The difference between print and broadcast news writing
Writing for the eye vs. the ear
Someone asked me this week if journalism is “good writing.”
We’ve all read stories that make sense, that flow, and that answer most of our questions. We’ve also all read stories that were a mess, or boring or not clear.
Good journalism may not always rise to the level of a Hemingway, although he had journalism experience. I’ve known some journalists who are wonderful writers. (I’ll name a few below.) A lot depends on how you, the reader, are consuming that writing – whether it’s for print/web, radio or television. Each demands a distinct writing style.
Print journalism is aimed at being consumed by your eyes. Seems obvious, I know, but radio and television writing are much different than print.
Writing for the ear
Radio news is written for the ear. Listeners can’t go back and re-read something they don’t understand, so radio news writing has to be simplified. Broadcast journalism professors taught us this rule: OTPS – one thought per sentence. No clauses, no complicated sentence structure.
Good radio anchors know how to use their voice to make that copy come alive. Listeners can’t see commas or periods, so anchors drop their vocal pitch down a notch for a comma and drop it dramatically at the end of a sentence. They may pause a beat before an important phrase, to draw the listener’s attention to what follows. Good writers understand writing for the ear and giving the anchors clear, short sentences to work with.
Writing to video
Writing for television news uses some of the radio rules, such as short sentences, but adds the need to write copy that complements the video.
When I sat down to write a TV news story, I would think not only about what facts I’d learned that day, and what interview sound I had gathered to support those facts. I also tried to think about what viewers would be seeing for each sentence I would write. Good TV news writing refers to the video. Visuals are way more powerful than my recorded audio track.
Here’s an example. Let’s say a ten-story apartment building is on fire. Good writing to video isn’t as simple as “The apartment building has ten floors (show the building). The fire department arrived. (Show a fire truck). Smoke billowed from the roof (show the smoke).”
Those are short, simple sentences but they don’t communicate anything to the viewer that they can’t see themselves. It’s way too basic. And boring. But using those same shots, if I write “Residents of this ten-story apartment building were stunned to hear fire alarms going off this morning. A fire on the top floor quickly burned out of control. The fire department sent crews from three fire stations to pour water onto the flames. Smoke could be seen five miles away in downtown.” That’s informative and refers to the video on screen.
On the other hand, if a mother on the third floor is dangling her baby out the window and people in the parking lot plan to catch the baby in a blanket, well, there’s no point in me writing ANY copy, because the visuals are so compelling that viewers wouldn’t hear a thing I said. Sometimes, good television news writing is knowing when to shut up.
Reading newspapers on the radio is not easy
I am reminded on a weekly basis of the difference between print and broadcast writing at one of my volunteer gigs. I read the Des Moines Register one morning a week at IRIS, the Iowa Radio Reading Information Service, a non-profit network of radio stations across Iowa for use by Iowans with visual disabilities.
Trying to make newspaper copy sound good on the radio is hard. That’s no knock at the Register or its staff. They’re writing for the eye, not the ear. Newspaper sentences are long. There are all kinds of clauses. Newspapers put people’s titles after their names. In broadcast, the titles always come first. Newspaper copy puts a quote attribution after the quote. “I’m going to veto this bill because I don’t think it serves the needs of Iowans,” said Governor Kim Reynolds. In broadcast, we’d write “Governor Kim Reynolds says she will veto the bill because it doesn’t serve Iowans.”
The best writers
After reading newspaper copy on the radio for the past few years, I’ve noticed that a few print reporters’ stories flow really well on air. I always enjoyed reading stories on the pandemic written by the Register’s excellent health reporter at the time, Tony Leys. His stories were complete. They made sense. Sentences were clear and short. I could read his stories cold and make them sound great on the radio. (Tony now writes for KFF Health News, and his stories occasionally show up in the Register.)
Another wonderful writer is Art Cullen, a member of the Iowa Writers’ Collaborative. Art is a poet. There’s never any doubt about where he stands. His sentences are clear. And powerful. There’s a reason he has a Pulitzer Prize on his mantel.
In TV news, I’ve known some wonderful writers. At KCCI, I marveled at the abilities of Kevin Cooney, Dana Cardin and Eric Hanson. Eric has won more national writing awards than anyone I know. At the network level, it’s hard to beat CBS Newsman Steve Hartman or the now-retired NBC News feature reporter Bob Dotson.
The next time you’re reading or watching a news story, I hope you’ll think about the writing – whether it helped you understand the story or whether it just got in the way.
There are lots of good writers, almost all of them with journalism experience, in the Iowa Writers’ Collaborative.
Recalling the times that I was overjoyed to have the opportunity to hear a wonderful author speak at a conference workshop! This outstanding writer was an average presenter....... Thanks for shedding some light on that phenomenon 🙏
This is a fascinating piece for me. I’m a retired English/ Language Arts instructor whose career included decades of teaching composition. The journalism minor I picked up in college (and which was not part of my teaching assignment) was a print- focused program with no background in broadcast. You present an intriguing and clear contrast between print and broadcast writing. Thank you.