Final Newstrack: Lessons Learned throughout JO 304

Recently I've started keeping a journal of little tidbits I learn on my journey to becoming a "real-life" journalist. It's become something to force me to reflect on my progress throughout each project, highlighting the ups and downs as I move forward. Since JO 304 was a big part of that process this semester, I thought it would be nice to share some of the lessons I've learned along the way for my final news track blog. Please note that these are all little scraps of fleeting information I jot down in a moment's notice, so some may not be perfect, but they've helped me nonetheless.

-- Are your batteries charged? Do you have extra memory cards? If not, what are you even doing here? Technology may fail in a single moment, but that doesn't mean the story will stop for you.

-- What good are connections if you don't use them?

-- Research beforehand, and be prepared for a story to fall through. It happens. Where's your backup? What are you going to do next? How much time did you leave yourself for mishaps like this? (which are bound to happen, btw)

-- Do not put things off until the last minute. You're only hurting yourself.

-- Don't be afraid to walk up to people and ask for their help. You're shy, we get it. And, yes, some will say no, but some will say yes. That's all that really matters -- (the others you can just ignore because BU is so big you'll never see them again!!)

-- Be confident. (See above.)

-- Take initiative. Put yourself out there. Get noticed -- it feels good. (See above).

-- You are doing okay.

Analyzing BBC News: Multimedia

Nowadays journalism is all about incorporating different multimedia into one story, utilizing photos, videos and audio to give readers a more personal look at an event or situation from anywhere around the world. As I analyzed BBC News this week, I found many of the same faults and successes I've relayed in my past news tracks -- namely, that the site does not do enough to integrate different kinds of media into one post.

BBC's success this week came primarily in the form of photos. Their article on the immigrants ignored in President Obama's recent executive orders incorporated six very different photographs within a medium-length post, which is the most I've seen since tracking the site. However, in this case, I believe that video would have supplemented the article more efficiently. The photos were simply portraits of immigrants mentioned in the article, but I think it would have been more informative and striking to see those immigrants speaking for themselves.

When I looked a little closer, I realized that there were videos that could have been included in the post. These were listed under a small section titled, "Related Stories." Sure, they weren't necessarily interviews with the immigrants themselves, but BBC has access to an entire page of videos portraying the general public's opinions toward Obama's address. Why weren't these included in the original article? Most readers don't like to search for information, and so they won't -- they will only read or watch what is right in front of them and is easily accessible. So why would you mask this related content (the box isn't that big, so it's not crying out for attention to begin with) and force them to click to new pages in order to see it? It doesn't quite make sense to me. BBC could definitely improve here.

I was again both excited and a little disappointed when I came across an audio report in BBC's article on the evolution of HIV. This is rare -- I've never seen an audio report woven into a story until today. However, BBC again tanked on the presentation front. The soundbite is from a professor at Mercyhurst University, talking about the caution needed when assessing this study -- very worthy information. Yet, the soundbite is almost hidden away because it's placed right next to the advertising column on the post. In fact, some of the advertisements are bigger than the audio report itself, attracting the attention that should be on the news, not on ads! I think BBC could have prevented this by justifying the edge of the audio report with the left side of the article (and away from the ads), and possibly making it span the entire column so that it demands your attention.

I'm generally a fan of BBC. I appreciate the quality of their articles and how they span the entire globe. Usually they are my first source for world news. However, I'm disappointed that such a strong organization could continuously make these fatal (and easy to fix) mistakes.