Category: Journalism

  • When the clock ticks

    When the clock ticks

    I always respond the same: Give me a deadline you feel you can comfortably meet and then I can put it on our publishing calendar. What I don’t want is for the person to give me an early date and then not be able to meet it.

    So, how does a reporter writing a story for News Decoder come up with that deadline? It comes down to “doability”. That means what it says: what you can do, what is feasible. In determining doability, it helps to look at the opposite: Something that isn’t doable.

    Some things are difficult.

    What makes something not doable? The idea for the story is great, but realistically you won’t be able to interview anyone for it. Wouldn’t it be great to do a story on Russian hackers? But do you know any Russian hackers or anyone who knows Russian hackers? What about a story on the wealthy people giving money to political campaigns? Again, do you know anyone or can you realistically reach anyone who would give you information about that?

    In assessing the doability of a story, the first question to ask, then, is where your information will come from. You might not need to know key sources personally, but you need a way to be able to reach them and a reason to feel confident that they will talk to you.

    The second criteria is your financial wherewithal. To find the information, will you need to travel to get it? Do you have the money and time to do that?

    Third, if the subject deals with an uncomfortable subject — sexual assault, race, abortion, religion or suicide, for example — do you have the emotional resolve to be able to ask people difficult questions about their experiences? Not everyone can do that. You need to be honest with yourself about your willingness to tackle such topics.

    Last, what other responsibilities do you have that might interfere? How much time do you have to work on the story? If you have classes to attend or a job, will you only have a few hours here and there? That needs to be part of your calculation on how long it will take you to do the story.

    Many editors want to see these criteria explained when you pitch the story. They want to know that you have a solid plan for getting the information you need and the interviews to humanize the story. They want to know that you also have the wherewithal to do it.

    Be conservative. That means never overpromise. If you think it will take 20 hours to do the story, allow for 30. If you think you will need to spend $100 on travel costs, budget twice that. If you think you can turn in a story by Friday, promise it for the following Wednesday.

    No reporter was ever fired for turning in a solid story early. But if you want more story assignments you need to always, always turn them in when you promise them.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why are deadlines so important in journalism?

    2. What is one piece of advice the author provides for meeting deadlines?

    3. Did you ever have a deadline that was difficult to meet? How did you handle it?

     

    Source link

  • A partnership across the Atlantic to inform the world

    A partnership across the Atlantic to inform the world

    Preety Sharma is a public health and development consultant currently based in Northern India, near the border with Nepal. She is also a News Decoder correspondent, one of dozens who came to News Decoder through a journalism fellowship at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto.

    For more than five years, the University of Toronto and News Decoder have partnered to help train health professionals in journalism, with the goal of meeting this need: Too much disinformation in the world about important health issues and too much factual information presented to the public in articles that are difficult to read.

    Under the program, mid-career professionals spend a year in journalism training at the University of Toronto and as part of the program, pitch stories to professional news organizations. But to get published, the articles must meet the strict standards of each news organization that accepts the story pitches.

    To publish on News Decoder, for example, the stories must be written in way that is accessible to young people and to those who read English as a foreign language. This is challenging for many professional journalists. The stories must also have a global angle and show how the problems in the stories play out in different parts of the world.

    Sharma’s first story for News Decoder was on how a relatively inexpensive food product made from algae could be the solution to ending world hunger. Another story she wrote, on the problem of plastics in children’s toys, became News Decoder’s most-read story of all time.

    “My first couple of stories were with News Decoder,” Sharma said. “I am glad to have had an opportunity to share it with a diverse and young audience globally.”

    Sharma is now a News Decoder correspondent, someone who writes periodically for the site.

    Bringing specialized knowledge to journalism

    Marcy Burstiner, News Decoder’s educational news director, has worked with Sharma on all her stories and thinks the Dalla Lana program and its partnership with News Decoder is unique and important. “When I taught university journalism, I often told science majors that they should consider going into journalism,” she said. “There are a thousand medical publications but they are not written with a general audience in mind and meanwhile most journalists lack the specialized knowledge to really understand and put into context what is happening in medicine and the hard sciences.”

    For News Decoder, this problem is particularly important, she said. “Health and science are two subjects that young people are hungry for information on and that’s our target audience,” Burstiner said. “But, because so much of the information is dense, they turn to sites on the internet that present pseudo science and they can’t tell the difference.”

    Sharma agrees. “In the age of fake news and social media information explosion, it is crucial to have a credible and trusted media outlet that can present complex issues, ideas and concepts to youth in a simple and educational style,” she said.

    News Decoder Founder Nelson Graves said that the partnership between the University of Toronto and News Decoder was a win-win proposition from the start. “Fellows at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health have a chance to publish stories examining some of the world’s most pressing issues on our global platform,” he said. “They benefit from editing by journalists with deep international experience.”

    The students in News Decoder’s global community and readers around the globe also benefit from the fellows’ reporting and insights, he said and that helps to maintain News Decoder’s breadth and depth.

    “News Decoder’s association with the University of Toronto encapsulates our nonprofit’s commitment to global citizenship and to fostering connections across borders and between generations,” Graves said.

    Connecting with young people

    Correspondent Norma Hilton also came to News Decoder through the University of Toronto’s fellowship in global journalism. Her first story was on K-Pop and social media influencers, a topic that’s important to News Decoder’s teen audience. Hilton said it was a great learning experience. “I’d never really written for a youth audience or taken more of an education angle to my stories before,” she said. “So, it was great to understand what young people want to hear about and write for them.”

    Hilton is also one of many University of Toronto fellows who have not only written stories for News Decoder, but become an integral part of the News Decoder team. She participated in workshops and cross-border roundtables with students and produced articles and videos that serve as journalism tutorials on such things as how to cover events, how to fact-check articles and how to cover traumatic situations.

    “I’ve never really thought I’d be on a panel of any kind, but being able to talk about my journalism experience and hopefully help younger people be interested in journalism and its power, has been the honour of a lifetime,” Hilton said.

    News Decoder Managing Director Maria Krasinski argued that the partnership with the University of Toronto is unique. “Neither of our organisations is a traditional journalism school,” she said. “Rather, we both recognize that learning journalism skills helps people, no matter their discipline or profession, communicate clearly and with impact.”

    She said that, for the students News Decoder works with, journalism is an entry point, a way to take action and engage with the issues affecting their communities and participate meaningfully in civic dialogue. “Young people discover that journalism isn’t just writing stories, it’s about learning to question, to listen and to make sense of the world,” she said.

    For the University of Toronto fellows, meanwhile, the journalism fellowship adds a powerful new skill to their already impressive toolkits. “It helps them translate their knowledge and expertise into stories that resonate beyond academic and industry circles,” Krasinski said. “Many of the fellows stay connected to News Decoder well after their fellowship ends. They are based all over the world and bring a diversity of perspectives and experience that enriches our news platform.”

    Source link

  • Can we close the “knowledge gap”?

    Can we close the “knowledge gap”?

    Can we close the “knowledge gap”?

    Source link

  • When young people ask big questions and seek answers

    When young people ask big questions and seek answers

    Cliffrene Haffner attended the African Leadership Academy (ALA) in South Africa during the Covid-19 pandemic. Her university applications were stalling and she felt stressed and anxious.

    “Life felt unstable, as if I were hanging by a thin thread,” Haffner said. But it was at ALA that she discovered News Decoder.

    “Joining News Decoder helped me rebuild my voice,” she wrote. “It created a place to write honestly and with purpose whilst supporting others in telling their stories. At a time when the world felt numb and disconnected, we used storytelling to bring back hope on campus by sharing our fears, thoughts and expectations.”

    At News Decoder, students work with professional editors and news correspondents to explore complicated, global topics. They have the opportunity to report and write news stories, research and present findings in global webinars with students from other countries, produce podcasts and sit in on live video roundtables with experts and their peers across the globe.

    Many get their articles published on News Decoder’s global news site.

    A different way of seeing the world

    Out of these experiential learning activities, they take away important skills valuable in their later careers, whatever those careers might be: How to communicate clearly, how to recognize multiple perspectives, how to cut through jargon and propaganda and separate facts from opinion and speculation.

    One milestone for many of these is our Pitch, Report, Draft and Revise process, which we call PRDR. In it, students pitch a story topic to News Decoder with a plan on how to research and report it. We ask them to identify different perspectives on problems they want to explore and experts they can reach out to for information and context.

    Then we guide them through a process of introspection, if the story is a personal reflection on their own experience, or a process of reporting and interviewing. News Decoder doesn’t promise students that their stories will get published at the end of the process. They have to work for that — revising their drafts until the finished story is clear and relevant to a global audience.

    One student who went through the process was Joshua Glazer, now a student at Emory University in the United States. Glazer came to News Decoder in high school as an exchange student in Spain with School Year Abroad.

    “I think the skills that I got out of that went on to really change the course of my education and how I view the world,” Glazer said. “Because when you step into the world of journalism you learn a different way of seeing the world.”

    Recognizing our biases

    Glazer learned that for journalism, he had to be less opinionated. “You have to really approach things kind of as they are in the world,” Glazer said. “And that is hard to do. That is not an easy skill that we can do as humans because we inherently have biases.”

    He said it challenged him to look inwards and recognize his biases and counter them with evidence.

    “So I think those skills have really changed the course of how I view having an argument with somebody because all of a sudden, you know, when you have an argument with someone, it’s all opinion,” he said.

    For Haffner, who is now a business administration student at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University in Japan, News Decoder reshaped how she and her peers understood storytelling.

    “It taught us to let go of rigid biases and to make authenticity the centre of our work,” Haffner said. “Students from different backgrounds found a space where their voices were heard, respected and valued. Our stories formed a shared map, each one opening a new room to explore, each voice strengthening the collective journey we were on. In that chaotic period, we created something meaningful together. Something bigger than us.”

    Working through the complexity of a topic

    Marouane El Bahraoui, a research intern at The Carter Center in the U.S. state of Georgia, also discovered News Decoder at the African Leadership Academy. At the time, he was interested in writing about the effectiveness of the Arab Maghreb Union — an economic bloc of five North African countries. He grew up in Morocco but didn’t want to approach the topic from a purely Moroccan perspective.

    “It was like a very raw idea,” he said.

    He pitched the story and worked with both News Decoder Founder Nelson Graves and correspondent Tom Heneghan to refine the idea. They guided him in the reporting and writing process.

    “One aspect that I liked a lot from my research was the people that I had the chance to talk to,” he said. “It was during Covid and I was just at home and I’m talking to, you know, professors in U.S. universities, I’m talking to UN officials, experts working in think tanks in D.C. and I was thinking oh those people are just so far, you can’t even reach them. And then you have a conversation with them and they’re just normal people.”

    He also found writing the story daunting. “It was a little bit overwhelming for me at the time,” he said. “You know, you’re not writing like an academic essay.”

    Graves encouraged him to write in a straightforward manner. In school, he had been taught to write in a beautiful way to impress.

    “From News Decoder, something I learned is to always keep the audience in mind who you are speaking to, who are you writing to,” he said.

    He took away the importance of letting readers make their own conclusions. “You’re not writing to tell the reader what to think,” he said. “You are writing to give them ideas and arguments, facts and leave the thinking for them.”

    Source link

  • Can you believe it? | News Decoder

    Can you believe it? | News Decoder

    Can you tell the difference between a rumor and fact?

    Let’s start with gossip. That’s where you talk or chat with people about other people. We do this all the time, right? Something becomes a rumor when you or someone else learn something specific through all the chit chat and then pass it on, through chats with other people or through social media.

    A rumor can be about anyone and anything. The more nasty or naughty the tidbit, the greater the chance people will pass it on. When enough people spread it, it becomes viral. That’s where it seems to take on a life of its own.

    A fact is something that can be proven or disproven. The thing is, both fact and rumor can be accepted as a sort of truth. In the classic song “The Boxer,” the American musician Paul Simon once sang, “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.”

    Once a piece of information has gone viral, whether fact or fiction, it is difficult to convince people who have accepted it that it isn’t true.

    Fact and fiction

    That’s why it is important — if you care about truth, that is — to determine whether or not a rumor is based on fact before you pass it on. That’s what ethical journalists do. Reporting is about finding evidence that can show whether something is true. Without evidence, journalists shouldn’t report something, or if they do they must make sure their readers or listeners understand that the information is based on speculation or unproven rumor.

    There are two types of evidence they will look for: direct evidence and indirect evidence. The first is information you get first-hand — you experience or observe something yourself. All else is indirect. Rumor is third-hand: someone heard something from someone who heard it from the person who experienced it.

    Most times you don’t know how many “hands” information has been through before it comes to you. Understand that in general, stories change every time they pass from one person to another.

    If you don’t want to become a source of misinformation, then before you tell a story or pass on some piece of information, ask yourself these questions:

    → How do I know it?

    → Where did I get that information and do I know where that person or source got it?

    → Can I trace the information back to the original source?

    → What don’t I know about this?

    Original and secondary sources

    An original source might be yourself, if you were there when something happened. It might be a story told you by someone who was there when something happened — an eyewitness. It might be a report or study authored by someone or a group of people who gathered the data themselves.

    Keep in mind though, that people see and experience things differently and two people who are eyewitness to the same event might have remarkably different memories of that event. How they tell a story often depends on their perspective and that often depends on how they relate to the people involved.

    If you grow up with dogs, then when you see a big dog barking you might interpret that as the dog wants to play. But if you have been bitten by a dog, then a big dog barking seems threatening. Same dog, same circumstance, but contrasting perspectives based on your previous experience.

    Pretty much everything else is second-hand: A report that gets its information from data collected elsewhere or from a study done by other researchers; a story told to you by someone who spoke to the person who experienced it.

    But how do videos come into play? You see a video taken by someone else. That’s second-hand. But don’t you see what the person who took the video sees? Isn’t that almost the same as being an eyewitness?

    Not really. Consider this. Someone tells you about an event. You say: “How do you know that happened?” They say: “I was there. I saw it.” That’s pretty convincing. Now, if they say: “I saw the video.” That’s isn’t as convincing. Why? Because you know that the video might not have shown all of what happened. It might have left out something significant. It might even have been edited or doctored in some way.

    Is there evidence?

    Alone, any one source of information might not be convincing, even eyewitness testimony. That’s why when ethical reporters are making accusations in a story or on a podcast, they provide multiple, different types of evidence — a story from an eyewitness, bolstered by an email sent to the person, along with a video, and data from a report.

    It’s kind of like those scenes in murder mysteries where someone has to provide a solid alibi. They can say they were with their spouse, but do you believe the spouse?

    If they were caught on CCTV, that’s pretty convincing. Oh, there’s that parking ticket they got when they were at the movies. And in their coat pocket is the receipt for the popcorn and soda they bought with a date and time on it.

    Now, you don’t have to provide all that evidence every time you pass on a story you heard or read. If that were a requirement, conversations would turn really dull. We are all storytellers and we are geared to entertain. That means that when we tell a story we want to make it a good one. We exaggerate a little. We emphasize some parts and not others.

    The goal here isn’t to take that fun away. But we do have a worldwide problem of misinformation and disinformation.

    Do you want to be part of that problem or part of a solution? If the latter, all you have to do is this: Recognize what you actually know and separate it in your head from what you heard or saw second hand (from a video or photo or documentary) and let people know where you got that information so they can know.

    Don’t pass on information as true when it might not be true or if it is only partially true. Don’t pretend to be more authoritative than you are.

    And perhaps most important: What you don’t know might be as important as what you do know.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is an example of an original source?

    2. Why should you not totally trust information from a video?

    3. Can you think of a a time when your memory of an event differed from that of someone else who was there?

     

    Source link

  • Which way do you lean?

    Which way do you lean?

    On November 26 dozens of articles written by News Decoder students will go to a panel of three judges as part of our twice-yearly storytelling competition. One of the criteria they will use to decide on the winners is this: Did the student report the story objectively, without bias? It is one of five criteria (another being total subjectivity on the part of each judge — sometimes a story is just a really great story).

    Here is the question: How does one define bias? You’d think I’d be able to answer this question easily, since I’ve written whole articles on objectivity, which is commonly thought of as the absence of bias. Webster’s Dictionary defines bias as an inclination of temperament or outlook, or an instance of such prejudice.

    Basically, you are for something or against something. A problem with trying to eliminate bias is often we don’t recognize when we lean more one way or another. If something is true it is true, right? How can truth be biased? But how many ridiculous arguments revolve around competing definitions of truth?

    News Decoder correspondent Enock Wanderema is an experienced journalist but he’s currently studying behavioral science. Two things he’s been thinking about are what is known as availability bias and confirmation bias.

    Availability bias is our tendency to rely on what we can remember. If we can remember it, it seems more important or more true. That leads to us raising importance stuff that recently happened since we remember it more easily.

    With confirmation bias, we tend to search for, interpret and remember information that confirms what we already believe and we overlook anything that contradicts those beliefs.

    “This happens automatically because constantly questioning everything we believe would be cognitively exhausting,” he wrote. “It means we can become trapped in false beliefs even when contradictory evidence accumulates and this matters enormously in contexts that are complex, novel, abstract or ideologically loaded; exactly the kinds of situations modern life presents constantly, but which were rare in ancestral environments.”

    Bias in journalism

    This becomes more problematic when we talk about journalists. “Journalists are the primary gatekeepers of information about complex issues people cannot directly experience but journalists are humans with the same biases,” Wanderema said.

    These biases come into play with the stories reporters or news organizations choose to cover or not cover. They inadvertently rely on what they remember and are familiar with when deciding if something is important enough to cover and deciding the events and people to ignore.

    This can lead to whole populations of people made invisible and important events ignored. If something has been happening and no one has covered it, how important can it be?

    News Decoder Correspondent Paul Sochaczewski struggles with the idea of bias not only with news stories but in writing non-fiction biographies of people long dead. “All journalism has bias,” he wrote. “Point of view, word choice, selection of details, who to quote and accuracy of that quote and so on.”

    In a 300-page book you can’t tell someone’s whole life story, but in summing up the life it is the biographer who decides what events are important and which ones paint the most accurate portrait of a person. It is the biographer who decides what to leave out.

    A picture of reality

    In some ways bias in storytelling is like the decisions a photographer makes in taking a photo. How many photos taken of me made me look awful? And yet there were a few that made me look better than I generally do. It had to do with the lighting available at the time and the photographer’s desire to make me look good.

    The photographer isn’t making anything up but by adjusting where I stand, what’s around me, how my hair falls — and having the sun on my face the right way, she can change my look from an old hag who just woke up in a terrible mood to a beautiful person in the prime of her life.

    News Decoder Correspondent Barry Moody says that you show bias when you lean towards one side or the other, either in the way you present the information or in giving more space to one side of an argument. Instead, you should present the facts and let your readers decide whether they have an opinion. “But don’t allow your own, either consciously or subconsciously to intrude,” he said.

    Kirby Moss, a professor of journalism and mass communication at the California Polytechnic University Humboldt in California sees bias as the inability or lack of awareness to critique your own perspective.

    That goes back to the notion of objectivity being the absence of bias. It is difficult to eliminate our own bias if we don’t recognize it in the first place.

    Wanderema said that our biases are often mental shortcuts that allow us to process the too much information we are constantly bombarded with, most of it from media rather than from direct experience. We pay attention to some things but not others. We are skeptical of some facts but easily accept others.

    “The result is a complex feedback loop where journalists’ biases shape coverage, coverage triggers audience biases, audience preferences reinforce journalistic practices and the entire system systematically distorts public understanding of reality,” Wanderema said. “Not through deliberate deception, but through the predictable operation of cognitive shortcuts that evolved to help humans navigate immediate physical environments.”

    Personally, in addressing the thorny problem of bias, I rely on what I have long decided should be the first rule of journalism: honesty. When reporting, I try to lay out facts as I’ve discovered them, after making a genuine effort to explore different perspectives and sides. But as Moss explained, it is important that I explore my own perspective so that I can then fess up to readers my own biases and conclusions. This lets them know where I stand so that they can accept or reject the conclusions I’ve made.

    In trying to eliminate our biases, we end up deceiving not just our readers, but ourselves.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is confirmation bias?

    2. In what ways can personal bias affect what stories you choose to tell?

    3. In what ways do you think that you are biased?

    Source link

  • Cook up a news story

    Cook up a news story

    Writing is the easy part; everything that comes before that is what’s hard. 

    That’s what News Decoder founder Nelson Graves told us back in 2020. Five years later, with the prevalence of artificial intelligence, this seems more true, doesn’t it? After all, you can just tell AI to write you a story and it will comply. 

    But what’s the point of that? It is one thing if your grade depends on the completion of a paper, and your graduation depends on that grade. Or maybe you can make some money churning out AI-written copy for some website. We won’t argue ethics here. 

    The point of this article, which I am thinking up and typing up word by word with no AI involvement, is to explain why the process of writing is the point. Apple founder Steve Jobs is often quoted as saying the journey is the reward. 

    Graves told us that the best stories emerge from a process that involves doing things that many people find difficult: Introspection, questioning your assumptions and interviewing people. All that seems even more of a challenge these days when it is so easy to tune out your feelings and avoid human interactions by listening to loud music, playing video games or bingeing TV shows.

    Again, why do that when AI could spit it out for you?

    Gather your ingredients.

    Graves, who spent his career writing for the news service Reuters, reminded us that writing is easy once you have the raw goods. That made me think about cooking. 

    Why do people take cooking classes and watch cooking videos when you can buy ready-made meals at Aldi? I often spend an entire afternoon in the kitchen making soup or a stew only to have my family gobble it up in 10 minutes. 

    It is hard to put together a fancy meal at the last minute. But if you have gathered your ingredients — the chopped vegetables, marinated chicken, diced onions and minced garlic — it is easy to toss them into a frying pan where the magic happens. 

    The same goes for a news story. If you have done your research — gathered some data, a timeline of events and information and quotes from interviews — then you are all set to toss them onto a page where the magic happens. 

    Follow a recipe.

    Ask yourself: Why do people become journalists when typically they don’t make much money and often get trolled and harassed — or worse — for what they publish? Many believe in the idea of public service, but really, there is nothing that matches the feeling of having published a great story. 

    It is like the satisfaction you get when the forkful of food goes into your mouth and tastes exquisite and you know you made it. You don’t get that feeling if you bought it ready-made from Aldi.

    People who don’t cook think cooking is hard or painful or not worth the effort. The funny thing is that once someone follows a recipe and makes something really tasty, that often changes the way they think about cooking and they try another recipe another day.

    The writing process is like a recipe. There are common steps journalists often follow. They don’t just open a blank page and start writing. So here is a basic recipe you can follow for just about any news story.

    1. Decide what to cook: This is your story idea. You can start broad: I’m going to make pasta. Then narrow it down to: Maybe a lasagna? Narrow it further, maybe based on the ingredients you already have. I’m going to make a spinach lasagna. So with a story you might start with this: I’m going to do a story about climate change. Then you narrow it: Maybe a story about pollution. Then you narrow it further: How about the factories around me that pollute the air?

    2. Find your ingredients. There are statistics you can get. A law has been proposed. A community group is planning a protest. The industry is coming out with new emissions guidelines. Interviews with advocates and proponents and lawmakers. 

    3. Decide in what order the ingredients go into the pan. For a news story there’s the lead that entices the reader (when you sauté garlic in butter people come into the kitchen salivating). Then there is the meat (we actually call it that in journalism), layered with the other ingredients: quotes, data, relevant events.

    With food, the order things go in is the recipe. In journalism it is an outline. It is an important part of the process. Without a good outline you have a mess of information and you don’t know what to do with it. An outline gives you a clear path to follow. The recipe for your story. 

    4. Put the final touch on the dish. It might be parmesan cheese on top, or garlicky bread crumbs or a drizzle of olive oil or soy sauce. For an article you want to end with a “kicker”: a good quote that sums everything up, maybe. 

    Finesse the flavors.

    What if you get to the end and it isn’t as tasty as you hoped? With cooking you tinker. A little more garlic? More salt or pepper? Yikes! I forgot the mushrooms! 

    In journalism, when the story seems flat you might reach out to one more source or call back one you already interviewed to get a better quote. You might look for a better example to use by doing another news search. 

    This is the revision process. And unlike in cooking, when you revise a story you can move your ingredients around and reorganize your story. Often that makes all the difference. 

    In the end you will have created something good, from scratch. It is a great feeling, even if your family takes 10 minutes to eat that lasagna it took you an hour to make. Even if a reader spends 30 seconds reading that story it took you days to craft. 

    The satisfaction you will feel won’t go away. 

    Questions to consider:

    1. If writing is the easy part, what is the hard part of creating a news story?

    2. What does it mean that the journey is the reward?

    3. Can you think of something you have done from scratch that you could have bought ready-made?

     

    Source link

  • A competition begs this question: Why be judged?

    A competition begs this question: Why be judged?

    But after learning he had won first prize, he realized that his stories didn’t have to inspire everybody at once. “Every story has some kind of relevance good enough to satisfy the thirsts of inspirations for a set of audience,” he said. “This has even given me the confidence to share everything I have found irrelevant before.”

    By encouraging students to enter their stories we are asking them to first assess their own work. We want them to understand that what they created is worthy of critical assessment.

    The students aren’t the only ones to take lessons away from contest. That’s what Tim Agnew, an expert in commercial finance and economic development and a member of News Decoder’s Advisory Board, discovered when he served on the judging panel that awarded Fofana first prize. “By reading the stories, I not only learned what students are thinking about, I learned about issues and challenges in the world that I wasn’t aware of,” Agnew said back then. “That is the mark of great journalism.”

    If students enter their work early enough, we give them the opportunity to work with us to revise it. Some 600 students have entered their work into our competitions.

    Finding themselves worthy

    The point for News Decoder isn’t to determine which story is “best”. Instead, we want young people to realize that even if ultimately they aren’t chosen as the best, they deserve to be considered among the best. 

    Their work, their creation is worthy of consideration. And the stories they found to tell, whether about themselves or others, are important stories that should be read and heard — that their voice and the voices of the people they interviewed for the article matter. 

    The results of each competition are always a bit of a surprise. All student stories that News Decoder publishes throughout the year automatically get entered into the contest, so you would think that it would be those stories that would win. After all, to get published on News Decoder, a student needs to persevere through our signature Pitch, Report, Draft and Revise process, and that means that they have received significant feedback and professional editing from us. 

    But that isn’t the case. In each contest, the judges invariably pick a mixture of stories: some that have been published on News Decoder ‚ although they don’t know that when they read them — and some that are drafts that haven’t been previously read by us. 

    This reflects our philosophy. When a student sends us their story pitch and story draft, we will never tell them it isn’t worthy of publication. The message we send is that it is a great beginning; that you can bring any idea to fruition and take anything you have done and make it even better. 

    Perseverance not perfection

    This is important in the age of artificial intelligence. We want young people to accept the idea that AI is a beginning, a tool they can use to explore big, complicated ideas and a tool that will help them create something unique and original. But it is just part of a process. 

    This is why we see journalism as a great way of fostering all kinds of things: media literacy and global awareness, critical thinking and empowerment. Ask any journalist about any story they have done and they will tell you that if they had just a little more time and more resources it would have been a better story. 

    Journalism is an exercise in getting just enough to make a story accurate and convincing and that has context and clarity. In journalism there is no perfect. Each source you get makes your story stronger, each draft you write makes it more powerful. 

    Journalists work under a deadline because if they didn’t have that deadline, they would never stop reporting and writing that story. It is a process of steady improvement. And it involves working with an editor so it is a process of collaboration with others to make something better. 

    With our storytelling competitions, we give students a difficult challenge. First they must come up with an original topic to explore and find credible sources for their information. Then, if they are telling other people’s stories, they need to interview someone. If writing about their own experience, they need to show how that experience is relevant to a global audience. 

    Great stories from student journalists

    Twice a year, students deliver. 

    Back in 2024, I noted that the variety of the topics showed how much and about how many things young people care about — problems happening around them and in other parts of the world. And I noted how impressed I was at the breadth of their sourcing.

    “Every time we do this contest I am reminded that great journalism isn’t something only seasoned professionals can produce,” I said at the time. “Young people have the knack for asking really perceptive questions and the persistence to find people who can provide the answers.”

    It is our mission at News Decoder to give students the opportunity to ask those questions and the forum to explore the problems they see happening around them. We want to show them that they can start a conversation about those problems with a worldwide audience. 

    It is our hope that from this they will realize that the world isn’t too confusing to care about and that they don’t have to zone out and tune out to what is happening around them and across the world. 

    We want to empower them to ask questions and get answers and find the people working on solutions. By telling important stories through that exploration, they can help make the world a little more understandable and a little more connected. 

    Graves noted that teens are our next generation of leaders. “Nothing could have made Arch Roberts more proud than to see News Decoder students put themselves forward as they prepare to inherit the earth,” he said. 

    For 10 years it has been our mission to inform, connect and empower youth. We intend to keep doing it for another decade. You can check out the winners of our last competition here and more about our academic programs here. If you aren’t already part of our News Decoder network, we would love for you to join us. 

     

    Source link

  • When a company’s enviro claims sound convincing …

    When a company’s enviro claims sound convincing …

    Many companies contribute to the climate crisis and make a profit doing so. As consumers and governments pressure them to reduce their carbon emissions, they look for ways to make themselves appear environmentally friendly. This is called green marketing.

    As a journalist, you need to learn to spot what a business really means by its green marketing.

    Greenwashing is when a brand makes itself seem more sustainable than it really is, as a way to get consumers to buy their product. For example, let’s look at fashion, an industry that is responsible for between 2 and 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

    In the absence of environmental legislation around the fashion industry a business might get themselves certified under a sustainability certification scheme — these are standards developed by governments or industry groups or NGOs to measure such things as energy efficiency or processes that are low carbon or carbon neutral. There are more than 100 different such certification programs.

    Companies tout these certifications. But a 2022 study by the Changing Markets Foundation (CMF) found that the standards set by the majority of the 10 or more popular certification initiatives for the fashion industry aren’t difficult to meet and lack accountability.

    Artificial claims about sustainability

    Fast fashion relies on cheap synthetic fibers, which are produced from fossil fuels such as oil and gas. And while you might assume that clothing with labels such as “eco” or “sustainable” might have fewer synthetics, you’d unfortunately be wrong.

    Another study by CMF found that H&M’s “conscious” clothing range, for example, contained 72% synthetics — which was higher than the percentage in their main collection (61%). And it’s not just H&M. While the same study found that 39% of products made some kind of green claim, almost 60% of these claims did not match the guidelines set out by the UK Competition and Markets Authority.

    The same is happening in the meat and dairy industry. Companies say they are reducing their environmental footprint by engaging in “regenerative agriculture”, a farming approach that aims to restore and improve ecosystem health. They argue that it reduces greenhouse gas emissions and helps store carbon in the soil.

    But relying on carbon storing in soil is not enough. An article in Nature Communications found that around 135 gigatonnes of stored carbon would be required to offset the emissions that come from the agriculture sector. This is roughly equivalent to the amount of carbon lost due to agriculture over the past 12,000 years, according to CMF.

    But companies grab onto these empty promises, perhaps knowing that the general public might only see regenerative agriculture and other “green narratives” as promising.

    Look for real solutions to climate change.

    For example, Nestlé tells their customers that it is addressing the carbon footprint of the agriculture industry by supporting regenerative agriculture, stating on its website that in 2024, some 21% of the ingredients they source come from farmers adopting regenerative agriculture practices.

    When you understand that regenerative agriculture is not the solution it has been made out to be, only then can you see through Nestlé’s branding.

    So how can you spot greenwashing?

    Let’s say you saw a press release from a company in an industry that has historically relied heavily on fossil fuels. It tells its readers that it plans to be carbon neutral by a certain date, or that it’s using recycled materials for a large portion of its production, or that its future is “green”.

    You might first wonder, is this an example of how companies are moving away from fossil fuels and towards a green future? How can you tell?

    1. Be skeptical.

    When something has to tell you that it is green, it might not be. Start your investigation right there.

    For example, if you were looking at Nestlé’s regenerative agriculture campaign, you would need to find out what regenerative agriculture is and how much it is indeed reducing greenhouse gas emissions. You can do this by starting with a good Google search: e.g “regenerative agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions”.

    Once you click on a number of articles that report on this topic, you’ll be able to read about the different studies and data into the topic. Follow the sources used when an article cites a study or data. The article should hyperlink or list the sources. But those hyperlinks might take you to other secondary sources — other articles that cited the same data.

    For example, an article might cite this statistic: sustainability certifications increase consumer willingness to pay by approximately 7% on average. The article might cite as the source this study published in the journal Nature. But that article isn’t the original source of that data. It came from a 2014 study published in the Journal of Retailing.

    So try to find the primary source and see how credible or reputable it is. Who conducted the research in the first place?

    If you wanted to find out what H&M’s “conscious” range really meant, you would start by looking at H&M’s website and reports to look further into their claims. Then, follow those claims.

    2. Research the wider industry.

    Whether you’re reporting on fashion, agriculture or any other industry, look into where its emissions are coming from, which companies are claiming what and what the evidence says needs to be done in order for these industries to reduce their emissions.

    Providing context is important. What percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions is this industry responsible for? Is it getting better or worse? What legislation is in place to reduce emissions from these industries? In order for you and your audience to understand the greenwashing of any company, this background information is vital.

    3. Go straight to the company.

    Once you’ve conducted some initial research, follow up with the company if you are using it as an example or focus for your article. On Nestlé’s website, for example, you can find contact details for their communications, media or PR department. Send them an email saying something like the following:

    “I am writing an article on regenerative agriculture and I’ve found some studies that show that soil sequestration through these practices are in fact not enough to be a real climate solution. Can you please provide me with a comment on what Nestlé thinks about this?”

    They might not answer, but that also says a lot. If they don’t reply to you after one or two follow-up emails, you might try calling them.

    If you try several times and in different ways to contact them and they failed to respond, you can state that in your article. That way your readers know you made the effort.

    Claims from corporations that they are doing all they can to help the planet are easy to make. But if we really want to slow down climate change, significant efforts have to be made. And it is the role of journalists to hold companies to account for the claims they make.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is “greenwashing”

    2. What is one example of greenwashing?

    3. What criteria do you use when deciding whether to buy a company’s product?

    Source link

  • Can journalists coexist with AI?

    Can journalists coexist with AI?

    But then the same thing could be happening now to the heads of news organizations who then subsequently pull back their journalists from various news beats. Since those news organizations are the ones who report news, would we ever know that was happening?

    The reality is that artificial intelligence could kill journalism without replacing it, leaving people without information they can rely on. When there are no reliable, credible sources of news, rumors spread and take on a life of their own. People panic and riot and revolt based on fears born from misinformation. Lawlessness prevails.

    Do algorithms have all the answers?

    Right now, entire news organizations are disappearing. The Brookings report found that last year some 2.5 local news outlets folded every week in the United States. Data collected by researcher Amy Watson in August 2023 found that in the UK, each year over a 10-year period ending 2022, more news outlets closed than were launched.

    CNN reported in June 2023 that Germany’s biggest news organization, Bild, was laying off 20% of its employees, replacing them with artificial intelligence.

    But ChatGPT had this to say: “ Rather than viewing AI as a threat, journalists can leverage technology to enhance their work. Automated tools can assist with tasks such as data analysis, fact-checking and content distribution, freeing up time for reporters to focus on more complex and impactful storytelling.”

    One of News Decoder’s many human correspondents, Tom Heneghan, spoke to students on this topic in November and expressed some optimism.

    “It will take away a lot of the drudge work, the donkey work that journalists have to do,” Heneghan said. “It’s amazing how much work is done by somebody at a much higher level than what is actually needed.”

    Working with artificial intelligence

    Once those tasks are automated, the journalist can pursue more substantive stories, Heneghan said. Plus the evolving sophistication of things like deep fake technology will make tasks like fact-checking and verification more important. “

    That’s going to come up more and more,” Heneghan said. “What artificial intelligence takes away may actually create some other jobs.”

    So here’s the thing: We wouldn’t have to fear AI eliminating the crucial role of journalism — informing the public with accurate information, reporting from multiple perspectives so that minority voices are heard and uncovering corruption, exploitation and oppression — if the businesses that controlled the purse strings of journalism were committed to its public service functions.

    I then asked ChatGPT this question: Are media corporations driven solely by money?

    It concluded: “While financial considerations undoubtedly influence the actions of media corporations, they are not the sole driving force behind their decisions.” It went on: “A complex interplay of financial goals, societal responsibilities and individual values shapes the behavior of these entities.

    Understanding this multifaceted nature is essential for accurately assessing the role and impact of media corporations in modern society.” I found that reassuring, until I glanced at the disclaimer at the bottom of the AI’s page:

    ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is an essential role of journalism in society?

    2. What did both the ChatGPT app and the human correspondent seem to agree on in this article?

    3. What, if anything, worries you about artifiical intelligence and how you get your information?

    Source link