Who What When Where Why How?

Journalism is mainly a state of mind. Specifically, journalists are always asking questions -- even just mentally. They walk through life with an attitude of deliberate yet natural curiousity.

Here's an example...

An hour ago I was going for my daily walk. I strolled past the Hogan-Pancost property -- a 24-acre parcel adjacent to my neighborhood that is the subject of a controversial development proposal. Right now it's an open field, used occasionally for cattle or horse grazing. However, in a year or two more than 100 houses could be on that site. (The primary online source of current details is a web site created by community activists opposed to the project. But that's a start! So here's a link to the oppostion site.)

I walked on by, listening to a podcast on my MP3 player, not really paying attention. About an eighth of a mile further along it hit me: What questions should I be asking about that property right this minute? What do I need to know in order to cover that story, and to guide a team of citizen journalists on that effort?

BACK TO BASICS

We've all heard the journalistic mantra: Who What When Where Why How?

If you're not sure where to start with a citJ project, or if you happen to find yourself in a place or situation relevant to a story or story idea, PAUSE. Ask yourself those key one-word questions. How many of them can you answer, even a little, by probing a bit right now?

On my walk, here's what I discovered:

• WHO: Well, the owner of the property certainly wasn't around. Only cattle and horses were grazing, and they generally make poor interview subjects. But looking around me I formed a mental inventory of people involved: The property owner, the developer, the city bureaucracy and goverment, the neighbors, the parks and recreation dept. (which owns adjacent facilities), and experts qualified to comment on various aspect of the story (such as flood plain or traffic management). Even just making a mental list can be an important part of reporting.

• WHAT: In this case the "what" (or as I like to think, the "so what?") is change itself. This story is about how a proposed drastic change in local land use would affect the people involved, and also the local environment. The land is not the story, the water table is not the story, the property owner's finances are not the story. Change is the core of this story. That's good for storytelling, because change inherently lends drama and makes a story compelling. Even a news story.

• WHEN: As I considered that, I realized I need to spend some time getting up to speed on the status and schedule of meetings, deadlines, project plans, etc. I realized a gap that must be filled sooner rather than later. So the "when" at this point applied mainly to my own reporting efforts!

• WHERE: That was an easy one. I was standing in front of the field. But then I realized that I'd never actually walked across the field! Out on the field, 15 head of cattle with nice sharp horns said "Not today!" However, at my next opportunity I do plan to walk the field. Direct experience of a location can be crucial to good reporting.

• WHY: This comes down to the motivating force for and against the proposed change. I think of this part as the physics of journalism. Why does the owner want to develop the property? Is it really as simple as money or profit? I reminded myself not to fall victim to such easy rationales. Why do some adjacent homeowners oppose the development so vigorously? Again, I don't want to make the easy assumption of NIMBYism or blind resistance to change. My reporters and I will need to probe motives carefully. Also, there are many local residents who don't care strongly either way about this development proposal. Why don't they care? That's also worth probing.

• HOW: The proposal will move forward or stop through a bureaucratic process. My reporters and I will need to learn more about how that process works. It also hinges on business, so we'll need to learn more about the transaction and finances involved. And we'll also need to learn more about citizen activism and participation in this process. Do the activists have a strategy? Also, "how" forces the question of "how do citizen reporters get started in this process?" And I realized just standing there, staring at cows and answering questions in my head, was an important part of that process.

...See, journalism isn't rocket science. It starts in very small ways. The only tools you absolutely need to get started are a brain and a sense of curiousity. Everything else is your choice. You can tailor this process to meet your abilities and resources. Don't let anyone tell you there's only one way to do journalism.

TRY THIS:

Next time you're somewhere interesting or relevent to you in some way, pause and ask yourself the key questions: Who What When Where Why How?

Consider it an excercise -- you're stretching your brain to nurture a journalistic mindset. And if you happen to find an actual story in the process, cool!

Comments

[Jack Krupansky]

So, where should the concept of objectivity come into the picture when approaching the six questions? After all, a lot of the interesting blogs arise simple because someone takes a very subjective, non-objective, activist stance.

I still don't know exactly who should be "branded" as a true citizen journalist. Is true objectivity required or not? Can you simultaneously write as both a citizen journalist and an activist?

Sometimes we refer to bias. Does a citizen journalist need to approach the six questions from as bias-free perspective as possible, or is bias something that should be deliberately calculated as part of the "tone" of a cj's "perspective"?

Let me throw one of your six questions back at you... Why are you a citizen journalist? Not the superficial rationale, but the deep WHY. Why not just be a blogger without the "trappings" of "journalism"? Why not seek funding and be a true "professional" journalist?

Personally, I consider myself as a kind of "shadow media", always poking around to figure out what's *behind* the story, what's the *real* story, and why is it that so often the "truth" is not accurately conveyed in "the story". Of course, a big part of the problem is the struggle to meet deadlines and the pressure to continuously pump out "interesting" stories.

My impression is that in America today (and maybe human society in general), a lot of people seem far more interested in a good story than true but boring facts. Objectivity appears to be a quality that is tolerated more than valued.

-- Jack Krupansky

[A. Adam Glenn]

It's like a bad punchline: 'Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story!?' But sadly, Jack, I have to agree that all too often poor journalists fall into the trap of distorting a story for "entertainment" value.

And you make some good points on objectivity too. See my separate post in a new category that I hope will gather lots of comments, since it's such an important issue.

[Jack Krupansky]

I prefer the rendition of that aphorism as "Nothing like a few facts to ruin a good story."

-- Jack Krupansky