who what when where why

0patience

What ever happened to this concept in journalism?
Today, I read several articles that I had absolutely no idea what happened until the last paragraph.
One, I never did understand what happened.

When the reader doesn't get the information right away,what good is the article?

I keep waiting for the articles that come out and get a few paragraphs and then "check back tomorrow for the full story." or "subscribe to view the full story."

But how is it that most of these people who write articles or blogs can't seem to understand basic writing? 

First_Warrior

They try to push our emotional buttons with words. The truth is pretty much non existent .

Gray4lines

I've noticed this in local news articles (I don't really read much other news stories). You're absolutely right that sometimes it is hard to tell what the author is even trying to communicate. 

jlmarta

I blame a lot of it on the teachers. They're just not doing their job if they allow their students to fracture and mis-use the English language. It galls the hell out of me to hear some newscaster use a phrase like 'as of yet' when it should be 'as yet'. 

Or to refer to a person or persons as 'the people that....' when it should be 'the people who...'  If you're referring to animals then 'that' would be correct but for humans the proper term is 'who'. 

How announcers and reporters ever get hired when they use language in that manner is simply beyond me. It goes to prove that the people doing the hiring are as dumb as those being hired. 

Teachers always seem seem to look for the easy way out. Now they're no longer teaching cursive writing. Just one thing less for teachers to have to do. They shorten the school day and complain that Johnny can't read. They forever strive for longer summer vacations. 

BAH!  Ya shouldn't have gotten me started, Tony.  . I'll get down off my soap box, now.....  

Amos_Umwhat

First_Warrior said:

They try to push our emotional buttons with words. The truth is pretty much non existent .

I think this sums it up.  Notice today's TV ads, same thing.  You don't know what they're selling until the end of the ad.

Yakster

I have an Amazon Fire tablet that shows advertisements on the lock screen, part of the reason it's so inexpensive.  This morning, it showed a picture of a tablet and asked if I'd take a short survey.  I agreed (for a change) and was presented with a question of how likely I am to buy "Reynolds."  No explanation of what they were talking about, no idea what the product is.  I just don't think that people take the time to look at what they're writing anymore.  It's just too easy to type it in on a computer and have spellcheck running on it and hit submit, no writing it down on paper (don't miss that) or printing it out and reading it anymore.  Technology surely has some part in the problem.

0patience

Yakster said:

  I just don't think that people take the time to look at what they're writing anymore.  

Exactly.
It's just like emails.
I get emails at work that I have no idea what they were trying to say.
To have to send a reply saying you don't know what their email said is really irritating.

We once had a manager write an email and send it, letting folks know that the machines that put the stripes on the highway would be here. His email said, 
"The strippers will be here Friday."

I called and asked him if he was setting up a pole in the shop for the strippers.

silvermouse

I agree with the above sentiments. What bothers me even more is the near-total erosion of journalistic ethics. Maybe it has always been that way.

jgibv

many of the news organizations and media companies use automated bots/algorithms to write and publish stories, especially for sports, stock market update, and weather articles.....

so while yes, you're probably correct that no one proofread the story, there's also a solid chance the story was written and published by a computer, with no human intervention at all.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/06/story-by-a-human/485984/

TNBigfoot68

I think one reason journalism is suffering today, is that writers have forgotten that there job is to report the facts not to editorialize to convince readers to believe like they believe. There is a time and place for that type of writing but it should not be masked as the news.  Journalism is dead!

webmost

Gresham's Law.

MoleRat

 When news became entertainment objectivity and truth went out the window.

GrouchoM

It's devolved to entertainment devoid of content and driven by advertising dollars. Newspapers are dying, so bloggers, random hacks on the web whitle down content to 140 charaters and entitled generations refuse to ask for more in their reporting. But, what I missed is quality content and the stories I only get in upscale news outlets like Time, NY TIMES or Newsweek.

But, what are you gonna do?

webmost

Even Popular Mechanics is down to three whiz bang paragraphs per article.

jbohon

jgibv said:

many of the news organizations and media companies use automated bots/algorithms to write and publish stories, especially for sports, stock market update, and weather articles.....

so while yes, you're probably correct that no one proofread the story, there's also a solid chance the story was written and published by a computer, with no human intervention at all.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/06/story-by-a-human/485984/

Now this is terrifying. 

Gray4lines

jbohon said:

jgibv said:

many of the news organizations and media companies use automated bots/algorithms to write and publish stories, especially for sports, stock market update, and weather articles.....

so while yes, you're probably correct that no one proofread the story, there's also a solid chance the story was written and published by a computer, with no human intervention at all.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/06/story-by-a-human/485984/

Now this is terrifying. 

Especially if you're a journalism student, lol!

Lee.mcglynn

Colonel mustard in the kitchen with a candle stick at 8:30pm 

Bigshizza

Corporate ownership pushing their own agenda!

Amos_Umwhat

Bigshizza said:

Corporate ownership pushing their own agenda!

is destroying the very concept of freedom and turning us all into slaves.


Needed finishing.

Martel

Amos_Umwhat said:

Bigshizza said:

Corporate ownership pushing their own agenda!

is destroying the very concept of freedom and turning us all into slaves.


Needed finishing.

This is nothing new in journalism, though, is it?  I mean really, Hearst?  Pulitzer? Yellow Journalism?  It predates them, but newspapers have always seen themselves as selling an agenda as news, haven't they?  And the journalists have always known it...John Reed knew it and hated the agendas of mainstream papers but gladly wrote with his own agenda.

Sometimes it's subtly (or artistically) done and sometimes it's not.  I just don't see this complaint as new.  It's always been incumbent upon citizens to sift through the dross for good information.  Still, I agree with the OP that it's becoming more and more difficult to find the basic facts in many news articles.  At least I'd have a starting point if an old-school muckraker were writing some of today's stories.  This complaint especially holds true for local events, today.  My wife works for a municipality and the errors in local stories are laughable.  They can't even seem to reprint a press release without making mistakes or removing the most critical information when the job is done for them!