L - Attribution
Rich Cameron
Issue date: 5/15/02 Section: 101 Newswriting
When you write a story, your job as a reporter includes gatherin information from a variety of sources. When you present the information you are not the expert, your sources are. So you need to attribute things such as quotes or disputable facts to your sources.
Attribution is:
In other words, attribution is that part of a quote, whether direct or indirect, where we say who is doing the talking.
There are four areas of attribution I want to cover here:
Where to put the attribution in a sentence,
When to use attribution,
Proper word order for attribution, and
How specific you need to be in your attribution
Where to put attribution
Again, think of this as adding tools to your writing tool kit. There are only three possible places to place attribution in a sentence. You can put it at the beginning of a sentence:
You can put the attribution at the end of the sentence.
Or, you can find a logical place somewhere in the middle of the sentence to pause and put the attribution.
That's pretty basic --I sometimes can't believe they pay me good money to teach things as simple as that.
But the point is that when writing your story you have six tools to use when it comes to attribution. Think of the tools as a brand new set of screwdrivers. You certainly can do most repair jobs with just one screwdriver, but sometimes you need a small flat blade screwdriver and sometimes you need a small Phillips screwdriver. Or maybe you would be better off with big blade screwdrivers. And just try using one of those on a screw that requires a hex screwdriver! You might as well use a hammer!
Let's give these attribution tools names. Let's call the first, where you put the attribution up front, Type One. We'll call the second, where you put the attribution at the end, Type Two. And the third, where you find a logical spot in the middle, we'll call a Type Three.
Be aware that these are not universal terms. Get your first job on a newspaper and ask your editor whether you should use a Type One quote or a Type Three quote and she is going to look at you funny . . . unless her newswriting class used this same textbook. What's in a name, though? The point is that you have a variety of tools available.
And you've got two sizes/flavors of each attribution tool. You've got the direct quote and the indirect quote.
A lot of writers, both beginning and experienced, don't pay attention to the fact that they have all tools and get stuck in a rut, usually making all or most of the quotes in their story Type One . . . . or maybe Type Two. Type Three slows you down a bit, so most don't get into that rut.
Also note that when you have multiple sources in a story you have to pay attention to which type you use. If you are quoting one person and change speakers, you need a Type One quote, or a Type Three quote with the attribution only a few words into the sentence, to let the reader know you are changing speakers. Here is an example of what NOT to do.
Did you think that Hanna was being quoted in the second paragraph before you got to the attribution? A Type One or Type Three would have cleared that up. You've switched speakers and you need to let the reader have a clue that you did.
(Oh, and by the way, did that construction in the first paragraph of " ...three days also ending Aug. 20, 1,500 students purchased..." bother you? How many thought 1,500 was the year 1500? The sentence should be rewritten to separate those numbers. But that is another lecture."
The next thing to note is there are some differences between wording and punctuation of a direct and an indirect quote, other than one is what the person said and the other is a paraphrase of what the person said.
Let's look at Type one again, for instance:
The direct quote needs a comma that separates the attribution (Smith said) from the actual quote. And of course, the quote needs quote marks. The indirect quote does not need either the comma or the quote marks.
But there is another significant difference. The direct quote contains a first person pronoun (I). First person pronouns --I, me, we, us, he, my, our, etc.-- and second person pronouns --you, your-- need to be part of a direct quote. Otherwise, the writer becomes part of the story. Leave off the quote marks and the "I" in the direct quote must be the writer.
When you make the transition to an indirect quote, you need to convert the first person or second person pronoun into a third person pronoun -- he, she, him, her, they, them, their, etc. Make sure the conversion you are making will be understood by your reader.
Now let's look at the difference in direct and indirect Type two quotes.
Because the attribution becomes like an afterthought, it always needs a comma separating it from the quote. Otherwise, the same rules that apply to the Type One quotes apply.
And, finally, let's look at Type Three.
The attribution is dropped into the middle of the sentence at an appropriate spot and needs a comma on both ends. Note, too, that the first letter of the quote after the attribution is lower case. Capitalize it only when it is a proper noun. You could, of course, put a period after the attribution (turning it into a Type Two quote) and follow with a new sentence that continues the speaker's thoughts. But that's not a Type Three.
The real trick with Type Three, as you may surmise, is where to drop in the attribution. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is difficult. You need to find a logical place to pause. If the sentence has any commas in it you have clues. A comma represents a pause; you can usually use that spot for your attribution. But how about the following example:
What you look for here is a break between word phrases? In this case, "with a dozen roses" is a prepositional phrase. (You didn't know you were getting a grammar refresher today, did you?) Keep it intact. Put the break there.
Your workbook exercises give you practice changing quotes around. In one exercise you are asked simply to convert the Type One quotes to Type Two. Another asks you to convert Type Three into Type One.
Still another is a bit more tricky. Not only are you converting from one type to another, but you are also converting between direct and indirect quotes. Watch those pronouns!
Just a word of caution though, in one exercise you are being asked to convert indirect quotes to direct quotes. While that may be okay for practice, it is not something you want to get into the habit of doing, unless you have the original quote to work with. An indirect quote is a paraphrase or summary of the original direct quote. To blindly convert it back to a direct quote is to risk changing the meaning.
When to use attribution
Beginning writers make two regular mistakes on deciding when to use attribution.
The first is that they either use too much or too little. Just as you do not need to make every quote a direct quote, you do not need attribution in every paragraph that contains a quote. If you are primarily quoting one person --hopefully with a mix of direct quotes and indirect quotes-- you only need attribution as necessarily to remind the reader who is doing the speaking. If, for example, you have a direct quote in a paragraph and end it with a Type Two attribution and the next paragraph is also a direct quote from the same source, you probably do not need an attribution on the second quote.
If you change speakers, though, be sure to use proper attribution. The key is to use a minimal amount of attribution, but make it clear to the reader who is doing the speaking.
Just how much attribution is necessary is a matter of feel. One thing is clear, though, the most attributions a single paragraph needs is one. Never put more than one attribution per paragraph. If you keep your paragraphs to one sentence only, you'll never have a problem with this.
Here is an example of what not to do. There are two attributions in this paragraph that actually ran in the Talon Marks.
The second error beginners make is overusing the source's name. Every attribution has the speaker's name. That is why pronouns were invented. As a general rule use a pronoun two or three times for every time you use the source's name. Of course, if you have multiple sources and you are rotating between or among them, you will need the source's actual name more often
Proper word order for attribution
Another definition to know is:
Grammar time again. The attribution contains both a noun and a verb and, technically, expresses a complete thought. It is an independent clause in a sentence and could stand as a sentence on its own. The proper order for independent clauses, in most cases, is noun, then verb. Sloppy writers fall into a habit of transposing the two, as in this example:
There ARE times when it is okay to turn the phrase around and put the verb first. For example, if the sentence above needed too many words between "mayor" and "said" you would reverse them. Note how the second example below is better than the first.
How specific you need to be with attribution
By now you should know that with attribution you should use the person's full name on first reference and last name only on second and subsequent references. But you should name your source . . . and with a real name.
Is the ever a time to withhold the name of a source? Yes. There are lots of examples.
When you and your editor decide to maintain anonymity, how far should you go in doing so? You could simply make up a name, but if readers see you making up names, they might think you are making up facts. It is simply better to veil the source and give the reader a clue as to the reliability of the source. Go as far ask you can in giving the reader a clue.
You could, for example, indicate that your source is "an attorney on the case." If it is a large case and there are lots of attorneys involved you turn up the heat for all, but may be protecting your source.
But you might have to go further in protecting your source. You may have to say, "according to a knowledgeable source in the courthouse." Now you could be talking about anyone from a judge to a janitor. But at least it is better than saying, "according to a source who asked to remain anonymous." Shoot, that could be my uncle Ed; there is nothing for the reader to use to judge the accuracy and credibility of the statement.
The more you protect your source the more you need to be careful what you attribute to that source, too. If you use a direct quote, but veil the source you might accidentally use words or phrases that will unintentionally reveal your source's identity to the wrong people.
Attribution is:
The source of a news story or of a fact within a story. To attribute is indicate the source of a story or fact and thus give the information authenticity.
In other words, attribution is that part of a quote, whether direct or indirect, where we say who is doing the talking.
There are four areas of attribution I want to cover here:
Where to put attribution
Again, think of this as adding tools to your writing tool kit. There are only three possible places to place attribution in a sentence. You can put it at the beginning of a sentence:
Smith said, "I am in the this race to win."
or
Smith said that he is in this race to win.
You can put the attribution at the end of the sentence.
"I am in this race to win," Smith said.
or
He is in this race to win, Smith said.
Or, you can find a logical place somewhere in the middle of the sentence to pause and put the attribution.
"It's not likely," Smith said, "that I would do that."
or
It's not likely, Smith said, that he would do that.
That's pretty basic --I sometimes can't believe they pay me good money to teach things as simple as that.
But the point is that when writing your story you have six tools to use when it comes to attribution. Think of the tools as a brand new set of screwdrivers. You certainly can do most repair jobs with just one screwdriver, but sometimes you need a small flat blade screwdriver and sometimes you need a small Phillips screwdriver. Or maybe you would be better off with big blade screwdrivers. And just try using one of those on a screw that requires a hex screwdriver! You might as well use a hammer!
Let's give these attribution tools names. Let's call the first, where you put the attribution up front, Type One. We'll call the second, where you put the attribution at the end, Type Two. And the third, where you find a logical spot in the middle, we'll call a Type Three.
Be aware that these are not universal terms. Get your first job on a newspaper and ask your editor whether you should use a Type One quote or a Type Three quote and she is going to look at you funny . . . unless her newswriting class used this same textbook. What's in a name, though? The point is that you have a variety of tools available.
And you've got two sizes/flavors of each attribution tool. You've got the direct quote and the indirect quote.
Direct quote -- A speaker's exact words, a verbatim report enclosed in quotation marks. Sometimes slightly edited to improve syntax or correct grammar.
Indirect quote -- Not verbatim, but rather a slightly edited or paraphrased version of the speaker's words. Indirect quotes are not enclosed in quotation marks. An indirect quote represents what a reporter tells us someone said.
A lot of writers, both beginning and experienced, don't pay attention to the fact that they have all tools and get stuck in a rut, usually making all or most of the quotes in their story Type One . . . . or maybe Type Two. Type Three slows you down a bit, so most don't get into that rut.
Also note that when you have multiple sources in a story you have to pay attention to which type you use. If you are quoting one person and change speakers, you need a Type One quote, or a Type Three quote with the attribution only a few words into the sentence, to let the reader know you are changing speakers. Here is an example of what NOT to do.
Across the street, Copies R Us manager Ihab Hanna said that in the same three days also ending Aug. 20, 1,500 students purchased books there.
"We don't like that, we're Cerritos College's bookstore and we will not accept any substitutes. We will fight them on the land. We will fight them on the water. We will fight them in the air. They should fear us," said Michael Greco, Cerritos Bookstore manager, when he learned how well the other bookstore did.
Did you think that Hanna was being quoted in the second paragraph before you got to the attribution? A Type One or Type Three would have cleared that up. You've switched speakers and you need to let the reader have a clue that you did.
(Oh, and by the way, did that construction in the first paragraph of " ...three days also ending Aug. 20, 1,500 students purchased..." bother you? How many thought 1,500 was the year 1500? The sentence should be rewritten to separate those numbers. But that is another lecture."
The next thing to note is there are some differences between wording and punctuation of a direct and an indirect quote, other than one is what the person said and the other is a paraphrase of what the person said.
Let's look at Type one again, for instance:
Smith said, "I am in the this race to win." (direct)
or
Smith said that he is in this race to win.(indirect)
The direct quote needs a comma that separates the attribution (Smith said) from the actual quote. And of course, the quote needs quote marks. The indirect quote does not need either the comma or the quote marks.
But there is another significant difference. The direct quote contains a first person pronoun (I). First person pronouns --I, me, we, us, he, my, our, etc.-- and second person pronouns --you, your-- need to be part of a direct quote. Otherwise, the writer becomes part of the story. Leave off the quote marks and the "I" in the direct quote must be the writer.
When you make the transition to an indirect quote, you need to convert the first person or second person pronoun into a third person pronoun -- he, she, him, her, they, them, their, etc. Make sure the conversion you are making will be understood by your reader.
Now let's look at the difference in direct and indirect Type two quotes.
"I am in this race to win," Smith said. (direct)
or
He is in this race to win, Smith said. (indirect)
Because the attribution becomes like an afterthought, it always needs a comma separating it from the quote. Otherwise, the same rules that apply to the Type One quotes apply.
And, finally, let's look at Type Three.
"It's not likely," Smith said, "that I would do that." (direct)
or
"It's not likely, Smith said, that he would do that. (indirect)
The attribution is dropped into the middle of the sentence at an appropriate spot and needs a comma on both ends. Note, too, that the first letter of the quote after the attribution is lower case. Capitalize it only when it is a proper noun. You could, of course, put a period after the attribution (turning it into a Type Two quote) and follow with a new sentence that continues the speaker's thoughts. But that's not a Type Three.
The real trick with Type Three, as you may surmise, is where to drop in the attribution. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it is difficult. You need to find a logical place to pause. If the sentence has any commas in it you have clues. A comma represents a pause; you can usually use that spot for your attribution. But how about the following example:
"Pack my box with a dozen roses."
What you look for here is a break between word phrases? In this case, "with a dozen roses" is a prepositional phrase. (You didn't know you were getting a grammar refresher today, did you?) Keep it intact. Put the break there.
"Pack my box," she ordered, "with a dozen roses."
Your workbook exercises give you practice changing quotes around. In one exercise you are asked simply to convert the Type One quotes to Type Two. Another asks you to convert Type Three into Type One.
Still another is a bit more tricky. Not only are you converting from one type to another, but you are also converting between direct and indirect quotes. Watch those pronouns!
Just a word of caution though, in one exercise you are being asked to convert indirect quotes to direct quotes. While that may be okay for practice, it is not something you want to get into the habit of doing, unless you have the original quote to work with. An indirect quote is a paraphrase or summary of the original direct quote. To blindly convert it back to a direct quote is to risk changing the meaning.
When to use attribution
Beginning writers make two regular mistakes on deciding when to use attribution.
The first is that they either use too much or too little. Just as you do not need to make every quote a direct quote, you do not need attribution in every paragraph that contains a quote. If you are primarily quoting one person --hopefully with a mix of direct quotes and indirect quotes-- you only need attribution as necessarily to remind the reader who is doing the speaking. If, for example, you have a direct quote in a paragraph and end it with a Type Two attribution and the next paragraph is also a direct quote from the same source, you probably do not need an attribution on the second quote.
If you change speakers, though, be sure to use proper attribution. The key is to use a minimal amount of attribution, but make it clear to the reader who is doing the speaking.
Just how much attribution is necessary is a matter of feel. One thing is clear, though, the most attributions a single paragraph needs is one. Never put more than one attribution per paragraph. If you keep your paragraphs to one sentence only, you'll never have a problem with this.
Here is an example of what not to do. There are two attributions in this paragraph that actually ran in the Talon Marks.
Across the street, Copies R Us manager Ihab Hanna said that in the same three days also ending Aug. 20, 1,500 students purchased books there. Hanna said that book sales were better this year than they were last year.
The second error beginners make is overusing the source's name. Every attribution has the speaker's name. That is why pronouns were invented. As a general rule use a pronoun two or three times for every time you use the source's name. Of course, if you have multiple sources and you are rotating between or among them, you will need the source's actual name more often
Proper word order for attribution
Another definition to know is:
Speech tag -- Device for attributing a quote or fact to its source, for example, "police said." Normal word order in a speech tag is name first, verb second.
Grammar time again. The attribution contains both a noun and a verb and, technically, expresses a complete thought. It is an independent clause in a sentence and could stand as a sentence on its own. The proper order for independent clauses, in most cases, is noun, then verb. Sloppy writers fall into a habit of transposing the two, as in this example:
"The mayor seems to be on top of the situation," said the mayor.
There ARE times when it is okay to turn the phrase around and put the verb first. For example, if the sentence above needed too many words between "mayor" and "said" you would reverse them. Note how the second example below is better than the first.
Example One
"The mayor seems to be on top of the situation,"the mayor, who was accused of not being on top of things during the election, said.
Example Two
"The mayor seems to be on top of the situation," said the mayor, who was accused of not being on top of things during the election.
How specific you need to be with attribution
By now you should know that with attribution you should use the person's full name on first reference and last name only on second and subsequent references. But you should name your source . . . and with a real name.
Is the ever a time to withhold the name of a source? Yes. There are lots of examples.
- Politicians often float "trial balloons" and insist on anonymity. You can refuse to accept a story on that basis, but you won't be given it.
- A whistle blower might be afraid of losing a job, or worse, and may insist on anonymity as a condition for sharing important news stories with you.
- You may be writing a story on something sensitive, such as a person's sexual habits, and you want to protect your sources from public humiliation.
When you and your editor decide to maintain anonymity, how far should you go in doing so? You could simply make up a name, but if readers see you making up names, they might think you are making up facts. It is simply better to veil the source and give the reader a clue as to the reliability of the source. Go as far ask you can in giving the reader a clue.
You could, for example, indicate that your source is "an attorney on the case." If it is a large case and there are lots of attorneys involved you turn up the heat for all, but may be protecting your source.
But you might have to go further in protecting your source. You may have to say, "according to a knowledgeable source in the courthouse." Now you could be talking about anyone from a judge to a janitor. But at least it is better than saying, "according to a source who asked to remain anonymous." Shoot, that could be my uncle Ed; there is nothing for the reader to use to judge the accuracy and credibility of the statement.
The more you protect your source the more you need to be careful what you attribute to that source, too. If you use a direct quote, but veil the source you might accidentally use words or phrases that will unintentionally reveal your source's identity to the wrong people.
