Saturday, October 27, 2007

What makes up an exciting story?

The New York Times' article on Ivan Pavlov, a Russian lawyer fighting for government information to be made public, has all the makings of a great suspense film. It starts out with a dramatic lede--a man beat up outside his own home by would-be assassins who mean business--builds to disclose a morally-driven higher purpose--Pavlov's attacks on the government--and ends by coming full-circle to show a man now hardened by his experience, toting a gun to protect himself. In between all of this drama, the article does an excellent job explaining the situation in Russia against which Pavlov is fighting and the progress his efforts have made.

An article in The Times of London, on the other hand, manages to say a lot without really saying anything at all. The article, on the alleged blackmailing of an unnamed member of the British royal family, takes a very long time to say--several different ways--that an undercover Scotland Yard officer caught two men who had a videotape of a royal allegedly engaged in a sex act as well as evidence of drug use by said royal. That's it. The Times can't legally name the royal, and apparently they also cannot give any more details about what was discovered. That's fine; it happens sometimes, I'm sure. But given all the intriguing details that are missing, did the story really merit so much space in the Sunday paper?

The Boston Globe crafts an exciting story by covering an exciting event: the first game of this year's World Series and a die-hard fans physiological responses to it. The Globe explains right away that there experiment is not entirely scientifically valid, as they and their MIT students assistant are not technically qualified to track all the fan's physical responses to the game. However, they tell a great story as they conduct the experiment, including such details as the location of Tate's mother's house in Cambridgeport, close enough to hear the fans singing "Sweet Caroline," or how Tate toasted the Red Sox at her own wedding in 2003. It's a fun story and unique coverage of the World Series.

No comments: