you can, even the one named George W,
but first, tell me what this story is all about!”
I recently came across a story — a big one that made it to the front page of major newspapers a couple of days later — but did not get pass the gatekeeper’s gate the first time it reached the gatekeeper’s desk all because it screwed up with the all-important, albeit much-cliched, news writing formula of “5W 1H”.
I use the term “formula” for want of a better word but you get what I mean.
I Keep six honest serving-men:
(They taught me all I knew)
Their names are What and Where and When
And How and Why and Who.
I send them over land and sea,
I send them east and west;
But after they have worked for me,
I give them all a rest.
– Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)
Let me state the obvious again -- that the 5W 1H formula is important.
It is to news writing what "E=mc2" is to the theory of relativity. The formula or equation is simple yet all-encompassing, brief but huge in concept and in the case of 5W 1H, you can tell any story you want or need to tell with it.
Most sentences, paragraphs and pages in billions of magazines and books in the world are just that -- telling stories, concepts or facts that can be deconstructed using the 5W 1H formula.
The Free Dictionary Online defines 5W1H as "When, Where, Who, What, Why and How", which is alright but not very definitive for news reporting.
Rudyard "5W 1H" Kipling
The poet Rudyard Kipling, the Noble laureate for literature and the progenitor of the formula -- although he did not call it 5W 1H -- had seen it that "What" must come first in the order.
He wrote thus in "The Elephant Child" that "I keep six honest-serving men" by the names of "What and Where and When And How and Why and Who."
Beat all the bushes you can
...even the one named George W, but first, tell me what the story is all about.
Back to the story, the one that did not get pass the gatekeeper's gate, it did not satisfy the gatekeeper's thirst for the "what" in the story.
Even after the seventh paragraph, there was no telling of what it was that the report was trying to report.
The way I see it, the writer was beating the bushes, did all he could while he was at it except to lay bare what the story was all about; not even towards the ninth paragraph that the gatekeeper's had the idea of what it was all about.
Under that circumstances, and with many other important and urgent stories bottle-necking the gate, the gatekeeper did the natural thing -- he ignored the bush-beating story and chose not to let it pass the gate.
It was a decision that had the pendulum swinging back and forth, far and furious, from one end to the other, between the direction marked "right" and "wrong".
Guilty of not telling "Which"
Well, I must admit that in writing this post, I'm equally guilty not telling which of the story that did not get pass the gatekeeper's gate. But I shall keep it that way for I intend to make the episode a part of my learning curve in my quest to learn this craft called writing.
