After reading the transcript for this NPR story, one of the biggest things that struck me about the writing was the differences in the inverted pyramid. The story does not begin with a lead sentence that states the what and when. Instead, the lead sentences kind of sets the stage for the story. It introduces the kind of topic that is going to be discussed. Only then, does it introduce the problem that the Common Application for colleges is having extreme technical difficulties.
Another difference that struck me was the way that quotes are used in the story. First of all, the quotes in this story aren't being used as additional nuggets of thoughts and observations from witnesses like the way that print articles uses quotes. Instead, the quotes in this radio broadcast seem to be the primary way that the story progresses. The quotes explain all of the issues in depth, and they explain all of the reactions in depth. Instead of the author just explaining the full scope of the story, he lets his expert and character witnesses tell the story. Overall, it gives them more of a role in the story. In addition, the way that quotes are introduced is also different. The story will first introduce the person in one or two sentences by explaining who they are and why they are relevant. Their quote is then played in the audio. A print story would have used a lot more paraphrasing, and it would have introduced witnesses within the text and embedded within a sentence
One final key difference I noticed was the tone. I found this radio broadcast to have a lighter tone that allowed for more reflection on the story. The broadcast was able to put the story into the larger context of why it matters. It could go into more detail about how both students and colleges are frustrated with this mess and struggling to cope. A print story would have been dryer. It would have stated the facts and the facts only. Quotes with reflective opinions would have been kept to a minimum.
No comments:
Post a Comment