Saturday, March 14, 2009

Northern Ireland unites in mourning Catholic police officer

http://www.latimes.com/features/religion/la-fg-ireland-police14-2009mar14,0,758972.story

Northern Ireland unites in mourning Catholic police officer

First off. This story is really disheartening :( I feel for the people of Northern Ireland.

That being said, I really appreciate the lead here. This story has two key aspects that it bounces back and forth between: The actual death of Carroll and what it means for the police force and Northern Ireland as a whole. I can tell for sure that this is an effective lead because when I read the lead, I knew all the W's...the lead was well-written and it captures both the levels that this story works on. Last semester? I probably would have read this and not thought twice about it. But now that I have tried to write my own leads...i really appreciate what a thorough lead this is.

The following three paragraphs are a perfect example of the "inverted pyramid" explained in Harrower's book...The first paragraph of the story is an overview of the conflict in Northern Ireland, the next paragraph focuses the story further by explaining the police situation. The third paragraph focuses the story even further by explaining the murder, and then the fourth paragraph specifically addresses Carroll. The rest of the story is mostly details, and is a lot less organized then the first few paragraphs. In fact, I feel like it jumps around too much in some places and can be hard for the readers to follow.

Also, the most prominent piece of news is Carroll's murder, yet the murder itself wasn't explained until 2/3 of the way through the article. I feel like the writer could have focused more on Carroll's murder and then moved to the effects of it, so the reader is not wondering what happened to Carroll.

A few things I really appreciated were: first, the quotes. The quotes were meaningful and effective, and the sources were worthwhile. I don't feel like any quotes were wasted. Also, I don't think the story has any holes. It definitely covers a wide range of subject matter in such a concise story.

A few things that i think could have been done better include: run-ons. I know it sounds stupid, and that it's hard to cram everything into a sentence without creating run-ons, but sentences, like:

“So it was that hundreds of mourners from across the political and religious divide filled a church Friday in the town of Banbridge to pay their last respects to the first officer of the revamped force to be gunned down by a republican splinter group opposed to Northern Ireland's peace process.”

are hard to follow. Reading this in one foul swoop, without any breaks? My brain needs a rest to handle all this! can I get a period somewhere?

There are a lot of complicated, compound sentences like this in the article. In my opinion, it makes it seem rushed and cluttered. But at the same time, how do you include all the information in the article in a concise manner without these compound run-ons? Any ideas?

Overall, I thought it was a well-written piece, but could have been focused a little more.

Hope you all had a great weekend!

Peace

oh… and some inspiration for you all: “if you don’t become the ocean you’ll be seasick every day,” Leonard Cohen

1 comment:

  1. Some people suggest that writers give a section to each concept and then move on. One difficult thing about journalism is figuring out how much to assume the audience already knows. With international affairs, we usually answer, "Not much." That makes for lots of explanations in the text. Maybe we could pull some explanations out and run a glossary with the story. (foul swoop? fell swoop)

    ReplyDelete