Student journalists take note

*Corrected version - typo in previous - my bad... *

You have a point there, Mr Stashko. In a similar vein to what you're pointing out, it seems many examples of student generated media suffers from a kind of exasperating objectivity that is so politically correct, ‘right-on’ and neutral, the copy becomes colourless, anodyne and crushingly dull.

“…to uncover discrepancies and wrongdoing in journalism one has to be bloody-minded, provocative and yes, the dirty word: subjective.”

Indeed, and I know I can be bloody minded with this, although to be fair no one is, I feel, saying that you should be bullish or controversial for the sake of it, but conversely, don’t be afraid of getting stuck in – if you cannot get your audience talking, provoke them into agreement or disagreement, sometimes even displease them, you’re doing something wrong.

You don't want a reader feeling 'meh' about your copy.

Journalism undergrads, grow a pair and don’t be afraid of stepping on a few toes now and then, because you will, and you will muck up – sometimes BIG time, but it’s no big deal, everyone does. Man-up and apologise, make amends then move on move on.

The overall theme, I think, is if anything, don’t be TIMID in your copy, Expunge clichés and journalese where you can, make your copy sparkle without becoming silly or zany.

Don’t be safe – please – it is really, REALLY dull to read. Find new ways of saying something – a good example of this is Charlie Brooker in the Guardian, he writes like the love child of Dorothy Parker and Raymond Chandler.

Make your copy sizzle without being sensational, entertain without distracting from the issue, stimulate, inform your reader. Simplify without losing clarity, and NEVER exaggerate. If you don’t know, SAY you don’t know, don’t wing it or bullshit. Look it up in a reputable Style guide.

*gets off soapbox*

You have a point there, Mr Stashko, in a similar vein to what like you point out, it seems many examples of student generated media suffers from a kind of exasperating objectivity that is so politically correct, 'right-on' and neutral, the copy becomes colourless, anodyne and crushingly dull.

"...to uncover discrepancies and wrongdoing in journalism one has to be bloody-minded, provocative and yes, the dirty word: subjective."

Indeed, and I know I can be bloody minded with this, although to be fair no one is, I feel, saying that you should be bullish or controversial for the sake of it, but conversely, don't be afraid of getting stuck in - if you cannot get your audience talking, provoke them into agreement or disagreement, sometimes even displease them, you're doing something wrong.

Journalism undergrads, grow a pair and don't be afraid of stepping on a few toes now and then, because you will *uck up - sometimes big time, but it's no big deal, everyone does. Man-up and apologise, make amends - move on.

I feel the overall theme here is if anything, don't be TIMID in your copy, Expunge clichés and journalese, make your copy sparkle without becoming silly or zany.

Don't be safe - please - it is INCREDIBLY dull to read. Find new ways of saying something - a good example of this is Charlie Brooker in the Guardian, he writes like the love child of Dorothy Parker and Raymond Chandler.

Make your copy sizzle without being sensational, entertain without distracting from the issue, stimulate, inform your reader. Simplify without losing clarity, and NEVER exaggerate. If you don't know, SAY you don't know, don't wing it or bullshit. Look it up in a reputable Style guide.

*gets off soapbox*

Just on that point of the "incessant focus on objectivity" and angles

The main reason for banging on about angles is to think about focus rather than to raise an existential challenge to be biased and unbiased at the same time. I agree that when you pick an angle it does preclude certain elements of a story (thats whats great about the web, you can link them back in) but that doesn't negate objectivity or encourage subjectivity. It simply means you select.

Objective does not always mean without a view and subjective is not just unsupported opinion.

Ooh, that crazy world of journalism ethics.

Hey, I think your points about subjectivity and objectivity are excellent. News journalists have a fetish about objectivity, one that I think is even stronger among US newspaper journalists than in the UK.

I think it's pretty troubling, considering that the truth of the matter is that you can only be objective about something you don't care about and who wants to read a story written by someone who doesn't care about it?

Good hyper-local is the exact inverse of what we are taught is 'good journalism.' It's immensely personal, you are involved with your subjects and it is about what you care about. That, more than anything else, is why I believe that hyper-local news is the future.

It all depends on the editor. When I ran The Courier up at Newcastle Uni, we made a point of encouraging our news team (and indeed readers) to cut their teeth in investigative journalism. As a result we just dodged court exposing a student letting agency who had been leaving - literally - blood and shit in student properties, gave a truthful account of drugs use on campus, grilled the issue of our NUS membership and much more.

I agree with the spirit of Joseph's post: my take on student journalism is that it ought to be where aspiring writers can work to ideals, not pick up bad habits. It's down to the editor to say, actually, we are going to investigate, we are going to campaign and we're not going to sensationalize news or recycle press releases.

Student journalism ought to be where students figure out if it's truly for them, not where they learn to cheat.

http://careers.guardian.co.uk/careers-blog/uni-papers-sam-parker

You’re right but I still think it’s a little early to make assumptions.

Yes everyone has to give it a go and it isn’t always about making mistakes. It’s more a fear of the unknown and actually having the guts to phone someone, tell them you’re just a student and ask them to tell you something that’s important to them.

Hence why we have all the practice assignments, so that by the time June 2012 rolls around we’ve built up enough courage. It’s far better for some people to take it slow and steady than to throw everything at it and have your confidence knocked.

Finding news stories of your own is part of our course criteria though. It’s amazing how many people are bad at it.

Journalism is about courage and being a journalism student is about not being afraid to make mistakes along the way.

Giving it a go is what matters.

I think it’s a fair point to make. I just think that if the course of study is so narrow, then you should be 100% behind exploring the options open to you.

I guess it’s a lack of enthusiasm coupled with a “bring me stories” attitude that I’m concerned about, so no personal attacks intended :)

I’m sorry Joseph but I think you’re being very stereotypical.

Not all student journalists are “sidelined to being ancillary press officers.” If we were, we’d be doing Public Relations.

The word “student” defines why; we can learn at a steady pace how to get into the real (scary) world of journalism.

Not everyone has your courage to make a news source of your own.

Mostly, but worryingly I’ve also experienced attitude with 2nd and 3rd year students.

Worrying that so many people whose aim is primarily to go into journalism don’t see things which are staring them right in the face…

I do agree but are you basing your argument solely on first year journalism students? If so do you not think the drive and motivation to go out and get stories independently can be developed?

I think it’s a fair point to make. I just think that if the course of study is so narrow, then you should be 100% behind exploring the options open to you.

I guess it’s a lack of enthusiasm coupled with a “bring me stories” attitude that I’m concerned about, no personal attacks intended :)