5 Steps to Becoming a Credible Reporter

To be credible is very important to a writer as nowadays charges of manufactured "news" are being found in whatever medium. In fact, complaints after complaints have been written about this. Credibility is defined in the dictionary as "the believability of a statement, action, or source, and the ability of the observer to believe that statement."

Every communicator is expected to have this quality as it has much bearing on his message. If a reporter lacks credibility, it is also most probable that his message may lack credibility in the presentation.

First, a writer or reporter must know the principles involved in any piece of writing. It does not take degrees to be able to come up with a good one. For instance, the Internet is full of instructions that can help a budding writer. As basic as knowing the necessary elements of news, for example, is important.

Will Richardson of The Georgia NJ Connection named ten of which he said a story only needs a few: oddity, emotion, consequence or its effect on the reader; proximity, drama, human interest, prominence, progress or technological advance; conflicts like man versus man, man versus nature, man versus machine, and man versus himself; and timeliness or the recency of the news. Surprisingly, he did not mention objectivity, which is considered very important in reporting.

Another important principle aside from using news elements is the use of data in reporting. One cannot be presenting news in general terms. Avoid saying, therefore, "According to reliable sources," "Some sectors observe," and the like, unless you have to protect your source. Name who, and tell what. With the subject named, mention the designation of the person relative to the news report. The source must have something to do with the data presented. For example, is he the officer-in-charge? Is he the spokesperson for the group? What is his personality in relation to the information?

Second, provide as much data as possible and check for facts. Robert F. Abbott, in writing for "Data Delivers Credibility," recommended using very specific information. He said, "Often, the more specific you can be, the more credibility you have."

Reviewer Brent Raynes, in evaluating writer/researcher Michael Grosso for a popular new book said, "He is a thorough and credible writer/researcher who assembles his case carefully and clearly. He weighs out the pros and cons, the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence for [his topic]. He knows the arguments and he is well versed and familiar with the histories and sciences surrounding the issues explored herein." Would that we can all be like Grosso.

This means it is always best to look into what environment has to say about your topic. Citing authorities can be very enhancing. In a news report, for example, after the lead, the second paragraph usually begins with the words, "According to." The same is true with any research material. When one cites many leading authorities in one’s topic, one is actually resorting to the practice of looking into the state of the art.

In handling data, be extra careful. In a critical part of one country in Asia, some reporters intentionally misspelled names as a way of escape when confrontation for data is most probable. Double check on names, dates, figures. If you are not sure, try to call those concerned and check. As long as there is still time, edit your own story to make it more presentable. Nothing is ever final as long as it is still possible to make necessary changes.

Third, do not exaggerate. For example, if there were only 10 people you saw in the area, you must not say 100 to make the picture impressive. If the rank of the person involved is only a private, do not promote him to captain to make the story sensational. If the subject was only saying his stomach ached, do not write of that as pregnancy. If the person is gay, do not say he is a hermaphrodite. There are differences - great differences - especially if you knit all these into one story that becomes fiction at the end.

There was an enterprising news hen of a local newspaper in Asia who had exaggerated almost everything in her story. She wrote about a hermaphrodite who had a captain for a boyfriend and now the hermaphrodite was pregnant. Her paper ran the story for more than a week it "developed." The foreign news had taken notice of it and sent representatives of the World Health Organization as this was a "first of its kind." Before they could arrive however, the reporter said the hermaphrodite went into hiding. Needless to say, the reporter’s credibility was put into question. She had to make a public apology later on.

Fourth, as much as possible, keep your own opinions from entering into the picture. If you say "allegedly," for example, who alleged? Stick to facts. As much as possible, present all sides of your story to project an objective stance. News is supposed to be impartial. Bringing into the picture the fruits of one’s own selective perception gives only half of the picture or just nearly all of the truth. "Nearly" means some of the data may have been suppressed. If one habitually does that, he becomes insensitive to what is true and what is not.

As a source, whether in speaking or in writing, one must be credible. It is not surprising that among law enforcement agencies, whenever one has to give his statement, his credibility as a source is evaluated first before his message is ever considered. Sadly, this quality can be lost just by being careless with facts and by being found dishonest in reporting.

Fifth, a reporter should keep educating himself even after he earns his degrees. The world is changing fast in many aspects, just as the world of communication is. Every reporter worth his salt is expected to continue learning on even after he hangs his diploma. That much, he owes his readers.

http://www.writing.com/main/view_item/item_id/1132898