How can an article be written before the debate. Is this standard practice?
Nothing specific about the debate is said in that article. It’s all generalizations and expectations; all of it is based on information available well before the debate. Later on, the article will be updated and expanded to contain information actually derived from watching the debate. There are a number of articles available about the upcoming debate. The only thing that’s different about this one is that it’s written in the past tense.
I suppose that journalists do this kind of thing so that they can write an article when it’s convenient for them, and have it ready for editing and publication as soon as the actual event occurs. Consider the ‘Dewey Defeats Truman’ headline, or the stacks of newspapers with ‘Innocent’ and ‘Guilty’ headlines in Chicago (and probably lots of other movies). Expect the same kind of thing before the November election as well. For any story with two possible outcomes, journalists may write a story (when it’s convenient, i.e. somewhere between 9 AM and 5 PM) for each possible outcome, and publish only the story that matches the actual outcome. Debates aren’t really like that because they need quotes and other details, but you can still expect to see articles getting updated and fleshed out as the debate goes on.
Sometimes an article will be published that looks like it’s detailed, but is really based on preliminary information. I remember when the 9/11 Commission Report was released that all the news outlets had detailed stories on its findings, and important quotes. When I was reading the report, it became clear that thousands of journalists had just bought or downloaded a copy of the report, thumbed through it until they found what looked like a ‘bottom line’, and written their story half an hour after the report was released.
One other thing… considering that the media outlets all have a copy of the 32-page debate rules, it’s not likely that there’s going to be any surprises. You could probably write a story based on those rules without even going to the debate: “Tonight, in the comfortable 72° air in a conference hall at the University of Miami, at precisely 9 PM EDT, presidential candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry read 90-second statements from pages of 8 1/2” x 11" 32lb weight high-brightness bond paper from behind 38-inch oak-and-mahogany podiums, across a distance of 25 feet and 6 1/2 inches."
This type of story happens often, and until ABC News started carrying the live feed from AP, readers had no idea what’s happening. So, here’s the complete story:
The Associated Press is a 24-hour news service that operates on an AM cycle (for morning newspapers) and a PM cycle (for the few evening papers still in existence). The AM cycle runs roughly from 2PM to 2AM; PM from 2AM to 2PM.
Each cycle begins with a “budget” – a list of stories newspapers can expect to come over the wire for the next 12 hours. Stories can be sent in several different versions, rewritten and updated with new information (and corrections). This budget – combined with budgets from the New York Times, Washington Post/LA Times, Knight Ridder and Newhouse News Service as well – is used by newspapers to plot their coverage: what goes on 1A, what goes inside.
So what you just read was the PM cycle story for afternoon newspapers, which generally goes to press sometime around noon or 1 p.m. so you’ll get your copy by dinnertime. Since the debate hasn’t started yet, the AP tries to do the best it can with what it has. Then, they’ll rewrite the story for the AM cycle and, as the debate goes on, it’ll update – maybe even rewrite – the story.
You’ll read on some of the blogs how this story is an example of newspapers “writing it before it happens.” In this case, it’s not true. Note that the story clearly says nothing about what happened at the debate, only about events leading up to it. It doesn’t try to pretend that it’s already taken place.
It’s still half-assed fucking journalism.
Did you see the Daily Show last night? They did pretty much exactly that last night.
Of course it does. ( my bolding )
Does the phrase " past tense " mean anything to ya? This article is clearly written in the past tense. It describes in detail an even that has not yet transpired.
It is irrelevant whether or not the AP or UPI do this as a matter of course for the sake of efficiency, or any other sake.
It is past tense, and is therefore a completely false report.
I in no way wish ill or harm upon anybody, but c’mon- what is the AP going to do if a fire breaks out 75 minutes before the debate is supposed to begin and it never takes place tonight at all ???
Dewey Defeats Truman indeed. :rolleyes:
Cartooniverse
I suppose it’s like celebrities obituaries – you write 'em in advance, using the stuff you already know will be in the final piece, then just fill out some details after-the-fact and have a new article up in a few minutes. I think making the article available before-the-fact is a bit tacky, though, whether it’s a debate or an obit. 
The same thing all the other reporters are doing – throw away the pre-written stuff and start crankin’ out the late-breaking news.
No, it’s professional journalism. As Pesch pointed out, that is an article for a newspaper that will be published before the debate. Hence, it discusses the expectations. That newspaper has to put something into the news hole about the debate, so it publishes an article that describes what people are expecting. It is, in effect, the pregame show for the debate.
But why put it up on the web?
Maybe someone there just thought the same thing.
I just tried the link and got a message saying it was unavailable. I was then directed to their frontpage.
rjung: Very true about the celebrities. Several memorials for celebrities and well-known figures were leaked from CNN.com to The Smoking Gun. One of them was for Ronald Reagan. When he died, the memorial pages at CNN.com had exactly the same layout as the leaked design, with only a few minor changes and additions. Even the quote was the same.
I vigorously disagree. It is a poor sham. My father was a newspaperman for over 20 years, and then spent the next 20 years of his life WRITING Press Releases for a US Gov’t agency that will remain nameless.
** YOU DO NOT PREDICT THE NEWS IN ADVANCE.** Ever. For any reason. No matter what. You write copy in past tense based in what has occurred and is verifiable.
I’ve spent enough time in network t.v. control rooms and production offices. I’ve seen whole tape logs for Obits for ALLLLLLL the likely folks. Celebs. Heads of State, and so on. Yes I agree heartily, most obits are written in advance and prepared down to the last 2%. The last 2% is of course how that person died, when and where.
Nobody would have the hubris ( NOT “professionalism”) to write " Ronald Reagan died of Alzheimer’s Disease last night at the age of … " before the fact. Why? Because he could have died suddenly of all manner of events. Nobody would publish that in advance.
It wasn’t professional, it was in fact insultingly lazy “journalism”. Find me a real journalist on the SDMB- a working paid professional, not someone who considers an online Blog to be professional journalism- who does this.
You can’t. Nobody would dare hang their career on looking into the future.
link :dubious:
And your point would be… ?
That is the most glaring support of my last post that anyone could possibly provide. Methinks you chose the wrong emoticon there, but thanks for supporting and proving my point of view here.
