hard enough to find people.

4. As I mentioned previously, the time zones create a bit of a challenge for us. Regionally, our interactions with AP have been good in terms of stories developing throughout the morning because the AP folks in Seattle, Spokane and Boise provide us with specifics (i.e. "we should move a write-through by 11:15 a.m."). I don't expect AP New York to do that for a small daily in northern Idaho, but expanding the tag "write-through expected by ...." would be helpful. If we're trying to decide whether to hold a page for a late-developing story, telling me a new version is coming "shortly" doesn't give me enough information to make an informed decision.

Also, I do appreciate people-focused stories – particularly on a p.m. cycle because it gives our stories a different feel than the morning editions. Also, I think readers would rather read a quick, snappy lead about a person dealing with immigration laws than a 52-word lead that tries to summarize the debate over immigration reform.

Jim McCarthy, managing editor, The Times Record, Brunswick, Maine

1. I wish I could give you a straightforward, definitive answer. Unfortunately, the reality is that I and other editors at The Times Record use both versions offered by the AP. I personally like the featurized approach, but my wires editor tends to like the straighter approach. I think having the option to go either way serves us best: It gives us the opportunity to compare one version against the other, and make our judgment on which one grabs our attention (and, hopefully, readers' attentions) best.

2. As an afternoon daily, yes, we try to emphasize the "today" aspect as much as we can ... if not in the headline, then certainly in the dropheads that we use with Page 1 stories. We frequently follow the suggested headline language provided by the AP.

3. Same answer as Question 1. It depends on the nature of the story. For the harder news stories, whether by AP or by a Times Record reporter, we tend to prefer the 'straight-to-the-chase' approach; for softer news, we encourage the featurized approach.

4. Thanks for asking our input. I think, by and large, we are well-served by the Associated Press. On most major stories, what's available to us in the morning is significantly different enough than what ran in our morning competition, the Portland Press Herald, to justify placement on our Page 1 as well. And, there are many stories that break on our cycle and appear on the wire soon enough for us to get first crack at and beat the morning dailies. I've got no major complaints; my only minor complaint is that there seems to be greater frequency of typos in AP news stories than I remember being the case when I was the wires editor. I assume it's due to budget cuts and having fewer editors to oversee copy before it hits the wire. If that's not the case, I'd encourage some workshops in copy-editing per the AP style guide.

Randi Kallas, city editor, Rochester (Minn.) Post-Bulletin

1. We prefer the straight approach. If we're doing things right on the copy desk, the copy editors/page designers should be inserting a box that says 'For updates on this story, go to our web site ...'

2. Our headline would NOT focus on the today part of the story but rather on the effect of the story, something like 'Energy prices could hold interest rates in check.'

3. We'll vary on the approach to a local story. If it's a hard news story, such as a homicide or court story, we'll more than likely go relatively straight with it – again with a box saying 'For updates ...' If it's a softer news piece, we'll go with a feature approach, such as featuring the person putting the program together or the crew of volunteers needed to make a program come off.

4. We're trying to concentrate on the fact that readers want us to get right to 'what does this mean to me' so we are trying to be more direct in how we assign, write and display stories. We're doing more bulleted items with pure statements of fact. Such as:

• What's happening: Federal Reserve Board meets today.

• Why: Considering raising interest rates banks pay on their loans.

• How's this affect me: If banks have pay higher interest rates for the money they get, they'll charge you more for the money they loan you.

Bill Kisliuk, managing editor, Napa Valley Register, Napa, Calif.

1. Straighter approach.

2. Most likely.

3. Probably feature, but it would depend on the quality of the feature lede/anecdote.

4. Appreciate you thinking of us.

Renee Carey, editor, News-Argus, Goldsboro, N.C.

We would prefer the reference to the event as "happening."

We would be more likely to use the featurized approach on the second-day followup.

Our readers know that something important is happening because we keyed them into the possibility – so we are a bellringer for what's coming up that day for those who buy from our racks and an alert for those who might want to check out the rest of the story on their own because it is of special importance to them. Everyone else catches up the next day when we tend to have a "what does this mean" approach.

So, long answer, short question aside: Yes, please, use the "this is what's happening today" approach.

Now, the rest of the questions:

1. Give it to us straight.

2. It depends on how big the story is. The bigger the story, the more of a chance we take with "today". For most stories, no, probably not, although sometimes it is to our advantage if we have been able to get an early write-thru and have been able to give readers a glimpse of what happened that day and we play up that we were there "first."

3. Straight to the chase. Follow up next day with that day's developments.

4. Thanks for asking what we think.

Sherry Matthews, editor, The Simpson Independent, Clinton, N.C.

1. Straighter approach.

2. If I use it on that day, yes. Sometimes stories come too late for my early afternoon edition.

3. Mostly straight to the chase.

4. For first stories on an event for our newspaper readers, I think the straighter lead is better; on second and third stories, the featurized lead works well.

Lisa Farmer, editor, Dunn Daily Record, Dunn, N.C.

1. Featurized.

2. We very rarely use any AP that's not packaged, state of sports, so it's a nonissue with us.

3. Anything that makes it sound different than the morning papers.

Michael A. Chihak, Editor and Publisher, Tucson Citizen, Tucson, Ariz.

1. Straight approach.

2. Yes.

3. Both.

4. When big stories break early in the morning, the AP often seems to forget that PMs newspapers are on deadline. We want the news and photos straight and fast. In the past two or three years, the AP has failed to deliver timely stories and/or photos on the following PMs deadlines:

• Terri Schiavo death (took 45 minutes from the initial bullet to deliver a printable story).

• St. Peter's square vigil for the dying Pope John Paul II (couldn't deliver a photo of the throngs despite its constant appearance on TV cable news and broadcast news).

Dave Minthorn, manager, AP News Administration, coordinates the questions and answers. Newspaper editors wishing to suggest a topic can send an e-mail to Minthorn at dminthorn@ap.org.

Back to archive