So here I am, with an update on what I did in the last two weeks on professional front to advance my fellowship goals at the Sun Sentinel.
The past two weeks were as eventful as the previous weeks had been, both in and off the newsroom.
As I wrote in my previous update, I worked with the metro team and got to spend one week with the courts and crime reporter, which brought alive the memories to me of reporting crime and courts at The Hitavada: The Akku Yadav case, (My Indian friends know about that case. A goon and alleged rapist was lynched dramatically in the courtroom in Nagpur by an angry mob in 2004) and the Khairlanji dalit massacre.
I sat through the wrap-up arguments in a homicide case for two days, with the jury awarding death penalty to a 50-year-old man convicted in February of killing a 72-year-old man in Palm Beach County in 2005. It was my first experience with the Jury system. We don't have a jury system in India. The criminal jurisprudence is much the same. Unlike fierce competition from at least 15 journalists from other newspapers back home, this one's an easy walk: you are alone in the courtroom reporting it.
May be, a colleague from the television could keep company to you in the court-room recording the proceedings.
Nonetheless, I could interact with the crime investigators, lawyers and people who make the court corridors such livelier and interesting always.
However, surprising to me was the fact that the story got less than 250 words, since it wasn't a high profile case. It ran as a joint byline, and I had to write it real tight. The courts reporter wrote the background. I wrote the lead and proceedings. The story appeared on the inside pages, but was up online first.
Suffice to say, it advanced one of my priorities: Learning to write tight.
The same week, I could tag along with the investigations team that is working on two monster projects. From the stage of conception of a story through the investigations and writing, it takes ages (really months) for it to hit the pages.
I spent two days with John Maines, senior journalist who is sort of backbone of this team, given his expertise in the computer assisted reporting. It's addictive, to say the least. He gave me basic tips to decipher piles and piles of data.
That helped me sift through a mass of agriculture census reports (I'm still immersed in it). Next in line: massive data on farm payments (subsidies).
Two reporters in the team shared with me their approach to writing stories; clues they explored to dig into a story and checklists they follow meticulously.
The editor explained to me the process of editing the investigative stories into parts that run as a series of expose!
As much as I would like, I won't be able to do an investigative story, given their pressing priorities and tight schedule, and my own schedule.
But it helped me learn the process of writing a narrative story: one of my goals. I might be able to apply those tips to a narrative story I'll do for outlook later. Plus it's so much more fun to learn how to do stories that delve beneath the skin.
With the metro team, I learnt about the Sentinel's internal day-to-day decision making and the guiding factors in prioritizing the news. It's changed over the years and it continues to change, for good and bad, both.
The second week, I came back to the editorial team to do a write-up for the Sunday Outlook magazine (July 12) on the Everglades after a tour on Wednesday.
I had to finish off a pending story: a profile of bagasse power plant, against the backdrop of climate change bill debate. Hope everyone's following the bill, for it's a major policy decision that would impact the world like never before.
In two weeks, I wrote four stories. One appeared on business front page on a Sunday (the story was about the partnership between local farmers and local hotels as part of local food movement). Three are to be published subsequently.
But I enjoyed learning about the process of writing tight; doing background research to add value to a story; and different reporters' approach to writing a story.
The weekend was a great fun. I could escape into a more rural landscape of Florida, driving up north to Jacksonville through the historic city of St Augustine, where I attended the Greek Landing Day festival (I'll blog about it separately), saw citrus groves on the way, and spent some homely time with the family of a friend's sister eating Maharashtrian food and watching (finally!) some cricket.
I had a brown bag last week with summer interns, who wanted to know about the tribe of Indian journalists and generally, journalism. Well...good luck to them.
Then, I could attend the editorial discussion with two guests: a former policy maker who is now vice chancellor of south Florida university and a lobbyist for the climate change bill that was passed late last week by the senate.
What's more, last Wednesday I wrote an editorial too, my first. The editorial board gave me the frame and the newspaper's position on President Obama's restraint on Iran. I think this is perhaps the most difficult part of print journalism. Writing a newspaper's position on an issue in just about 250-300 words with context is not easy. It's a serious business and needs hours of background research.
Honestly, it wasn't easy for me to write an editorial and express the newspaper's stand that might not always be your personal opinion. But it was worth it. I learnt the ABC (argument, background and circling back to argument) of editorial writing.
It meets my third goal: Write opinion and comment pieces.
I'm now also the Sun Sentinel's editorial blogger, where I am writing my experiences and observations about American life, from an eastern standpoint! It's all about learning to engage with readers in a conversational tone.
All of that, as my friends in the editorial board tell me, will help me figure out what not to write than what to. That is key to writing crisp, clear and clean.
I'm not there yet. But I'm on the course.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
DEMOCRACY, WHAT'S IT?
Iran's in the news. In the United States.
Hypothetically, if Mahmoud Ahmedinejad were to sing paens to the United States even if he were at war with his neighbors, he won't make news. But that's hypothetical.
Two years ago, I attended a workshop of Asian film-makers on "Why Democracy?" in the beautiful town of Shillong in north-east India.
For centuries since its birth as a concept, a particular shade of democracy has been the driver of the global geo-politics.
Fascinating though is the question, what's democracy, than why democracy.
As I see the U.S. media almost overtly likening the street protests in Iran - and as shown by the cameras - as counter-revolution of unprecedented nature (the re-elected president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad being the villain of course), I am reminded of that gripping brainstorming on the notion of democracy at that workshop.
My notion of democracy could be totally different than yours. We talk about it. We fret about it. And yet we can't really explain what is democracy.
The British empire went on enslaving the world in the 18th and 19th centuries while claiming itself to be a democracy.
Others European nations owned, until very recently, tiny island nations, some in the Caribbeans, and yet were called democracies.
Some of the founding fathers of the United States owned slaves and even had racial prejudices. That's part of the history. But they were "democratic".
The two world wars had nations fighting each other despite being "democracies."
So when the ebullient media - and the TV hosts in particular - jump on their seats on what is perceived by the west as a counter-revolution in Iran, I wonder if those on the streets in the Muslim nation are really championing democracy that I see as my notion. Would the Ahmedinejad rivals, who by now are openly tip-toeing the line that United States want them to, be in any way promoting democracy in that nation?
Fundamental issue is what makes the west see Iran undemocratic. And will that change if Ahmedinejad were to be toppled in a coup!
China, for ages, remains undemocratic electorally and socially. And it funds North Korea too.
But the US won't preach democracy to China the way it does to some of those smaller nations in the middle-east.
For, the Asian behemoth remains the big super market on the street that you can't mess with.
It's easier to preach it to Iran, as to Iraq, the small road-side shops.
Modern day geo-political situation is complex enough to be shaped by the principles of democracy. It remains alas a garb. Merely.
At the core of nuclear proliferation, military build up and religious fundamentalism around the world remains the notion of autocracy.
Some of the so-called democracies today have highly undemocratic principles driving its economies and social structures.
India, for instance, is called as the world's largest democracy. But we hardly have any social or economic democracy.
As the architect of Indian constitution Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar said in the early fifties: "We are an electoral democracy, but we aren't yet a social and economic democracy." Poverty, illiteracy and communal violence are symptops of that.
How can any form of violence - physical or verbal- or war be the driver of democracy that fundamentally espouses the principle of non-violence and inequality.
Globally, which includes of the United States as well, social and economic democracy remains far from a dream.
Some nations may at best have electoral democracy, which is driven by the concept of a majority and not pursuasive unanimity or concensus.
Some are better than others. But they still remain only electoral democracies.
Mahatma Gandhi once described the western form of democracy as "a diluted form of fascism." Stress is on "The Western Dominion Form of Democracy."
Why? because he saw the British empire go about conquering the world while calling itself the mother of all parliaments.
Ironically, humanity has progressed very little on embracing a democracy that has no place for dominant one-upmanships and economic inequalities.
Modern day wars waged in the garb of promoting peace and democracy would continue to hold hostage the very notion it intends to propagate.
The argument that a nation needs to be invaded or toppled because it doesn't toe a dominant western line is also a sign of autocracy.
Mere electoral democracy isn't enough to play preacher to the world.
Hypothetically, if Mahmoud Ahmedinejad were to sing paens to the United States even if he were at war with his neighbors, he won't make news. But that's hypothetical.
Two years ago, I attended a workshop of Asian film-makers on "Why Democracy?" in the beautiful town of Shillong in north-east India.
For centuries since its birth as a concept, a particular shade of democracy has been the driver of the global geo-politics.
Fascinating though is the question, what's democracy, than why democracy.
As I see the U.S. media almost overtly likening the street protests in Iran - and as shown by the cameras - as counter-revolution of unprecedented nature (the re-elected president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad being the villain of course), I am reminded of that gripping brainstorming on the notion of democracy at that workshop.
My notion of democracy could be totally different than yours. We talk about it. We fret about it. And yet we can't really explain what is democracy.
The British empire went on enslaving the world in the 18th and 19th centuries while claiming itself to be a democracy.
Others European nations owned, until very recently, tiny island nations, some in the Caribbeans, and yet were called democracies.
Some of the founding fathers of the United States owned slaves and even had racial prejudices. That's part of the history. But they were "democratic".
The two world wars had nations fighting each other despite being "democracies."
So when the ebullient media - and the TV hosts in particular - jump on their seats on what is perceived by the west as a counter-revolution in Iran, I wonder if those on the streets in the Muslim nation are really championing democracy that I see as my notion. Would the Ahmedinejad rivals, who by now are openly tip-toeing the line that United States want them to, be in any way promoting democracy in that nation?
Fundamental issue is what makes the west see Iran undemocratic. And will that change if Ahmedinejad were to be toppled in a coup!
China, for ages, remains undemocratic electorally and socially. And it funds North Korea too.
But the US won't preach democracy to China the way it does to some of those smaller nations in the middle-east.
For, the Asian behemoth remains the big super market on the street that you can't mess with.
It's easier to preach it to Iran, as to Iraq, the small road-side shops.
Modern day geo-political situation is complex enough to be shaped by the principles of democracy. It remains alas a garb. Merely.
At the core of nuclear proliferation, military build up and religious fundamentalism around the world remains the notion of autocracy.
Some of the so-called democracies today have highly undemocratic principles driving its economies and social structures.
India, for instance, is called as the world's largest democracy. But we hardly have any social or economic democracy.
As the architect of Indian constitution Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar said in the early fifties: "We are an electoral democracy, but we aren't yet a social and economic democracy." Poverty, illiteracy and communal violence are symptops of that.
How can any form of violence - physical or verbal- or war be the driver of democracy that fundamentally espouses the principle of non-violence and inequality.
Globally, which includes of the United States as well, social and economic democracy remains far from a dream.
Some nations may at best have electoral democracy, which is driven by the concept of a majority and not pursuasive unanimity or concensus.
Some are better than others. But they still remain only electoral democracies.
Mahatma Gandhi once described the western form of democracy as "a diluted form of fascism." Stress is on "The Western Dominion Form of Democracy."
Why? because he saw the British empire go about conquering the world while calling itself the mother of all parliaments.
Ironically, humanity has progressed very little on embracing a democracy that has no place for dominant one-upmanships and economic inequalities.
Modern day wars waged in the garb of promoting peace and democracy would continue to hold hostage the very notion it intends to propagate.
The argument that a nation needs to be invaded or toppled because it doesn't toe a dominant western line is also a sign of autocracy.
Mere electoral democracy isn't enough to play preacher to the world.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
UPDATE: JUNE 1 TO JUNE 15
Fort Lauderdale:
The most difficult part of doing a story is conceiving it. Then, pitching it to the editor. And finally after working on it, writing what you had originally conceived.
The media overall are increasingly shying away from covering farmers' issues. I find that in India. I am discovering it here in the US too.
So, conceiving an idea that helps me understand farming systems in the US and at the same time interests my host newspaper has been the most challenging task for me so far. The last two weeks yielded some success for me though.
One, I was able to propose some story ideas that interests the newspaper, and two, using the online research tools, I was able to make some initial contacts needed for the story. But my mentor helped me fine tune the focus for the stories.
I drove down a few miles to meet and interview the last remaining small farmers of South Florida to know their transitions and strategies to stay afloat.
It was a small step toward achieving my first goal: Understanding the US farm system in general. The small farmer here is though a big farmers from an Indian view.
No way is our small and marginal farmers any way near them in terms of farm size, technology, capital and energy inputs, production and income. Yet by the local standards, I learnt from the two farmers I met, they too are finding it hard to remain in farming, given the rising urban pressures and production costs.
With the help of the Sun Sentinel's data analysts, I downloaded and sifted through truck-loads of data on agriculture. I am still sifting through it.
Last week I attended yet another writers group discussion in the Sun Sentinel. The group goes through a few old well-written stories and discusses the form individuals would have chosen if they were to write the same story today.
It helped me learn how reporters here are evolving ways to tighten a story to fit the shrinking spaces while keeping most details in keeping with journalism tenets.
Alongside, I managed to get some new tip sheets into the way stories could be penned effectively within tight deadlines.
Two stories (yet to be published) that I did along with my other mentor for the business pages proved the best way to gain in an insight into the way journalists here write their stories here. It advances my goal: writing tight and yet lucid.
The only upsetting thing was that I could not publish any story this past fortnight. Scaling down the pace of work is something of a cultural change.
For me, it is indeed difficult, and at times frustrating, not to see a byline in the print for that long a period. I am slowly coping with those fundamental differences in the way newspapers function in this distant land.
PS: I move on to the metro reporting team tomorrow (Monday, June 15) for the next fortnight, even as I continue to work on my long term story features on agriculture issues that have been slotted for August. Idea is to look at daily processes, news priorities, tight writing, investigation skills, copy editing, presentation etc. and also get to know some ongoing local issues. I start with courts to know the justice system. That's the best way to dig into the layers beneath the skin of a society. Hopefully, there will be a few bylines as "the evidence" along the way.
Friday, June 12, 2009
WHAT ARE YOU EATING TODAY?
The question sounds ridiculously out of focus for most Americans. In India, what did you eat today is kinda starter to many a conversation.
Food though, is increasingly going out of focus for most people.
It's not what you eat, but where and how you eat that is the matter of discussions today. Sort of status symbol. You might be eating junk most of the times, but eating junk in say a five star hotel would be a status statement than say, a stall.
But junk we eat, most of the times. At least I find it here in the US. Sorry, I say, to the proponents of the American culture (if there's one), but what you guys eat at the fast-food joints at a cheaper price is not food. It's trash.
That brings me to the point: A new documentary that, I feel, is a must-watch for all those who care about food, farming and farmers. www.foodincmovie.com.
Check out the synopsis: http://www.foodincmovie.com/img/downloads/Press_Materials.pdf
Food, not oil, is transforming the nations and thus the world. The way we eat. What we eat. How we eat, and when we eat. We are going through the most fundamental and historic of structural changes in our food systems. A few corporate sharks that are amassing unprecedented profits are feeding us trash at the altar of the new century. In fact, they are killing us with the slow doses of poison through our own food.
So much for the profits! Long live capitalism!
The film thankfully brings back the focus on the fundamental issue of living: food.
Food though, is increasingly going out of focus for most people.
It's not what you eat, but where and how you eat that is the matter of discussions today. Sort of status symbol. You might be eating junk most of the times, but eating junk in say a five star hotel would be a status statement than say, a stall.
But junk we eat, most of the times. At least I find it here in the US. Sorry, I say, to the proponents of the American culture (if there's one), but what you guys eat at the fast-food joints at a cheaper price is not food. It's trash.
That brings me to the point: A new documentary that, I feel, is a must-watch for all those who care about food, farming and farmers. www.foodincmovie.com.
Check out the synopsis: http://www.foodincmovie.com/img/downloads/Press_Materials.pdf
Food, not oil, is transforming the nations and thus the world. The way we eat. What we eat. How we eat, and when we eat. We are going through the most fundamental and historic of structural changes in our food systems. A few corporate sharks that are amassing unprecedented profits are feeding us trash at the altar of the new century. In fact, they are killing us with the slow doses of poison through our own food.
So much for the profits! Long live capitalism!
The film thankfully brings back the focus on the fundamental issue of living: food.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Cryslter down, GM down, what's up?
Fort Lauderdale:
Two behemoths are down: Chryster went down first. Now the GM. But the industry is saying: Hello! Nothing to worry, everything's fine.
For a super-power that prides itself with selling millions of cars every year, this is not a good time at all. Profits are shrinking. Thugs aren't walking away with the bounties as they did just a couple of years ago.
The other day, watching a TV discussion, you could sense the uncertainty that haunts the US economy. And yet the media, the industry champions, and politicians would like to guarantee you: Not to worry. The Wall Street's about to rebound!
They are the same in India too. In fact, they are more Americans than the Americans!
Well. Well. Well.
Not exactly. Unemployment rate is breaching 10 per cent in some states in the US. Foreclosures are rising every passing day. Layoffs aren't abetting. And I could hear reporters in my host newsroom discuss hunger stories!
Hunger? In America? You must be kidding. It's true though. Shelterless and homeless numbers are on the incline. So are individuals seeking federal food coupons.
And out on the streets, in the coffee shops and in the newspaper columns, a debate is surging: Long live capitalism! Long live socialism!
Between them, life oscillates like a pendulum! Isms be damned.
Meanwhile, those (you know it) who said the world's flat are writing on more important issues: climate change, for instance.
When the world turns flat, climate ought to change.
Gee! The climate's to blame for all the world's ills! Hunger? Climate change. Lay-offs? Climate change. Recession? Climate change.
May be there's some linkage between changing climate and terrorism too. Or could it be that the US economy burst due to changing climate!
Close to me, the fellowship program that brought me to the US is bleeding too. The AFPF will just have five fellows next year, exclusively from the newspapers that are partnering with the foundation. These are tough times for them too. And I just can't tell you how lucky we are to be the 25th class of the program this year!
The newspapers are bleeding too. From NYT to Washington Post!
Damn it! Climate Change!
Two behemoths are down: Chryster went down first. Now the GM. But the industry is saying: Hello! Nothing to worry, everything's fine.
For a super-power that prides itself with selling millions of cars every year, this is not a good time at all. Profits are shrinking. Thugs aren't walking away with the bounties as they did just a couple of years ago.
The other day, watching a TV discussion, you could sense the uncertainty that haunts the US economy. And yet the media, the industry champions, and politicians would like to guarantee you: Not to worry. The Wall Street's about to rebound!
They are the same in India too. In fact, they are more Americans than the Americans!
Well. Well. Well.
Not exactly. Unemployment rate is breaching 10 per cent in some states in the US. Foreclosures are rising every passing day. Layoffs aren't abetting. And I could hear reporters in my host newsroom discuss hunger stories!
Hunger? In America? You must be kidding. It's true though. Shelterless and homeless numbers are on the incline. So are individuals seeking federal food coupons.
And out on the streets, in the coffee shops and in the newspaper columns, a debate is surging: Long live capitalism! Long live socialism!
Between them, life oscillates like a pendulum! Isms be damned.
Meanwhile, those (you know it) who said the world's flat are writing on more important issues: climate change, for instance.
When the world turns flat, climate ought to change.
Gee! The climate's to blame for all the world's ills! Hunger? Climate change. Lay-offs? Climate change. Recession? Climate change.
May be there's some linkage between changing climate and terrorism too. Or could it be that the US economy burst due to changing climate!
Close to me, the fellowship program that brought me to the US is bleeding too. The AFPF will just have five fellows next year, exclusively from the newspapers that are partnering with the foundation. These are tough times for them too. And I just can't tell you how lucky we are to be the 25th class of the program this year!
The newspapers are bleeding too. From NYT to Washington Post!
Damn it! Climate Change!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)