So, I was tasked to do another version of a running story (I've done something of that sort in a previous semester, and this one was just slightly different.)
Every single time I'm told to do something like a running story, I just have this innate need to include as much information in a story as possible, regardless of whether the information is actually truly necessary.
And this becomes why I don't usually have much time remaining as the clock ticks on towards the end of the "test".
Well, I think this time, despite the fact that I was rushing for time by the end of the sixth version of the story (the last one), I think I managed to tell the story decently without really missing any key points, although I do wish that I had managed to be a little more detailed when it came to the bigger parts of the story.
Leaving the room after I finished the test really made me think. I'm not sure how often this happens in the industry, this running story thing, but I definitely had newfound respect for the journalists who do this on an almost daily basis. Even as a test, this was stressful enough. But I do think that might be due to the fact that I was writing a running story that happened across a few days in just under two hours. If this was the "real world", yes, I would probably be still running a schedule, but at least I won't have to churn out six stories that quickly.
And yet, this also brings me to my next thought. Repeating a similar story for a week straight does get dreadfully boring at times, especially if not much new information comes in, yet you still have to produce a story. Doesn't that make the story more of an update story then? I guess if a story is big enough, even a small update story or the smallest of new information regarding that story can make the headlines. I probably wouldn't mind having to type the same story for a week straight. In a way, it's easier than writing a story from scratch.
From the running story exercise, I've definitely had a tiny taste of how a big headline story is prepared and edited throughout the week (or weeks) of its publication. Do you include this information? Would you provide some backstory for others who have just picked up on this piece of news? That all depends on the journalists. A piece of information regarding the story might have been a huge deal one day and then minor information the next. But then, that's news for you. It's ever-changing, and hence news stories are always changing to reflect that.
I can't help but feel that doing all these small tests in university will really help to prepare me for the real world ahead. Granted, I have no experience in the world of journalism besides running my own blog, but any and all skills that I've gained in university would definitely help me heaps.
Every single time I'm told to do something like a running story, I just have this innate need to include as much information in a story as possible, regardless of whether the information is actually truly necessary.
And this becomes why I don't usually have much time remaining as the clock ticks on towards the end of the "test".
Well, I think this time, despite the fact that I was rushing for time by the end of the sixth version of the story (the last one), I think I managed to tell the story decently without really missing any key points, although I do wish that I had managed to be a little more detailed when it came to the bigger parts of the story.
Leaving the room after I finished the test really made me think. I'm not sure how often this happens in the industry, this running story thing, but I definitely had newfound respect for the journalists who do this on an almost daily basis. Even as a test, this was stressful enough. But I do think that might be due to the fact that I was writing a running story that happened across a few days in just under two hours. If this was the "real world", yes, I would probably be still running a schedule, but at least I won't have to churn out six stories that quickly.
And yet, this also brings me to my next thought. Repeating a similar story for a week straight does get dreadfully boring at times, especially if not much new information comes in, yet you still have to produce a story. Doesn't that make the story more of an update story then? I guess if a story is big enough, even a small update story or the smallest of new information regarding that story can make the headlines. I probably wouldn't mind having to type the same story for a week straight. In a way, it's easier than writing a story from scratch.
From the running story exercise, I've definitely had a tiny taste of how a big headline story is prepared and edited throughout the week (or weeks) of its publication. Do you include this information? Would you provide some backstory for others who have just picked up on this piece of news? That all depends on the journalists. A piece of information regarding the story might have been a huge deal one day and then minor information the next. But then, that's news for you. It's ever-changing, and hence news stories are always changing to reflect that.
I can't help but feel that doing all these small tests in university will really help to prepare me for the real world ahead. Granted, I have no experience in the world of journalism besides running my own blog, but any and all skills that I've gained in university would definitely help me heaps.
No comments:
Post a Comment