David Usborne is the New York correspondent for The Independent, a center-left newspaper in London. He was in lower Manhattan Sept. 11, 2001, and he knew immediately his coverage of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centers would be the biggest story of his career. Reading it now, several years later, it brings back the immediacy he tried to convey to readers in England.
At the end of 2001, he wrote an account of how he covered the story and how he felt that day that is, to my mind, one of the best pieces of reporting to come out of that tragedy. He also captured the conflicting emotions and instincts of a reporter covering a very big story in a way that I think any hard news reporter will recognize.
... I was distracted by worry that I should have been getting closer to the towers. It is a reporter's disease; you have to get to where it's at. (The same instinct took over a few weeks later when American Airlines flight 587 crashed in Queens. I was just despairing of reaching the site itself when I found myself staring at one of the plane's engines in a driveway.) I imagined getting inside the tower, exploring the foyer and getting important detail. With my press badge on display – theoretically it gets me through police – I went against the flow of people fleeing the Trade Centre area, ignoring urgent appeals from police officers to stop and turn back.The rest of his account relives that day, from the time he rushed to lower Manhattan in the morning to his trying -- unsuccessfully -- to unwind in an East [Greenwich] Village bar shortly before midnight.
But then I changed my mind. An officer shouted that they were clearing the area because of a risk of gas explosions. And while I felt a twinge of professional guilt, I rationalised that every non-essential person in the area was one more person getting in the way of the rescue crews. And something else was starting to dawn on me. This was going to be a very big news story. I was going to have enough to write that day and it wouldn't matter if I didn't have first-hand details of how it looked on the mezzanine level of the South Tower, or wherever. So, about three blocks north-east of the towers, I stopped. It was one of the better decisions I have taken in my life.
Also linked below are:
- Usborne's spot news coverage on Sept. 12, 2001.
- A story Sept. 18, 2001, by David Lister, also of The Independent, on spot news coverage of the attacks by news media in the UK.
1. How do Usborne's accounts of the terrorism that morning in New York City stack up as pieces of writing? Compare and contrast his deadline story that ran Sept. 12 with his year's-end retrospective Dec. 28. What's the same? What's different? What does it tell you about deadline writing?
3. What do you learn from reading Usborne about the ethics and instincts of a journalist? Your careers, hopefully, will involve events that much less dramatic. But there may be some of it you can apply to your own writing. What does Usborne say that you can so apply?
9 comments:
Both stories are excellent pieces of journalism and use literary elements effectively. The differences between Usborne's initial article and his December 2001 article are that the first was much more emotionally driven and contain more figurative language. It paints a much more vivid picture. The December article is informative with much more detail, but it seems to lack the passion the initial piece contained. This tells me that deadline writing doesn't necessarily have to have all of the details or all of the facts, but it has to get the story out and be interesting enough that people will want to read YOURS instead of someone else's.
Usborne mentions his reaction to want to get as close to the scene as possible as a professional hazard. The fact that he understood when to stay away and when to question people, speaks to his morals as a journalist. Regardless, as a REAL reporter, even in times of disaster, Usborne continued to want to get facts so he could produce the best story possible. It is almost a double edge sword, he either can be too sensitive and not get the story or be too cold or unfeeling, and disrespect people who've experienced real tragedy. The lesson that can be learned from Usborne is that a good reporter must be ready for anything, even the worst, and prepared to get the information out to the people.
This story is a compelling story. You see that the writer said he had a sense of "professional guilt." amoung not being abe to enter the building. Why is that? When his life and other lives could be at danger from him simply trying to get a story, he still feels guilt. As a journalist, to get a accurate and "good" story you have to get right on the scene, so not being able to do so, he felt guilt. As where other's would simply turn away and not think about it twice.
The main difference between Usborne's Septemeber 12, 2001 article and his Decemeber 2001 article is that the day after 9-11 was more about experience and emotions. As for the December article which was released 3 months later I think the intial shock was over and Usborne gave more facts about the attacks. In the article Usborne says "It was one of the better decisions I have taken in my life." Journalist and reporters sometimes put their lives on the line trying to get right in the middle of the action. saved his own life that day because he said he knew one more person for the police and EMS to hold back was enough so he moved north. Smart decision on his part.
All three of these stories give me goosebumps. Part of me thinks I wish I could have been there just to witness one of the most significent days in history. But the majoirty of me is thankful that I've never had to experience anything like that. Usborne uses specific tactics in writing each of his stories. In the story in which he had a deadline, you can tell he was nervous. He was writing vigorously, trying to include every single thing he witnessed; which would have been impossible.
In the article that he wrote at the end of December, he seemed more hurt; more affected. At this time, he had time to recollect everything that had happened that day and for weeks afterward.
All three of the articles have a sense of urgency. The two articles that he wrote in September of 2001 contain excellent quotes. I'm sure he had to study his notes for a while, trying to figure out what was scribbled down and what every item meant. Each story painted a picture, almost like a photo, in my head. The details he gave, especially in the last story, were phenomenal.
I can't imagine being able to witness that day. However, he did a wonderful job and was able to use his best judgement in sticky situations. Some people would panic, have a melt down, or simply not be able to watch the sequential events as they were happening.
I feel that both these stories are very compelling and that he had felt he guilt of not being able to get in there and see it more personal and close up. To get the story he wanted he felt the neeed to be right in the middle of it and right there. The story from 3 months later shows that it wasnt as emotional as the story he wrote the story he wrote the day after..He is a great writer in both of these
I agree with most of the posts, these stories were very compelling! Usborne's accounts of the attacks are great pieces of writing. His deadline story that ran Sept. 12 was full of emotions and was real close to the terrible attacks. The Dec. 28 story was a few months later which gave him time to compose different facts that he may have missed the first time around due to the emotions at hand. Deadline writing can be tricky, hard, and sometimes based on emotions.
Both stories seem very strong. However, the second article seems more refined in detail and less in-the-moment. The first may be a more effective approach as it adds more emotion.
I thought both were good stories. I think there is more emotion in the first story especially with him not being able to enter the building. The second story seems less emotional but perhaps better written.
i think both stories were very good. the forst story seemed more emotional/spur of the moment while the second story seemed to have been well constructed and refines
Post a Comment