Fear the former civil servants, for their hatred burns as fire

RBC Firebomber Sentenced

1. What is the story? (What is the point of the news report)

Last month, a former civil servant by the name of Roger Clement pleaded guilty to firebombing a Royal Canadian Bank, receiving a sentence of three and a half years in prison.

2. What is the establishing shot in the video?

The establishing shot of the video is actual footage of the bank itself being engulfed in flames, footage taken by Roger Clement himself. Next, the view changes to the aftermath of the fire, showing the charred remains of the building's interior and forensic teams combing the area for evidence.

3. What is the introduction?

The introduction actually precedes the opening shot, and begins with the host of the program giving the barebone details of the story, then moves to reporter in Ottawa Jeff Semple, who begins informing the audience of the fine details, such as number of people involved, specific details of the judge's ruling, etc.

4. Name two sources.

The first and foremost source of quotes and information was the judge who handed down the ruling on Roger Clement. Another source seems to have been Clement himself.

5. Based on what these two sources say, what questions do you think they were asked? Create two questions for each source that you feel they were probably asked.

From the video, I gather that no (or very few) questions were posed to the sources themselves, but instead from the proceedings in the courtroom. It is a safe assumption that reporter Jeff Simple either sat in the courtroom during the proceedings, or saw a taped version of the proceedings.

If they had been asked questions, they probably would have been asked these:

Judge

Q1: "For what reasons did you settle on a sentence of only 3 and 1/2 years, which is less than what the Crown wanted?"

Q2: "Did Clement's recent personal tragedies affect your decision?"

Clement

Q1: "What message were you trying to send with this fire?"

Q2: "What drove you to such an extreme action after so many years of exemplary behavior?"

6. Identify two types of B-roll in the video.

Two examples of B-roll in the video are the actual footage of the burning bank and the forensic crew sifting through the burnt-out shell of the building.

7. What are two other types of B-roll footage that you think they could have used?

One type of B-roll they could have used is footage taken from the courtroom during Clement's trial. Another type they could have used is a shot of Clement and his lawyer leaving the courthouse after the trial.

8. Identify two different voice overs and briefly list what facts are in each voice over.

Contrary to the usual style, the closest thing to a voice-over is in fact two "screens", one with the reporter's face as he reports on the right and the other playing the B-roll on the left. This is the only voice-over in the video, and the two-screen effect sustains throughout it. During this segment, Jeff Semple informs the viewers of Roger Clement's guilty plea, the severity of the fire damage, Clement's motive, and the details of his conviction.

9. What is the closing to the video?

The video closes with a head-and shoulders shot of Jeff Semple summing up the report, then the host of the program thanks Mr. Semple for the report and says his name and location.

10. Who is the reporter and what is his tag at the end?

The reporter, as stated before, is Jeff Semple, reporting onsite in Ottawa and his tag at the end is simply the closing remarks of the story.

Cold Facts and Warm Hearts: Hard News vs Soft

The CBC article "Canadian resident sentenced to death in Iran" is the very definition of hard news. The hard hitting title combined with the concise and uncompromising stating of the facts paint pictures of torture and injustice abroad. The entire article conveys a sense of helplessness, both in the situation of the accused, Saeed Malekpour, and in the situation closer to home. The fact that Canada can't swoop in and save this man from his death is a fact that is brutally and plainly laid out for the reader. There are no soft touches, no kind words in this article, only the facts of forced confession and unjust torture. The quotes, which include statements like "Most of the time, the tortures were performed by a group," are uncompromising. This article is hard news with a vengeance.

Another story that personifies hard news is the article "Haiti cholera death toll tops 2,000" from the CBC website. Obviously, stories of tragic death are hard news. This is so much the more when there has not only been one tragic death, but over 2,000. This story gives us a very grim view of the situation in Haiti, and does so without reserve. The facts are put forth without any comforting assurances that Haitian happy days are just around the corner, quite the opposite in fact. The number of people afflicted by the disease(over 91,700) and the death count (over 2,000) are stated plainly, and the situation is reported just as it is: dire.

Now, we'll avoid the system shock of going straight from hard news to soft by looking at one that's in the gray area between the two, namely CBC's "Spider-Man working out bugs for Broadway debut". This one is hard to place mostly because of its shameless blending of comic book lore(soft) and the problems besetting a 65 million dollar Broadway production (hard). It strikes a fair balance between hard and soft by incorporating the best of both; for soft news, the article goes into great detail concerning the history of the play, from the beginning of the writing process nine years ago to the present, one month before opening night. However, it doesn't shy away from the hard news aspects either, bluntly describing the many hitches and troubles currently afflicting the technical aspects of the play, such as perfecting the devices which will allow Spider-Man to scale the walls. However, if I had to classify it as one or the other, I would classify it as soft news, because the soft news aspects of the story get much greater attention.

Just as it's usually easy to spot hard news, it's just as simple to spot soft news, and boy is this article ever soft. The article looks at something many people who work in a cubicle use to relax, casual video games. News about casual video games is soft news indeed, for obvious reasons. First of all, they're games. Second, they're the kind of games specifically designed to be simple, rewarding, and relaxing for the player. Much like the article on Spider-Man theater above, this article is soft news because it goes into the history of the game and explores where the game came from, instead of what focusing solely on what it's doing right here and now.

"Dark Genius" doesn't exactly sound like something one would classify as soft news. However, the title describes the subject of the article(Tim Burton) quite well. This soft article isn't even really news so much as it is a tribute to the career of Burton. The news side of the story/tribute comes from the opening of a gallery that showcases much of Tim Burton's work. The story has a distinctly personal touch, with many quotes from Burton himself explaining his feelings about the gallery. It discusses many of Tim Burton's influences from his youth, and concerns itself mostly with the artistic, the theoretical and imaginary than with cold facts and faceless figures. In closing the article, there is a quote from Tim Burton concerning thank-you notes that he got from parents who brought their teenage children there. The personal side of the story is embraced fully, making this soft news without a doubt.

Barbara Frum, more than the average Broad-caster

It is clear from the get-go that Barbara Frum is not conducting an average interview when she gets on the line with Manson follower Sandra Good. But this odd interview takes a turn for the utterly abnormal when Good starts talking about a fanatical devotion to nature, and a murderous malice for those who would destroy it. Through this strange and baffling tirade, Barbara Frum refuses to give up the chance to talk with a mind, which through cultist ideals is probably exactly the same as Lynette Fromme's. This interview, whether Frum realized it or not when she scheduled it, would be an amazing insight into a mind like Lynette Fromme’s. I think that about two minutes into the interview, Frum realizes this and starts to run with it. Her questions shift away from “When did you last see Lynette” and “How was she emotionally” to more personal questions for Good herself, hoping to understand more of the mind of a person capable of killing for the benefit of trees and plants.

Because of this desire to see into a crazed mind, Frum refuses to let go of the interview. She stays in control, but in a subtle way. She doesn’t ask the same question twice, but instead maintains her line of questioning through asking a different question that would lead to the same answer, and unfortunately for someone trying to gather the facts, every question did lead to the same answer: “you’re ignorant... and killing trees.” Despite Ms. Good’s irritation at her “ignorance” this subtle and crafty style of questioning allows her to keep Sandra Good on the line for 7 minutes. Only when she begins to interrupt Ms. Good’s psychotic recital of the Manson-inspired manifesto does Good finally hang up the phone. Had Frum been very aggressive and confrontational, the interview may have lasted 70 seconds instead of 7 minutes.

The most effective thing that Frum said throughout the interview was “Ms. Good, how come you’re talking about trees that you care about, but you don’t care about killing men?” because this question causes Good to state her goals and the intent of her actions outright, as well as the reasoning behind them. Good makes it very clear that her intent is to see trees live, even if men must die. It is this exact state of mind that Barbara Frum was trying to uncover when she asked “what was the condition you last saw [Fromme] in?” One thing that I learned from this as a student journalist is that it is very important to get to the answer that will define the interview, but you cannot force it. You are an important part of the interview, but the interview is non-existent without the person you are interviewing. If that person gets out of control and you lose them altogether without getting that all-important answer, your interview has been virtually meaningless. You need to get that answer without destroying the contact between you and the person you are interviewing.

If I had to choose one person to interview, it would be Rudolph Hess, the Nazi general who was arrested in Scotland after his attempted independent peace treaty with England ended in disaster. He was a man who was very close to Adolf Hitler, and he would be very interesting to interview about his reasons for trying to end the war. It wouldn’t be a tough interview, because the man seemed to have firm convictions about the war, thus he would likely talk freely about them to propagate his ideas of peace.