In the Nick(ens) of Tim

The two men reclined in a comfortable slump between a row of desks, one against the counter top and the other on a stool.

One in a bow tie and the other in a necktie.

Formal, yet relaxed.

They exchanged opinions and ideas as if they were old friends making up for lost time, with playful quips and remarks thrown in for good measure.
It was as if they were alone together, sharing a cup of coffee or an impromptu meal.

But this was a classroom, and in it, students.

And despite the informal nature of these friendly conversations, there was much to be learned there that only time and experience could teach.

Tim Nickens is the editor for the St. Pete Times editorial section and he is certainly not lacking for such experience. Since 1983, Nickens has been a field reporter, front-line editor of metro and politics pages and now occupies the top chair for the Times' editorial board.

While he was prompted to explain the technical aspects of good editorials, Nickens' best advice resulted from open discussions with the other students.

Though Nickens agreed that the purpose of an editorial should be to provoke thought and incite action, he noted that they should aim to influence the opinions and actions of legislators as well as constituents, so that real change may result from the effort.

Unlike articles, where your intended audience is almost too broad as you attempt to get every one's attention, in editorials, Nickens revealed, "sometimes you're really aiming at one person in an effort to convince them that something is the right thing to do."

This idea blew my mind at first; that an organization would publish a piece intended for an audience of one. However, I quickly understood that if the action proposed by the editorial meant enough to the organization that was publishing it, I could see the logic behind this 'direct' address.

Our discussions also made light of certain news judgment values in our local newspapers that I had not noticed before. I believe it was Thomas who inquired as to why there is such a scarcity of international stories, unless they can be brought to a local level or are of the utmost importance to cover.

Nickens explained that, in the Times' case, they admit that they are not the experts needed to adequately cover such international topics.

More importantly, he added that the Times has the least impact on issues abroad and would rather focus on local and state matters where it can more significantly influence the results.

Gil made a nice point here about striving for balance, saying that too much of a local view makes news parochial and ultimately underestimates your reader's interests.

This has given me a new found preoccupation with asking myself what each of the news entities I read on a daily basis are really expecting of me as a citizen based on what stories they are willing to share...

In the case of some local papers, I'm rather offended to say the least.

But moving on, another of Nickens' ideas that struck home with me was that excellent editorials can be written on both sides of any issue as long as you strive to leave no doubt in the reader's mind as to your opinion and why it is your opinion.

This got me thinking about the relationship between writing your claims and backing them up factually and the daily amount of times I verbally defend something I believe in or something I would like to do.

When arguing any side to any case, I always ask myself what I would argue if I was on the other side of the issue and then focus on breaking those arguments down to strengthen my point.

This realization, that I already possess the critical thinking skills necessary to successfully argue a point, is very liberating, as I now find the prospect of shifting such ideas to paper much less daunting.

Hello Goudreau!

Don't say what you think; show how you think.

Then let your readers decide.

So was the main idea that Rosemary Goudreau instilled in me during her visit to share her input and experience on editorial writing with our class.

"Everyone has opinions. The value of an editorial is that it is an educated opinion and has something to say," Goudreau said.

This illuminates your readers to the point you are trying to make through sound arguments so that they may react to what you have said and make up their own mind about it.

At first, the idea of forming one's own opinion based on another's opinion, no matter how much evidence is presented, seems contradictory to original thought.

However, one of my favorite feelings in this world is when someone says something to me that sheds light on a new facet to an old story and leads me to reconsider my former stance on that subject.

If my writing can do this for even one person, that's the best result I could ask for.

In truth, I realized that I would rather incite a reader to act against my editorial view than for them to simply read it, agree passively and move on to the next part of their day without giving it a second thought.

This idea connects with another of Goudreau's more powerful points from our discussion last week that "a newspaper should be a champion for its community."

Within that context, an editorial should serve as a benchmark by which that community can test its own values over time. It should be an open forum that makes a connection to its public and builds on the conversations that occur every day within it.

Although Goudreau's discussion with our class will undoubtedly help me to write future editorials, or any persuasive pieces for that matter--for which I thank her--I knew all along that I would enjoy her visit.

After all, her name is French.

Thoughts on Vickie Chachere

First, I would like to thank our guest for sharing some of her valuable time and invaluable experience with our class, as I very much appreciated and gained from it.

Our visit by Vickie Chachere, former member of the editorial board for the Tampa Tribune, among other reputable positions she has held during her career thus far, was, in a word, enlightening.

Every class even remotely related to journalism that I have taken in my three years of college thus far has instilled me with the goal of being as neutral and objective as humanly possible in reporting the news.

After the first day of our critical writing class, I found myself on the brink of unfamiliar territory as I would have to find some way to reprogram myself to knowingly insert my opinion into the pieces I will write.

However ominous a task this seemed to be, I feel that Chachere has armed me with helpful hints and tricks of the trade that she has learned about editorial writing throughout her career; insight that has effectively nursed the uncertainty I felt after that first class.

Some of her best advice, which, in retrospect, should have been immediately understood, was to just spend time reading top-quality editorials, such as those that are awarded the Pulitzer Prize. She said that what I will notice is that each piece isn't award-winning due to the nature of its topic, opinion or grace of the sentence, but because each is meticulously reported.

This, Chachere said, is the basis of great journalism--the ability to write and report clearly and accurately. With these basic abilities, I am confident that I can write in any style asked of me.

Since our class is not an actual news organization, we will have the opportunity to find our own stories on which to report with our own opinions, instead of being given assignments, allowing us to choose issues that have the potential to incite a visceral reaction in our audience and even spark real change as a result.

This idea excited me, as I have already come to find that a story is much easier to write when you are interested in the subject you are covering, but adding that such pieces may actually make a difference in our world is immensely empowering.

Yet another tip that Chachere gave to our class was that we should strive to intersperse and drive our argument with fact-based reporting, much as lawyers do within their closing arguments, allowing our strongest facts to build towards our ultimate idea. This comparison was a very helpful way to show us what she meant by that idea and I feel that it will guide me throughout the rest of this course.

Finally, Chachere's visit has taught me to not see each of the pieces I will write as individual works with definite conclusions inherent in them as I type their last word, but to always keep the follow-up editorial in mind and see if the local issue addressed within them could be emblematic of a larger picture.

In short, our discussions with Vickie Chachere have, I feel, better equipped me to perform well in editorial writing.