(Image from christuniversity.in)
A recent journalism assignment has got me thinking a lot about one of the basic rules of journalism: don't assume one person's or a few peoples' opinions is representative of a whole group.
I have been bombarding innocent citizens the St. Vital ward prior to the Winnipeg Civic election to find out what they think are problems in their neighbourhood and what they want changed at city hall in the next four years.
With this information, I'm to write an article for the CBC's website, quoting five people, that gives readers an idea of what is going on in the St. Vital ward as they prepare to vote for a city councillor.
I've collected a lot of opinions, but they vary widely, from potholes to better community facilities to less police radar guns, making it difficult to pinpoint key concerns many citizens share.
I am struggling to find a way to write a story that does not project the opinions of these few people onto everyone in the ward, but that informs people living outside the ward about some of the ward's issues.
That involves staying away from phrases like "many citizens" or "a major concern".
Any other thoughts on how I can pull this off?
"I've collected a lot of opinions, but they vary widely, from potholes to better community facilities to less police radar guns, making it difficult to pinpoint key concerns many citizens share.""
ReplyDeleteWell, then, that's probably a clue to the story, isn't it? People in St. V don't agree that there's 1 or 2 central issues that galvanize the community. Everyone's got a different opinion on what the problems are.
One the other hand, remember that shared group characteristics are where "demographics" or "target publics" come from.
ReplyDeleteGet enough people together with the same interests and: you've got a movement.