Canadian Association of Journalists

Following September 11, a number of media outlets wrote stories that focused on the strong public support for the U.S. government and military action in the wake of the tragedy. For instance, on October 23, CNN quoted a Gallup official as saying: "We see no drop off in the very high levels of support that we have been registering for the military action."

How would this story read differently if you included the following statement from John Zaller, a worldwide expert on public opinion? "Academic studies have shown that the public tends to rally behind the national leadership and its policies in the early stages of foreign crises. Politicians, policy makers and pundits have also noticed this tendency."

These two sentences change the relevance and impact of the earlier example. In fact, if we apply our news values to this example — the numerous stories on public support of U.S. President George W. Bush and his administration become a lot less newsworthy. They become part of a known response to foreign crises. This example shows that all it takes is one or two sentences of context and a story can become questionable on a number of levels — from newsworthiness to accuracy and impact.

Context has become a buzzword in journalism circles over the past decade, but while effective, it is not always that easy to accomplish. What is context and why is it important?

The best definition of context is offered by Peter Jacobi, a U.S. magazine writer, author and educator. He describes context as 'background or environment' or the 'interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs.' The Concise Oxford dictionary defines context as 'the circumstances relevant to something under consideration.' These are broad definitions at best — particularly if you are on deadline and only have 10 to 12 inches or limited airtime for your story.

Context is important for many reasons, but I will focus on the top two. The first is that readers, listeners and viewers want context and it is good for the news business.* Last April, the Readership Institute at Northwestern University completed the largest, most scientifically valid study of newspaper content and news consumers across the United States using 100 newspapers of varying sizes and a survey of 37,000 consumers. In its summary of core news points from audience members, researchers found that: Serious coverage is valued and how stories are told matters. They also found that readers made it clear that 'relevance' or impact is a key factor in terms of their consumption of news. This is linked to context, with the need for journalists to have the expertise to explain the relevance of issues, such as how international events can affect their lives.

Other research from the Readership Institute reviewed the coverage of outbreaks of war during the past 40 years and found that readership rises when news is fresh and dramatic. As events become less compelling, consumers settle back into their old ways and the gains are lost. They cite the growing number of consumers who are reading newspapers after September 11 are doing so for three main reasons: informed perspective from experts who have time and space to develop their arguments; context surrounding the events; and explanation in the format of words, charts, lists, maps and graphics.

The second reason for incorporating context into your stories is that it works. Until the 1960s, research indicated that traffic accidents were blamed on the 'nut behind the wheel' and prevention strategies consisted of advising people to drive more safely. According to a paper by Renita Coleman and Esther Thorson of the University of Missouri School of Journalism, the media changed their reporting when researchers started to identify societal and environmental risk factors in car crashes, such as type of car involved, road and weather conditions and whether the driver had been drinking or wearing seatbelts. "Soon, perceptions of the causes of auto injuries and deaths changed, and more social policies were enacted to discourage drunk driving, build safer roads and force car manufacturers to design safety features into cars," they said, adding that the rate of automobile deaths and injuries also slowed. This is just one example of how context has had an impact over time.

The first step in making context work in practice, in print, for instance, is to realize that there are limitations to the most commonly used news format — the inverted pyramid or the basic news story. Print reporters know and recognize this story form, as they have worked with it for most of their careers: Place the most important information first and arrange it hierarchically ending with paragraphs that can easily be trimmed for length. If journalism school didn't drill the structure into you, then newsroom editors finished the job.

However, there is increasing dissatisfaction with the inverted pyramid format. For instance, eye-tracking study results from Poynter, a U.S. journalism-training institute, show that readers look at 25 per cent of stories in a newspaper and actually read only half of those. U.S. journalism historian Thomas Leonard argues that newspapers have found a way to make readers stop using their product. Part of the reason is that the inverted pyramid format coupled with the ethic of 'objectivity' can lead to simple he-said-she-said formula of reporting. News in this model becomes a recital of context-free information that has a limiting effect on audience interest.

So now that we know what context is and why it is important, how can working journalists provide more context in their stories? It can be accomplished by changing your story architecture on two fronts:

Incorporate new story forms that allow for greater complexity — when you have the time.

Change your reporting to include more contextual questions, which will result in content that can work in short or long news stories.

Chip Scanlan, a well-known U.S. writing coach who has written a journalism textbook, advocates using a 'nutgraph' story, which was pioneered by the Wall Street Journal. Also identified as the news or analytical feature, a nutgraph story is an effective way to incorporate context into stories. According to Scanlan, the genre's hallmarks include anecdotal leads to hook the reader, followed by the nutgraph paragraph, which is a summary lead located three to five paragraphs into the story. The nutgraph is followed by sections that amplify the story's thesis and provide balance with evidence. Scanlan says the reason this format works is that complicated stories call for new structures because audiences aren't ready for the most important information at the top.

A good example of a nutgraph can be found in a recent Wall Street Journal story on jagadieros, Brazilian fishermen who sail wooden boats to far away lobster and fishing areas on the Atlantic Ocean. Their occupation goes back to the 16th century.

Of late, though, jagadieros have faced obstacles far more fierce than the ocean: competition from motorized dive boats, often manned by poorly trained human divers. The boats use illegal fishing techniques that are stripping Brazil's fishing grounds of their stocks, and threatening to put an end to Brazil's historic jangada fleet.

But where and how do you get the information to include in a story that addresses context? What types of questions can help you gather relevant context — other than the simple how and why? Well, there are many.

Frank Allen, a 15-year Wall Street Journal veteran who currently runs Institutes for Journalism and Natural Resources, a U.S. non-profit journalism organization, has created a reporting model for covering the environment. His method allows journalists to ask the larger questions needed for more contextual reporting.

He identifies eight elements of reporting, which include: purpose, significance, scope, cause, history, consequence, counteraction, and the future — what next. The most important of these elements are: history (from what), cause (the why), consequence (so what) and scope (the how much). These four key areas include a number of sub-questions that you need to keep in mind if you are trying to add context to your stories. They are:

1. History: Is the central development a clean break with the past? If so, how? Is the central development a clear continuation or extension of the past? If so, how? What historical details would lend authenticity and interest to the telling of the story? How can they be related briefly and yet effectively?

2. Cause: Why is it happening now? Or why is it about to happen? Consider if there are economic, social, political, physical, or psychological causes involved.

3. Consequence: What effect, impact or consequence (intended or otherwise) flows or will flow from this central development? Who or what is likely to be helped or harmed by what is happening or by what is about to happen? How? What is the likely extent of that help or damage? What further reactions (intended or otherwise) could these consequences trigger?

4. Scope: What is the breadth or magnitude of the story? What is its physical or geographic range? In what different ways is the central development revealing itself? To what extent or degree are individuals, communities, organizations involved in it? Is the central development waxing or waning, spreading or constricting?

Does this model work? If journalists had addressed questions about political causation in their coverage of public opinion after September 11 — they would have found a more relevant and compelling angle to focus on in their coverage.

* You can read the report at http://readership.org/news/index.htm

Mary Lynn Young is an Assistant Professor at the UBC School of Journalism. She worked as a journalist at the Hamilton Spectator, Vancouver Sun, Houston Post and The Globe and Mail before returning to graduate school at the University of Toronto in a quest for context. She is currently completing her Ph.D.

Selected reading material about context

1. Committee For Concerned Journalists,

2. Coleman, Renita and Esther Thorson. (2000) The Effects of News Stories that put Crime and Violence into Context: Testing the Public Health Model of Reporting. Unpublished paper presented to the annual AEJMC conference, Phoenix, Az., Aug. 9-12.

3. Leonard, Thomas C. (1995) News for All: America's Coming of Age with the Press. New York: Oxford University Press.

5. Scanlan, Christopher. (2000) Reporting and Writing: Basics for the 21st Century. Toronto: Harcourt College Publishers.
6. www.poynter.org
7. www.ijnr.org
8. http://readership.org/