It’s really the first time she has spoken outwardly about her professional interests, so my wife and I wanted to handle this in a supportive manner.

It really should not be a surprise to us.  She takes after her mother, who is an excellent writer.  I know, because that was one of the first things that attracted me to my wife.  We first met over twenty years ago, on a documentary she was producing about Native Americans.  I was the video editor.  She handed me a first draft for us to use for the rough cut.  I immediately saw that it was head and shoulders above the average script and that it told the story with a unique “voice.”

So, having struggled to get my writing to a passable journeyman grade, I figured, what better way to get to the next level than marry a writer?  (OK, yeah, there was more to it than that.) 

Perhaps it was my wife’s reading to our daughter while she was still in the womb.  Perhaps it was the excitement we and her early teachers exhibted about reading.  Or maybe it was Harry Potter.  Whatever it was, just like her mother, our daughter developed into a bookworm, and if you think of all the bookworms you have known, chances are those folks also stand out in your mind as excellent writers.

My wife and I are privleged to know a number of successful broadcast and print journalists.  Some are much more than acquaintances — they are family members and close friends we have known for many years.

Most professionals realize that possessing a passion for a career is imperative in order to succeed.  Before we had met, my wife and I each had made conscious decisions early in our adult lives to follow our “passion” into the media field.

But we also know the realities.  We hear of “the democratization of media” caused by rapidly changing technology.  We hear of mergers resulting in layoffs.  We hear with chagrin of newspapers cutting staffs as readership declines. (e.g. Washington Post http://tinyurl.com/4vks5x  and Tribune Co. http://tinyurl.com/5qzl6g)

I recently caught an interview with Fred Smith, founder of Fed Ex, on ”The Charlie Rose Show,” http://tinyurl.com/4ps88j and Mr. Smith said that possessing the ”passion” is not enough . . . nor are great management and hard work.  He said that none of that matters if the business model of a venture isn’t viable.  That makes sense of course, but it’s noteworthy how many of seem to forget that.     

If you look at my David’s Website Picks http://tinyurl.com/4lw9ag, you will see that I list many links to articles about the changes taking place among print and broadcast media.  Yes, some of the news is unsettling for media veterans.  But on the other hand, I find much of it to be inspiring.  (Just for the record, I wear my “battle scars” from having been downsized in the media field.)

Yes, I may be naive, but I wonder if we are not presently within just the initial phases of a vast transformation in communications – one that rivals other watershed points in our history such as the introduction of electricity or the airplane, antiseptics or refrigeration to our lives.

Sure, we had the internet tech bust and boom.  But now that the dust has settled and saner minds prevail — and technology keeps advancing at incredible rates (take for example, the emergence of portable hard drives just within the past couple of years) — it appears to me we are in for on onslaught of amazing changes in our field.   Read what Microsoft chief, Steve Ballmer, recently predicted: http://tinyurl.com/5nar2y

That leads me to be a bit more optimistic than many about the future of journalism.  I think a democratic society will always crave for diverse voices presenting news, in-depth analysis and debate.   Case in point, amateur blogger Mayhill Fowler scooped the mainstream news recently in the presidential campaign — twice: http://tinyurl.com/6ym995

So in that light, does not the hand-wringing of some of the old-school journalists over the demise of paper and ink sound just a bit reminiscent of other doom-sayers of societal transformation?  I don’t want to appear flippant, but geez, might it be great not to have to cut down all those trees to supply us with our daily newspaper? 

I remain convinced some new profitable form of journalism will emerge – perhaps one we can’t even imagine yet, just like we had a difficult time imagining the power of search engines – as recently as just ten years ago.  Suzanne Clark,  President of the National Journal Group, seems pretty sanguine about the future of the  press: http://tinyurl.com/3fv58a 

And there are some interesting online attempts out there already for news reporting, as in Digg http://digg.com/, Redit http://www.reddit.com/ and Mixx http://tinyurl.com/4ns7t9.

Does my daughter read the daily newspaper thoroughly?  Sometimes, but not a lot.  And yet she says she might want to go into journalism?  Hmmm, there’s a disconnect you might say.

But she is more informed than I was at her age.  And the papers she is writing in high school are better researched and written than my college papers.  So how is my daughter getting her news?  Sure, the internet.  But it’s more complicated than that I think.  Maybe we can explore that in another post.  (Hey, duh, I should get her to write a post.)

So, what advice did we actually give our daughter?  Probably  not much different than a version what our parents advised us — a twist on the ”have a trade to fall back on” theme. 

While encouraging her to pursue her dreams, we suggested that she might also consider concentrating on another specialty field that interested her (like the law or medicine . . . ok, ok, no we didn’t say that) develop strong credentials in that field, and then become a reporter of that “beat.” 

And we also said that whether she decided to pursue journalism or not, she should keep honing her already very good writing skills.  In fact, we suggested that she consider majoring – or at least minoring - in English.  I certainly would not be the first person to submit that good writing skills are THE BEST job qualifications to have, no matter what field one decides to enter.   

Good writing is a talent that is resistant to technological change.  I have seen it with my wife.  With all the changes that have occurred over the years in television technology, she remains in high demand as a producer — for a number of reasons of course, but a leading one being her strong writing abilities.  Whether it be a documentary or an informational program, she knows how to tell a story.  (Read her latest entry on “Better Writing with Susanne” http://tinyurl.com/4w47mn)

As we have discussed with our daughter, good writing may not be enough to guarantee success, but without it, one will not reach their potential.

And, oh yeah, just for the record, I urged my daughter to keep working on her Spanish.  Por supuesto, este idioma va a presentar aun mas ventajas en el futuro. [For certain, knowing this language will present even more advantages in the future.]

I’d be curious to hear what you think.  Feel free to write a comment below.  Or write me at dryan@videolabs.net

I’ve been filming – or attempting to film – red foxes in my neighborhood for one of my new independently-produced segments for Maryland Public Television’s weekly series, Outdoors Maryland. It occurred to me during my stalking endeavors that pursuing foxes is not unlike pursuing viewers of a media production, whether documentary or corporate, video or website.

In both cases you have a “quarry” who is preoccupied with their industrious lives. Finding a way to grab their attention – and winning consent to your themes or messages – requires ongoing research.

In other words, know your prospective audience. I’ve walked up and down the street day after day talking to neighbors about the habits of our fox family – where the male and female and two pups roam and when they seem to be most active. Many have a theory about where the foxes have a den. Others have seen them carrying hapless squirrels.

Researching your viewers means more than simply knowing their principle products or general interests. Find out the current issues specific to that enterprise, including struggles, successes and goals – get to know the neighborhood.

Surfing the web is a good way to start. Read news accounts about the industry or association. Scrutinize their publications. Most importantly, talk to people on the ground. If you can, visit the offices or organization to get a sense of the culture.

Incorporate technology and jargon, but don’t overload and outdate your production with passing fads. I’ve learned that the yard the fox runs through today may not be the yard he or she runs through tomorrow. You need to figure out the range of your target audience’s interests.

Keep in mind, these concerns are not necessarily the same thing as the key messages or themes your client or funding agency want delivered. The interests of both client and audience need to be reflected if you are to engage your quarry productively.

In other words, don’t assume that the viewer will be interested enough to act just because you’re out there with an urgent message vaguely related to their field.

One mistake I made early in the pursuit of foxes was staking them out in areas where I thought, after diligent research, that the foxes had a den. I spent hours and hours waiting in a camouflaged hunting blind, alone with a camera or with a second cameraperson. During this endeavor, I captured not one frame of video of a fox. I did get one or two shots of squirrels and a deer.

The footage I do have so far was captured by driving or walking around — camera ready — and rolling when we spotted our moving target. Don’t expect your audience to come to you.

Happy hunting. I’m still on the trail….

You may reach Susanne Stahley, Writing Consultant, at scstahley@verizon.net

Read about Susanne’s recent Emmy award: http://davidryanmediasolutions.com/davids-website-picks/

It’s important to pay attention to the details when it comes to your business writing.  It matters because just as people judge you by your dress and manners, they also judge you from  your writing — (and yes, I’m talking about the writing in your e-mails too)

Sure, very few of us can be creative writers of great prose or of the screen.  But we can still be good communicators.

And being precise in your writing is one important aspect of good communication.

Here’s an example of what I mean, the use of the two words “just” and “only.”

Think a moment about what these two words do in our language. They are very powerful modifiers. They are used to express limits to some thing or action.

When you leave your house and call out, “I’m just going to the store,” you may hear your junior high English teacher in your head correcting you, “ahem it’s . . . I’m going just to the store . . .” You roll your eyes and quash that voice and silently reply, “Hey, the folks in the house get the point, come on . . . what’s the big deal?”

Ah, that was one of the beauties of Latin that I gleaned from my undergraduate studies. Latin may be considered a “dead” language, but it’s pretty cool how in that language the roles of words in sentences are determined by their endings, which means that the positions of words in a sentence can be moved around without the meaning of the sentence changing. Good for poetry, but alas, the language still faded. But that’s another story.

In English, position of words in a sentence does matter, and those important limiters, “just” and “only,” are set to modify the words that come right after them. Again, as I pointed out at the top, one could question whether it really matters.

Well, it does. Let’s take an example:

A) The sales manager told her team that they only had to sell three projects this week.

B) The sales manager told her team that they had to sell only three projects this week.

Think about it. The meanings of the two sentences are different.

In A, the “only” modifies “sell,” leaving it open that something else could be implied, such as, “The sales manager told her team that they only had to sell three projects this week, . . . but they had to get statements of intent for six other orders.”

In B, the “only” modifies “three,” and there is no room for misinterpretation.

So remember, “just” and “only” are important modifiers in our language. Use them properly to reinforce clear communication.   And clearer communication results in more success at marketing and sales.

(And you can now replace that image of your junior high English teacher in head with mine.  Hmmm, oh well, I’ll take the risk.)

I don’t even remember the topic of the script anymore, but this was an actual conversation I had with a client that still echoes in memory.  I do recall that the manager was determined to cram as much data into the video as he could, and either didn’t realize, or didn’t care, that his intended audience would tune it out, overloaded into apathy. Important messages would be lost in an unrelenting deluge of instruction, whether the audience – his company’s employees – was required to view the video or not.

As a television writer and producer, I grapple with the problem of how much information is too much information all the time, and it’s a dilemma whether you’re writing documentaries or instructional how-to’s.

I believe that I’m thought of as a quick study and a meticulous fact-checker, great credentials to be sure in a documentary producer or a corporate video writer.  And having a consuming curiosity is always an essential trait in any creative endeavor.  For me the hard part is not grasping the material, but finding a balance between what the audience needs to know and wants to know.  As a writer, producer, or manager hiring such talent, it’s important to remember the need to engage both the intellect and imagination.

Here are a couple of techniques for keeping your production both engaging and informative:

Maintain an organic process of brainstorming and structuring throughout the process.  Outline the flow of the information or the unfolding narrative, and keep the momentum moving along that through-line, but don’t allow that structure to pre-empt new concepts or creative ways of visualizing the material.

It’s essential, and yet sometimes near impossible, to maintain this kind of flexibility when you are working on a project by committee, especially if new members join the advisory group mid-way.  There’s a tendency – quick study and responsible “creative” that you are – to internalize all those voices so that finding your way back to the basics can be difficult.  Remind yourself, and your supervisor or the consultants, that the ultimate committee is the audience.  If the intended viewer needs to know something, you need to make them want to know it by piquing their curiosity, engaging their emotions, and making clear what’s at stake if they don’t have this information.  Simply seating someone in front of a television or computer screen does not automatically lead to understanding. 

Trust your instincts – what catches your interest or stirs your emotions will probably do the same for the audience. To be sure, you can get sidetracked by arcane detail that will bore your audience, or you may need to present arcane detail that you fear will bore.

If you’re awash in research or detail, try laying out all the minutia in rough form, then look for repetitious sentiments or data, and choose the quote or piece of information that is most potent.  Set yourself a goal of reducing the content in this way by thirty percent or even fifty percent.  Give yourself limited time to do this – ten minutes for a ten minute script, for instance.  You’re relying now on gut instinct and experience.

Then set aside the long-winded and the compact versions for a time, even if it’s only for a lunch break.  When you return, read or view the short version first – you are putting yourself back in the position of the audience who is seeing it for the first time. Chances are you won’t remember what’s missing — though your client might.  Add back only what is too vital to lose and be sure you covered the client’s key themes.  Remember that with video and other visual media productions, information and emotional cues are also powerfully conveyed by visuals and sound effects, including appropriate music.

Keeping creative within the constraints of deadlines is always a challenge.  It helps to begin honing the closing statements early on – maybe not before you write the open but soon after.  You’ll be more efficient in organizing the rest of the material toward that grand finale – and you won’t be too tired to inspire by the end. 

Susanne Stahley can be contacted at scstahley@comcast.net

One surefire way to make your style more dynamic is to use the active rather than the passive voice in your sentence structure. Yes, this sounds old school, but it actually works. Simply explained, in the active voice the subject of the sentence performs the action of the verb. So, the subject is emphasized, becomes the star of the sentence. This makes a difference if you want you or your product to shine.

Active voice: Our new software program compresses vast amounts of data in seconds.
(“Our new software program” is the key player.)

Passive voice: Vast amounts of data are compressed by our software program in seconds.
(“Vast amounts of data” is the subject that is acted upon by the software program, which takes second billing)

Here’s a link to more fine examples of passive and active voice: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_actpass.html

Another quick, but not necessarily painless, way to sharpen your sentences is to read your writing out loud. Often you can pick up awkward phrasing that interrupts the flow or confuses the reader. So, in the first sentence of this paragraph, I would drop the phrase: “not necessarily painless.” Note that this is not the same as making your language totally, like, conversational or full of slang, whatever. Not unless you’re looking to insert humor… but that’s the subject for another day.

I invite you to share your comments below.

Susanne can be reached at scstahley@comcast.net