I interviewed Lenny Bernstein, a health blogger at the "Washington Post," yesterday about his experience covering Ebola. It was insightful, and I learned a lot. To prepare, I read several of his articles and looked at the accompanying photographs. He traveled with Michel du Cille twice last fall, so I also read an article du Cille's wrote about covering the epidemic. I noticed that because I had seen the photos and read the coverage already it was easier to imagine the stories as he told them. Usually in interviews, you have to imagine a lot yourself. But because I had seen so much for what he saw, it helped me to immediately visualize his experience. I guess that's the sign of good reporting and writing.
I thought for my blog this week, I would take a look back and analyze the coverage Bernstein wrote for the Post.
Interestingly, Bernstein said his post "Reporting on Ebola first rule is you don't touch anyone," received much more coverage than he would have liked. He stressed that the situation needed and still needs to focus on Liberians, not the journalists.
His other articles include Why you're not going to get Ebola in the U.S., Out of control: How the world's health organizations failed to stop the Ebola disaster, With Ebola crippling the health system, Liberians die of routine medical problems and Surviving Ebola. (There are dozens more, too.)
Overall, the coverage is gripping. I got a sense that Bernstein wanted action from governments and NGOs. There is desperation in the tone. He told me that he did feel the stories needed to be told so that our government would act. He said the media woke the world to the Ebola epidemic and prompted the response. I sensed his urgency in his writing.
The frequency of his posts was fantastic. He had a lot of material and then was able to sift through it and produce a lot of copy quickly.
His frame tended to focus on the dire situation and the need for more resources. Many of the stories were heartbreaking. He also broke away from the people with Ebola and focused on people who had other health needs. It wasn't a story he had planned to write, but once he got to Liberia, he said it was painfully obvious that it needed to be written. I also liked how his articles varied in their purpose. Some were in-depth looks at individual lives and others offered an analysis of how the epidemic spread so rapidly. Within the articles he had a nice balance of expert and non-expert sources.
The social response to the work was equally emotional. People projected their own experiences onto people with Ebola. There was lots of controversy in the comments section. People were clearly stirred up and thinking about Ebola. Unfortunately, many of the responses were too hysterical and extreme. One comment read: "As the winter flu season develops, hospitals will be overwhelmed by panicking people with fever and headache and some cases of Ebola will be misdiagnosed. Health care workers will be infected. Too late, the US will ban flights from Africa. Then again too late, the US will ban all international air travel." What the hell? Strong words and not what happened.
I really enjoyed reading these articles. Most of the coverage I read on Ebola came from the "New York Times" (trying to make that subscription pay off!). So it was really interesting to read news from the Post and get a sense of the differences in tone, style and writing. I'm not sure I've read enough to make an assessment, but I did notice some differences. I think the post might lean toward being more conversational. The graphics have a different feel as well.
I thought for my blog this week, I would take a look back and analyze the coverage Bernstein wrote for the Post.
Interestingly, Bernstein said his post "Reporting on Ebola first rule is you don't touch anyone," received much more coverage than he would have liked. He stressed that the situation needed and still needs to focus on Liberians, not the journalists.
His other articles include Why you're not going to get Ebola in the U.S., Out of control: How the world's health organizations failed to stop the Ebola disaster, With Ebola crippling the health system, Liberians die of routine medical problems and Surviving Ebola. (There are dozens more, too.)
Overall, the coverage is gripping. I got a sense that Bernstein wanted action from governments and NGOs. There is desperation in the tone. He told me that he did feel the stories needed to be told so that our government would act. He said the media woke the world to the Ebola epidemic and prompted the response. I sensed his urgency in his writing.
The frequency of his posts was fantastic. He had a lot of material and then was able to sift through it and produce a lot of copy quickly.
His frame tended to focus on the dire situation and the need for more resources. Many of the stories were heartbreaking. He also broke away from the people with Ebola and focused on people who had other health needs. It wasn't a story he had planned to write, but once he got to Liberia, he said it was painfully obvious that it needed to be written. I also liked how his articles varied in their purpose. Some were in-depth looks at individual lives and others offered an analysis of how the epidemic spread so rapidly. Within the articles he had a nice balance of expert and non-expert sources.
The social response to the work was equally emotional. People projected their own experiences onto people with Ebola. There was lots of controversy in the comments section. People were clearly stirred up and thinking about Ebola. Unfortunately, many of the responses were too hysterical and extreme. One comment read: "As the winter flu season develops, hospitals will be overwhelmed by panicking people with fever and headache and some cases of Ebola will be misdiagnosed. Health care workers will be infected. Too late, the US will ban flights from Africa. Then again too late, the US will ban all international air travel." What the hell? Strong words and not what happened.
I really enjoyed reading these articles. Most of the coverage I read on Ebola came from the "New York Times" (trying to make that subscription pay off!). So it was really interesting to read news from the Post and get a sense of the differences in tone, style and writing. I'm not sure I've read enough to make an assessment, but I did notice some differences. I think the post might lean toward being more conversational. The graphics have a different feel as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment