Anatomy of a news story

Bob CollinsBob Collins Jul 7, 2008
7

There was a story floating around this weekend that makes a wonderful exercise in ascertaining the difference between solid newspaper reporting and TV/video news fare. Perhaps the medium really is the message.

One story, one news organization. Two different messages and tones — one that is relatively scholarly,and one that is simply meant to scare the devil out of you.

See if you can figure out which is which.

The Associated Press story documents the increase in routine maneuvers at airports called “go arounds,” which — as the name implies — is when a pilot decides to abort a landing and go around for another crack at it. This can be warranted when another plane hasn’t cleared the runway or the approach just isn’t to the pilot’s satisfaction.

Here’s the “print version” carried by many newspapers (the Star Tribune carried a severely edited version of it). Nothing you’re about to read will make any sense if you don’t click the link and read the full story.

Here are the take-aways from this version of the story:

  • The “go around” is a routine maneuver. It’s not a tense situation.
  • Go-arounds haven’t been blamed for any crashes or midairs in over 30 years, but air traffic controllers worry that without more safeguards, an accident is inevitable.
  • The sources of knowledge in the story are a pilot, and several air traffic controllers.
  • The main problem is intersecting runways at large airports.

    The Associated Press also packages a video version of some of its stories for use on Web sites, using the same reporting as the basis of the story.

    Here’s how this same story was packaged for an online video audience:

  • The “routine maneuver” becomes the “dangerous maneuver” in the video version.
  • The air traffic controller and pilot are replaced with a scared passenger. “It’s a catastrophic accident waiting to happen,” the passenger says. We’re not giving any information about who this passenger is or why he’s considered an expert on flying airplanes.
  • The pilot who says “we’re trained in that maneuver, os it’s not a tense situation,” is replaced by a controller who says, “it gets your nerves going, it gets your adrenalin going, it gets your adrenalin a little too much going than we would like.”
  • The video version blames pressure from the airlines. The original version has no such claim. The video version also leaves out the fact the FAA has changed procedures at several airports and “found no safety issues” with certain practices.

    The person who did the original reporting is not the person who cobbled together the TV/video version. In the nation’s newsrooms right now, there is some occasional howling from reporters about having to produce their work for multiple “platforms.”

    The loss of a story’s integrity in this case provides a good reason why they should.