Praxis Journalism key terms

A news story structure that places the most important facts first, followed by supporting details in descending order of importance, so editors can cut from the bottom without losing essential information.

The opening sentence or paragraph of a news story, designed to summarize the central news point and draw readers in. Also spelled "lead" in some newsrooms.

The paragraph, usually appearing a few graphs into a story, that explains why the story matters now and previews what the rest of the piece will cover.

Timely coverage of significant events such as government actions, crimes, or disasters, typically written in a factual, direct style with emphasis on what happened and when.

Feature-style reporting on topics that are less time-sensitive, such as lifestyle, human interest, or trends, often using narrative techniques and looser structure than hard news.

A longer, non-breaking news article that explores a subject in depth through narrative, profile, or human-interest approaches, often using scenes and anecdotes rather than a strict inverted pyramid.

A criterion editors use to judge whether an event merits coverage, including timeliness, proximity, impact, prominence, novelty, conflict, and human interest.

The professional ability to decide which facts, events, and angles deserve coverage and prominence, weighing news values, audience relevance, and fairness.

The practice of identifying the source of information in a story, using named sources, titles, or standardized phrases such as "according to," so readers can evaluate credibility.

A ground rule meaning the source's comments and identity may be published and quoted directly. It is the default assumption unless another arrangement is explicitly agreed.

A reporting agreement that information provided cannot be published or used in the story, and the source's identity is protected. Terms should be negotiated before the information is shared.

A reporting arrangement in which a source's information may be used but the source is identified only by a mutually agreed description, such as "a senior administration official."

A person quoted without being named, used only when the information is essential and unobtainable elsewhere; editors should know the source's identity and readers should be told why anonymity was granted.

A published false statement of fact that damages a person's reputation. In U.S. law, public officials and public figures must also prove actual malice to win damages.

The Supreme Court standard from New York Times Co. v. Sullivan requiring public officials or public figures to prove a libel defendant knew a statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

The general legal category for false statements that harm reputation, including libel (published or broadcast) and slander (spoken). Truth is generally a complete defense.

A published correction or withdrawal of a statement previously reported, often issued when an error is significant; it can affect legal liability and the newsroom's credibility.

A published acknowledgment and fix of a factual error in a story. Newsrooms typically append corrections to the article and may also note them in a corrections column.

A newsroom staffer or independent reader representative who investigates audience complaints, explains editorial decisions, and writes about accuracy and ethics issues.

A set of professional principles adopted by a news organization or association, covering accuracy, independence, fairness, transparency, and minimizing harm, often used to guide editorial decisions.

A situation in which a journalist's personal, financial, or political interests could bias coverage or appear to do so. It is typically disclosed or avoided rather than merely managed.

Presenting another person's words, ideas, or reporting as one's own without attribution. In journalism it includes copying passages and lifting facts or quotes without credit.

Inventing quotes, sources, details, or events in a story. It is a severe breach of journalistic ethics and usually grounds for dismissal and publication of a correction or retraction.

The discipline of confirming facts, quotes, and documents before publication through independent sources, records, and cross-checks rather than relying on a single account.

The process of confirming names, dates, numbers, quotes, and claims in a story against reliable records or independent sources, often performed by a dedicated checker before publication.

Documents and data held by government agencies that are generally accessible to the public under freedom-of-information laws, used by reporters to document claims and find stories.

The Freedom of Information Act, a U.S. federal law allowing the public to request records from federal agencies. States have similar open-records statutes covering local and state agencies.

A state statute protecting journalists from being compelled to disclose confidential sources or unpublished materials in legal proceedings, with varying scope and exceptions.

Government action that blocks publication before it occurs. In U.S. law it is presumed unconstitutional, and courts require an extremely heavy justification to allow it.

The U.S. constitutional provision protecting freedom of speech and of the press, which underpins legal defenses for journalists and limits government censorship.

The process by which editors and journalists select which events, sources, and angles reach the audience, shaping public attention through inclusion and omission.

A media-effects theory holding that the issues news outlets emphasize become the issues the public considers most important, even if coverage does not change opinions.

Selecting and emphasizing certain aspects of an issue, such as conflict, economics, or human impact, which shapes how audiences interpret the story.

The professional norm of reporting in a neutral, evidence-based way, separating factual reporting from opinion and testing claims rather than adopting a side.

The practice of giving relevant parties a chance to respond to criticism and presenting competing views accurately, rather than balancing claims that are not equally supported.

Presenting two sides of a factual dispute as equally valid when evidence strongly favors one, which can mislead audiences about the actual state of expert consensus.

A systematic slant in news coverage or judgment that favors a person, group, or viewpoint. It can be explicit or subtle, and journalists are trained to recognize and reduce it.

The practice of showing audiences how reporting was done, including sources, methods, and limitations, so they can judge the reliability of the work.