I feel like you have a little more freedom in print journalism than you do broadcast journalism. For broadcast, you have to throw the story right at the viewer in order for them not to change the channel. No ifs, ands, or buts, you have to jump right into the major details. The same is required for print journalism, but you have the ability to flower it up in a way. You can start with a comedic line, a play on words, or lead into a quote with foreshadowing. If it is a serious story, like the death of Dan Wheldon, you can still lead with a few lines that don't get into the immediate details, all while making the reader aware of what happened. For example, here is the lead from the Sports Illustrated article that announced his death.
"Race car drivers always know the worst can happen whenever they get behind the wheel. On Sunday, it happened to one of IndyCar's biggest and most popular stars."
It is evident that a major star died in a crash, but you must keep reading to find out who exactly passed away. An excellent job by the writer of letting the reader know what happened right away, but forcing them to read their article instead of flipping to another page. That luxury is not as present in broadcast journalism.
While there is more freedom in print journalism than there is broadcast journalism, the amount of freedom in PR writing can be quite large. While you have a certain message of a PR piece that you must write according to, the writer can be as creative as they want, just as long as they spin what they are writing to make their business/product more favorable. Print and broadcast writers cannot do this, as objectivity is the name of the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment