These stories
illustrate the importance of context, both visual and factual, in making stories
more understandable. Visual context involves adding B-roll to support the
script, rather than depending so heavily on meeting video. It also involves the
use of a split screen to avoid confusion between two characters in the story who
resemble each other. Factal information was added in setting up sound bites to
clarify the meaning of what was said. These stories also demonstrate the value
of placing background information early in a
story.
The Story: Commission Meeting
The
Changes
The local Public Transportation Commission is meeting
to adopt a new ethics code, a move prompted by a lawsuit.
The suit alleges that in granting valuable business permits,
the commission gave
Restructured story to put background information first,
and moved reference to the lawsuit higher up. Also created
a split screen effect with graphics to put the two key
players in the story (who
preferential treatment
to a former member. The commission also is discussing
how to handle the legal bills from the ongoing lawsuit.
This story is a day-of-air package.
Reporter: Deborah Potter for NewsLab.
The Issues
Sequence of events--who did what,
and when--is not clearly explained.
Story is written in such a way
that it depends largely on meeting video, which does not add to the viewer's
understanding.
Not all lead-ins provide enough
context for sound bites that follow.
Script refers to possible future
actions by the commission at three different points, making it difficult for
viewers to keep track of potential next steps.
resemble each other) on screen
at the same time.
Added video of ambulances, taxis,
and taxpayers to match script references, and cut down meeting video total from
three segments totalling 28 seconds, to one segment totalling six
seconds.
Checked with commission staff to
clarify what Norman meant by his statement and rewrote the lead-in to reflect
that explanation.
Moved the reference to a possible
tax increase from the middle to the end, to give it additional emphasis, and to
connect it to the discussion of other funding options.
For Discussion
Is a story easier to follow if it
is told in a more or less chronological order? Why or why not?
How does the use of meeting
B-roll help viewers understand the issue under discussion? Does this kind of
video send a subtle, unintended message to viewers about the freshness or
significance of the story?
Can introducing characters in a
split screen with graphics help viewers avoid confusion about who did what in
the story?
What affect does video context
have on the viewer's perception of key characters in a story?
