We edit audio because we do not always have the time on air to broadcast a whole interview. Before you start editing audio, always ask the editor or producer of the item how long the edited item should be.

Make sure you are familiar with editing software you are using.

Ask whether you need to edit a cut down of the whole interview including your questions or if you are to provide one or more clips of just the interviewee talking.

Listen to the whole interview all the way through once, taking note of key points and noting down a time code for each important point made by the interviewee.

Listen out for poor quality. If you can’t hear what’s being said, it’s unlikely your listeners will be able to.

There are two main ways to edit – amputation and filleting.

Amputation implies cutting short the whole interview or cutting out whole questions and answers.

Filleting means taking only the essential parts of each answer and cutting out a little of each answer.

Amputation risks leaving out relevant information while filleting can result in an interview which sounds disjointed and unnatural.

Allow interviewees to sound as if they are having a conversation. It is not your job to make the interviewee sound more fluent or more polished.

However if they interject with hesitations such as ‘um’ and ‘er’ or leave long pauses in their answers, you should consider editing some of these out if it helps the listener understand what is being said.

Be careful not to cut all the hesitations and pauses out because that can sound artificial and unnatural.

Never take one answer and edit it as a response to another question. This is unethical and unprofessional.

Radio is a medium that is based on your ears. That mean when you edit audio, try not to edit using just the screen. Pay more attention to how it sounds rather than how it looks on the screen.

When you have finished editing, always listen back to the finished edit to make sure you have fulfilled the brief you were given, that you have captured all the relevant points the interviewee made, and that you have represented the interviewees points fairly and accurately.

The post Editing audio for radio news first appeared on Media Helping Media.

While delivering a training course at a TV station I noticed that all the packages were made in exactly the same way. The reporters would go out with a camera operator, shoot some footage and get an interview or two. They would come back to the office, decide what interview clips to use in their package and start typing.

The scripts they wrote would have worked fine for radio or newspapers – but they had no connection with the pictures. Apart from the interview clips, all the other pictures they used were just wallpaper behind the reporter’s voice.

This misses the point of television reporting; let the pictures tell the story, wherever possible. Here’s one way of making a TV package by thinking first about the pictures:

Pictures come first

When the pictures have been ingested into the system, make a shot list then show the editor the pictures.

Which are the most interesting shots? What is their optimum lifespan (in seconds)?

What is the right sequence to tell the story? (It is not necessarily the order in which they were recorded)

Do you have a good opening shot? Do you have a good shot for the end?

What is the best place for your stand-up (piece-to-camera) if there is one?

Agree with the editor how the package is to be put together and the key elements of the text

Agree the target length of the package.

Now do your rough cut. Each shot should be as long as it is visually interesting.

Do not use the same shot twice in the package, unless there is a compelling reason to do so (helping with the edit is not a compelling reason).

Does each shot join up smoothly with the next?

The points which attract the eye should ideally be in the same area of the screen at each shot change.

Avoid jump cuts.

If someone is walking, try to end with them walking out of the picture (especially if they are in the next shot in a different place).

With moving shots, only use the moving part, not the static beginning or end.

If you cut away from an interview or a press conference, don’t go back to it unless there is a good reason to do so (helping with the edit is not a good reason).

Don’t use the first question in an interview – start with the first answer.

Watch the finished edit carefully. Does it flow, is there anything that can be cut without damaging the overall package, is there anything missing, is it visually effective?

Now write a shot list with accurate timings.

Now write your script.

You might want to read our training module on ‘How to create a broadcast news package”.

The post Letting the pictures tell the story first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Enlisting a second pair of eyes

Trawling for typos

Most journalists need a second pair of eyes to check through their copy in order to spot any factual, grammatical or spelling mistakes.

This is because it’s often difficult to see where you have made errors.

We see and read what we think we have written.

However, as more of us work alone, without anyone to check our work, mistakes can get missed.

Here are a few suggestions from journalists on how to reduce embarrassing errors.

Getting sloppy with copy

I write a lot of stuff on the move. The copy always looks fine to me when I write it, but when it’s published I regularly spot silly mistakes.

Perhaps it’s because I am sloppy; perhaps it’s because I am a fast touch typist. Others have told me they have the same problem.

When I was a newspaper journalist I always relied on the news editor and the subs to put things right. Probably too much so.

When I moved to radio and later TV there was less of a need to get the spelling right because I just voiced the script I had written – so I probably became careless.

And now, when I write I don’t have the luxury of a second pair of eyes to check what I have written.

I invited a number of colleagues to share how they deal with the issue.

The contributions were so good that I thought it worth including them in a short training module for this site because they may be useful for a wider audience.

The three tips for spotting errors in copy

There were several tips submitted but three stood out:

1. Try to fool the brain – change text size and colour, font and background.
2. Don’t get caught up in the narrative – read from bottom to top so you are forced to think.
3. Print and read out loud – to be able to hear silly mistakes in sentence construction.

Fool your brain

Terry O’Connor, a former print and online journalist and now a freelance journalist and trainer, suggested that it’s all a matter of tricking the brain. Terry wrote:

“Since we journalists cannot (normally) put our work aside for a time and then re-read it, we miss the ‘stranger’s eye’ that’s essential for picking up mistakes. Our eyes might see the mistakes but our brain interprets what the eye sees as whatever we intended to write. So it’s time to fool the brain by presenting the material in an unfamiliar way, thereby forcing it to see it as a stranger would — a bit, anyway. If you have time, print the article and re-read it. If you don’t have time or paper, change the screen resolution, page width, text colour, background colour, or all of these. If I’m in a real hurry I just select all, make the text white and the background black. This forces the brain to work as a stranger and you’ll be surprised what you can pick up.”

Read your material out of context

Phil Harding, journalist, media consultant and former director of news at the BBC World Service said he doesn’t know of a foolproof method, but goes along similar lines to Terry O’Connor in trying to force the brain to look at the content differently.

“Leave it overnight…..print it out of course, if you can….changing the font…..reading the paragraphs in reverse order (part of the trick is not to get caught up in the narrative)…. and often best of all read it out loud slowly.”

Enlist a trusted colleague

Nick Raistrick, a media development specialist agrees with Phil Harding’s point about reading the material out loud, but he also turns to colleagues to check his copy.

“I enlarge my copy using a massive font, close everything else on my desktop, and then read it out loud …. and still I miss stuff. I can’t sub my own work at all, which is embarrassing as I’m so anal with other people‘s copy. I’ve developed an informal network of subs who I sometimes send things to… as long as it’s reciprocal. Not always practical as deadlines loom though…”

Look out for sentences that don’t make sense

Bob Doran, former senior BBC journalist and now media consultant and trainer agrees with both the reading aloud and fooling the brain approach.

“I always recommend reading your story aloud. Sometimes a piece can look fine on the screen; it’s only when you read it aloud that you spot the absurdities. I remember listening to a radio news story which began: A man has died after being shot outside a concert by Madonna (or some other star). The writer meant to say that Madonna was giving the concert. When it was read out loud, it sounded like she’d pulled the trigger. Read it aloud yourself and you’ll see. This approach is particularly useful for radio and television scripts. If your sentences are hard to read because they’re too long or too wordy, you’ll know they won’t work on air.”

Walk away, if you can, and return to the text later

Catherine Kustanczy, reporter and freelance broadcaster suggests leaving the copy and returning to it later. She agrees with the reading out loud approach.

“Walk away for a day, an hour, it doesn’t matter. Then come back. Read it once. Read it again, out loud. Always works for me.”

Naomi Goldsmith, a journalism trainer at the BBC World Service Trust agrees with the approach of making the brain work.

“I change the look of the copy. I generally change the font style, make the size larger and print it out to read. The secret is to make it look unfamiliar.”

The post How to spot errors in your writing first appeared on Media Helping Media.