I went to London this weekend for the Press Gazette Student Journalism Awards with the reps from Sheffo.
All the post-grads had been shortlisted as a team for our local election coverage, and Rhoda was up for Best Student Interviewer.
Rhoda won, which was excellent, and then proceeded to amuse us all by clambering across the lighting rig to reach the stage. We cheered her desire to venture where no other student journalists dared, clapped her efforts to take the path of most resistance, and hi-fived her refusal to look happy about the award on stage.
The rest of us, the Election Team for which I was simply a reperesentative, lost out to Homefront, a glossy magazine. On reflection, we didn't really have a hope in a category where every other finalist was a highly polished showcase periodical. Our huge cross platform effort, produced live and unedited over two days of elections, was probably just too sprawling to be taken in by the judges. It's a shame as it's some of the work I'm most proud of this year, and the closest we've come to real newsroom pressures.
I hope that doesn't seem too churlish. It's a shame we didn't get to see the other entries properly and I'm sure they were fantastic and well deserving. I just don't feel like we were really in the same contest.
The idea of entering each medium separately next year was discussed with perhaps the website or magazine alone standing a greater chance than the whole cross platform extravaganza, but this would destroy the whole purpose of converged work.
Still, we discussed our loss on the way home and concluded you can still put "Award winning" Election Project on your CVs, as the tutors at least won awards for it. And when you talk it over at interview, they never need to see all the typos that spoiled the final product.
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Blogging the elections
Saturday, 3 May 2008
Today I was covering the local elections for the university news website, JUS News.
We had a team of us at the results count, and a supporting gang back at the newroom to build up coverage. That's about twenty times the manpower of any real news organisation, and I think we did a good job. I know it seemed like Sky News was asking us for info at one point, and we had better contacts than most.
I was mainly taking pictures for the live feed and gossip blogging as we went along, which all went pretty well and was well recieved.
Overall, a triump for wi-fi - and special thanks to Kate as it was her laptop that let us get anything done when mine failed.
The blog is copied below in full, with all errors intact.
-live at the count -
11.00
Well, the results are starting to come in, and we're sending info back online as fast as we can.
It's hot in here, a huge room full of people running from table to table. The light is poor so photos are blurred, and we're trapped up in the press gallery far from the VIPs - so were using a lot of zoom in our coverage.
There are hundreds of people below us, so stalking the leaders with our cameras is tricky... look away and you loose them for 20 minutes.
On the subject of pictures, most of the counters seem to lack a sense of drama, passing out voting slips rather than tipping out the ballot boxes properly.
11.20
Mass movement - I think the results are going to come in in a flood. It looks like a recount in the central area, and from the results we've seen Labour majorities are being slashed. Still no sight of the only Tory in the village, but the Dore table is awash with blue - they're clearly concentrating hard on their foothold in Sheffield.
11.30
Broomhill is bout to declare, seat of the Lib Dem leader Paul Scriven, and my home ward. Another hard man to track with a lense, so hopefully he'll stand still on the podium.
This live reporting business isn't going smoothly, but then we never really believed it would. The connection is slow, and we're only allowed one power supply between 3 laptops and two TV cameras. Next time we should bring out own splitter block.
Oh, Lib Dem leader directly beneath me - time to photograph his bald patch again. No... he's running to the plinth.
He's won as expected, and looks happy, but I imagine he's got his eye on the bigger picture.
11.40
Firth Park - The BNP are standing here - I havn't seen the candidate yet, they declined to take the stand and were booed when the results were read.
700+ votes for the BNP - well ahead of the Conservatives and Greens.
We've also just had insider news that Central ward has gone to the Greens - that now give them total control and Labour are out. A bad day for Labour gets worse.
Oh and Blunkett's here - hiding behind a pilar at the moment.
12.00
Lib Dems just won Gleadless which is a big and unexpected step for them. Paul Scriven looks very happy down on the floor.
We also got confirmation that the Greens took central.
12.15
The interviews are starting to arrive, all exclusive on JUS News. Plenty of people seem prepared talk to us which s very kind of them.
we're now looking to get the results up as fast as possible for you.
12.25
The first BNP candidate has shown their face on the stand. More Boos. They're starting to come second in quite a few wards around the city. Aside from that, everything is ruing as expected.
Graves Park ward just declared and we got to enjoy the local socalist candidate giving a clenched fist salute.
12.30
Big news - The Liberal Democrats have won control of the city.
That's the story from our inside sources... we're wating for confirmation, but this is big news. Labour have held this city tight for 50 years, and a blow here represents a major knockback on a national leave.
Oooh, must go, Blunkett will talk to us now. Will see how he feels about the Labour disaster today.
12.40
We just interviewed David Blunkett and he admitted that Labour have lost control - The Lib Dems are looking at a 6 seat lead across the city.
He also had this to say: "It's now clear that the Liberal Democrats have responsibility for the city. I very much hope they don't abandon our strategy of closing the gap."
"I hope the Lib Dems will represent the whole city now, not just the privileged areas that elected them."
"The message at the moment is anyone but Labour."
"We've got a bloody nose today."
12.48
The Blues out!
The Torys have just lost their only seat at Dore and Totley - The Lib Dems took it, meaning that the conservative party no longer has a single councilor in the UK's fourth large city.
12.56
Jan Wilson, leader of the Labour Party in Sheffield:
"Obviously we're disappointed with the result."
"It's part of the national picture."
"We're going to meet later to talk things over and try and see where we went wrong, and see what we need to do to regain the faith of the people of Sheffield."
"Where do we go from here? Home for a cup of tea!"
1.07
We just spoke to Paul Scriven, the Lib Dem leader and a very happy man.
He said that it would be wrong to see this as a reflection of the national view, and he thought many votes were tactical, but that their party represented the best overall compromise.
1.10
And that's it, we're on or way back to the office to cut and paste and edit and take a good hard look at these results. But in brief - The King is dead - Long live the King!
Ben
We had a team of us at the results count, and a supporting gang back at the newroom to build up coverage. That's about twenty times the manpower of any real news organisation, and I think we did a good job. I know it seemed like Sky News was asking us for info at one point, and we had better contacts than most.
I was mainly taking pictures for the live feed and gossip blogging as we went along, which all went pretty well and was well recieved.
Overall, a triump for wi-fi - and special thanks to Kate as it was her laptop that let us get anything done when mine failed.
The blog is copied below in full, with all errors intact.
-live at the count -
11.00
Well, the results are starting to come in, and we're sending info back online as fast as we can.
It's hot in here, a huge room full of people running from table to table. The light is poor so photos are blurred, and we're trapped up in the press gallery far from the VIPs - so were using a lot of zoom in our coverage.
There are hundreds of people below us, so stalking the leaders with our cameras is tricky... look away and you loose them for 20 minutes.
On the subject of pictures, most of the counters seem to lack a sense of drama, passing out voting slips rather than tipping out the ballot boxes properly.
11.20
Mass movement - I think the results are going to come in in a flood. It looks like a recount in the central area, and from the results we've seen Labour majorities are being slashed. Still no sight of the only Tory in the village, but the Dore table is awash with blue - they're clearly concentrating hard on their foothold in Sheffield.
11.30
Broomhill is bout to declare, seat of the Lib Dem leader Paul Scriven, and my home ward. Another hard man to track with a lense, so hopefully he'll stand still on the podium.
This live reporting business isn't going smoothly, but then we never really believed it would. The connection is slow, and we're only allowed one power supply between 3 laptops and two TV cameras. Next time we should bring out own splitter block.
Oh, Lib Dem leader directly beneath me - time to photograph his bald patch again. No... he's running to the plinth.
He's won as expected, and looks happy, but I imagine he's got his eye on the bigger picture.
11.40
Firth Park - The BNP are standing here - I havn't seen the candidate yet, they declined to take the stand and were booed when the results were read.
700+ votes for the BNP - well ahead of the Conservatives and Greens.
We've also just had insider news that Central ward has gone to the Greens - that now give them total control and Labour are out. A bad day for Labour gets worse.
Oh and Blunkett's here - hiding behind a pilar at the moment.
12.00
Lib Dems just won Gleadless which is a big and unexpected step for them. Paul Scriven looks very happy down on the floor.
We also got confirmation that the Greens took central.
12.15
The interviews are starting to arrive, all exclusive on JUS News. Plenty of people seem prepared talk to us which s very kind of them.
we're now looking to get the results up as fast as possible for you.
12.25
The first BNP candidate has shown their face on the stand. More Boos. They're starting to come second in quite a few wards around the city. Aside from that, everything is ruing as expected.
Graves Park ward just declared and we got to enjoy the local socalist candidate giving a clenched fist salute.
12.30
Big news - The Liberal Democrats have won control of the city.
That's the story from our inside sources... we're wating for confirmation, but this is big news. Labour have held this city tight for 50 years, and a blow here represents a major knockback on a national leave.
Oooh, must go, Blunkett will talk to us now. Will see how he feels about the Labour disaster today.
12.40
We just interviewed David Blunkett and he admitted that Labour have lost control - The Lib Dems are looking at a 6 seat lead across the city.
He also had this to say: "It's now clear that the Liberal Democrats have responsibility for the city. I very much hope they don't abandon our strategy of closing the gap."
"I hope the Lib Dems will represent the whole city now, not just the privileged areas that elected them."
"The message at the moment is anyone but Labour."
"We've got a bloody nose today."
12.48
The Blues out!
The Torys have just lost their only seat at Dore and Totley - The Lib Dems took it, meaning that the conservative party no longer has a single councilor in the UK's fourth large city.
12.56
Jan Wilson, leader of the Labour Party in Sheffield:
"Obviously we're disappointed with the result."
"It's part of the national picture."
"We're going to meet later to talk things over and try and see where we went wrong, and see what we need to do to regain the faith of the people of Sheffield."
"Where do we go from here? Home for a cup of tea!"
1.07
We just spoke to Paul Scriven, the Lib Dem leader and a very happy man.
He said that it would be wrong to see this as a reflection of the national view, and he thought many votes were tactical, but that their party represented the best overall compromise.
1.10
And that's it, we're on or way back to the office to cut and paste and edit and take a good hard look at these results. But in brief - The King is dead - Long live the King!
Ben
Super Coverage
Monday, 11 February 2008
The War for the White House; now in bar charts!
Later in the year I'll be working on the election project. We'll be building a website and running full, round the clock coverage of an election for a few days - the full works. Nobody's sure what election it'll be this year; Gordon doesn't look like doing us the favour, but there could local polling. Or hell, maybe a referendum on the EU constitution or ID cards.
While I'm waiting for that to roll around I've been trying to keep an eye on how big media is covering the US elections to pick up some ideas and spot some mistakes.
In general it seems that total coverage is a must; every piece of available data has to be reported and analysed, every poll and every statistic made available online. Strength in depth is the key. This has led to most news sites creating separate sections dedicated to election coverage even before the main election gets going. These sub sites are invariably packed with information, raw data and graphic interpretation in the form of interactive maps and charts. But while the web can host this volume of information, the ability of the news organisations to present it all effectively is being tested.
On MSNBC the election overview is an example of how not to do it; all the stats from each state laid out on one endless page. You can jump around but it feels clumsy and you can't rearrange the numbers to look for patterns. What I do like here is that they mark out stories when they get updated, even when they fall down the news rankings.
CNN is dry, sometimes messy, but very functional. Their results page is superb, a mass of stats that can be easily re-arranged to answer any questions using simple drop-down menus.
One problem here is that their interactive coverage seems to be occasionally based on low resolution images, resulting in pixelated photos and very grainy jpg text. (For a good example of this serious mistake, look at fuzzy captions on my pictures). Displaying text as images is a real blow for accessibility, but I guess the blind aren’t the readers they want to impress with fancy graphics. Since 'Super Tuesday' this seems to have improved.
Their 'Explainer' section is good (even if it's a horrible neologism) with short but useful comments from a range of pundits. They also do a great job of explaining how the whole US system works, which is oddly lacking elsewhere.
USA Today tried to make me sit through an advert before I got to their election coverage, and then attacked me with pop-ups when I go there. I didn't buy a Dell and I didn't spend much time on their site.
Fox is too brash for me to spend too much time with. It's good, but it all feels like an imperialist war-game, not news coverage. They have great links to local media, but that's probably because they own it all. Useful though.
The New York Times has my favourite semi-novelty feature: an info-collage that lets you see just who is endorsing who. So now I know that Howard Stern is yelling for Ron Paul, Scarlett supporting Obama, and Chuck Norris (!) will roundhouse kick your face if you don't vote for Huckabee.
I'll update this post as I find other good examples of innovative coverage or horrible mistakes.
Later in the year I'll be working on the election project. We'll be building a website and running full, round the clock coverage of an election for a few days - the full works. Nobody's sure what election it'll be this year; Gordon doesn't look like doing us the favour, but there could local polling. Or hell, maybe a referendum on the EU constitution or ID cards.While I'm waiting for that to roll around I've been trying to keep an eye on how big media is covering the US elections to pick up some ideas and spot some mistakes.
In general it seems that total coverage is a must; every piece of available data has to be reported and analysed, every poll and every statistic made available online. Strength in depth is the key. This has led to most news sites creating separate sections dedicated to election coverage even before the main election gets going. These sub sites are invariably packed with information, raw data and graphic interpretation in the form of interactive maps and charts. But while the web can host this volume of information, the ability of the news organisations to present it all effectively is being tested.
On MSNBC the election overview is an example of how not to do it; all the stats from each state laid out on one endless page. You can jump around but it feels clumsy and you can't rearrange the numbers to look for patterns. What I do like here is that they mark out stories when they get updated, even when they fall down the news rankings.
CNN is dry, sometimes messy, but very functional. Their results page is superb, a mass of stats that can be easily re-arranged to answer any questions using simple drop-down menus.
One problem here is that their interactive coverage seems to be occasionally based on low resolution images, resulting in pixelated photos and very grainy jpg text. (For a good example of this serious mistake, look at fuzzy captions on my pictures). Displaying text as images is a real blow for accessibility, but I guess the blind aren’t the readers they want to impress with fancy graphics. Since 'Super Tuesday' this seems to have improved.
Their 'Explainer' section is good (even if it's a horrible neologism) with short but useful comments from a range of pundits. They also do a great job of explaining how the whole US system works, which is oddly lacking elsewhere.
USA Today tried to make me sit through an advert before I got to their election coverage, and then attacked me with pop-ups when I go there. I didn't buy a Dell and I didn't spend much time on their site.
Fox is too brash for me to spend too much time with. It's good, but it all feels like an imperialist war-game, not news coverage. They have great links to local media, but that's probably because they own it all. Useful though.The New York Times has my favourite semi-novelty feature: an info-collage that lets you see just who is endorsing who. So now I know that Howard Stern is yelling for Ron Paul, Scarlett supporting Obama, and Chuck Norris (!) will roundhouse kick your face if you don't vote for Huckabee.
I'll update this post as I find other good examples of innovative coverage or horrible mistakes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)