STRATFOR Writing 101July 1, 2011

STRATFOR Writing 101STRATFOR Writing 101

“Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words,

a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason

that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts.

This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short,

or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline,

but that every word tell.”

-- William Strunk Jr.

What this Presentation is AboutWhat this Presentation is About

• Teaching young editors the tricks of the trade.• Improving the production process.• Improving the product.

What the WritersWhat the Writers’’ Group Does Group Does

• We write/edit, rewrite, polish, package and present the analytical product.

• We clarify what analysts think and say about an issue or event and help them sound as smart as they think they are.

• We provide the final vetting of their analysis in the review process.

• We serve as the surrogate STRATFOR reader.

The ProcessThe Process

• Proposal• Approval• Budget• Write• Comment• Edit• Fact check• Copy edit• Post

The ProcessThe Process

• STRATFOR readers are discriminating and demand a level of quality, consistency and accuracy in the content they consume.

• STRATFOR is a unique media outlet pioneering a more sophisticated, intelligence-based form of journalism.

• STRATFOR employs analysts to develop sources, gather information, examine events, watch for patterns and trends, predict likely outcomes and provide the basic content for STRATFOR products.

• Some of these analysts can write well and some cannot write at all.

• While the analysts are responsible for analytical content, the editors (or writers, whatever you want to call them) are wordsmiths who hammer and shape the analyses into final form.

The ProcessThe Process

• Analysts gather and evaluate various combinations of words and then convey their thoughts in some form to the editors.

• This form can range from a well-written analysis that needs only a few tweaks to an outline and hastily written notes that must be sorted, structured and fleshed out by the editor/writer.

• Writing and editing at STRATFOR is a collaborative and creative process difficult to quantify.

Selecting InformationSelecting Information

• Determine the thesis, the salient point to be made.• Determine what is relevant to support that thesis.• Think about the evidence and why it is being included.• Know the difference between a data dump and a

STRATFOR analysis.• Remember: The reader does not need to know

everything the analyst knows.• At the same time, because the reader doesn’t know all

that the analyst knows, he or she needs context and specificity. Don’t assume he or she has read our last piece on the subject.

Structure of an Analysis as Written

• Summary• Lead• Nut graf• Body• Conclusion

Summary

• One sentence describing what has happened (the trigger).

• Another sentence explaining why you think this event is important (the thesis).

• A third predicting what it might lead to (the forecast).• The summary must truly summarize the whole piece in

75 words (more or less).• Its purpose is to give the busy reader the distilled

essence of the entire analysis. • Analyses with fewer than 500 words do not need

summaries.

Lead

• What is the event or timely topic (the trigger) that prompted us to produce this analysis?

• In journalese, we’re talking about who, what, where, when and why.

Nut Graf

• An elaboration on why this is important to our readers, the point of the piece (the thesis).

• What does it mean?• What may it portend (the forecast)?

Body

• Prove/support your thesis.• Do so in an orderly manner using the paragraph as

your basic unit of composition.• Make each paragraph count.

Conclusion

• Wrap it up and tie it together.• Re-emphasize your thesis using different words.• Be conclusive.

Structure of an Analysis as PostedStructure of an Analysis as Posted

• Headline• Teaser• Summary• Analysis

Headline

• We are not a newspaper.• What we’re really talking about are titles.• In most cases (when it is not a frantic red-alert

situation), the title should not be the trigger.• It should be the larger concept that the trigger

introduces.• The words used in the title should reflect the editorial

essence of the concept in a way that sounds good to the ear while meeting marketing’s goal of “search-engine optimization” (e.g., by including the relevant country’s name).

Headline

For example, here’s a newspaper-like headline:

Austin: Man Bites Dog

Headline

At STRATFOR, the analysis would be titled something like:

Austin: Turning the Tables on Canine Aggression

Teaser

• 30 words or fewer• A hint of things to come.• It can be a boiled-down version of the thesis.

An Example on Site

Here’s what you see on the front page:

Russia: The End of Bashkir and Tatar Independence

With the resignation of the longtime president of Bashkortostan, the Kremlin has consolidated control over the two energy-rich and semi-autonomous Muslim republics.

22 different words elaborating on the headline and leading readers to the piece. Perfect.

An Example on Site

Here’s what you see inside (along with the headline):

Summary

Longtime Bashkir President Murtaza Rakhimov has resigned, only months after the long-serving president of Tatarstan, another semi-autonomous Muslim republic, left office. Their departures provide an opportunity for Moscow to reconsolidate control over the two regions and integrate their substantial energy resources into larger state-owned firms like Gazprom and Rosneft. They also point to an increased confidence on the part of the Kremlin to contain any outbreak of violence in the country’s restive Muslim regions.

74 words summarizing the whole analysis. Perfect.

An Example on Site

More in the lead graf (trigger, sourcing, relevant context):

Analysis

The Bashkir government will vote July 19 on the nomination of Rustem Khamitov to replace the long-serving president of Bashkortostan, Murtaza Rakhimov. Rakhimov announced his retirement July 13 following a three-hour closed-door meeting with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, according to STRATFOR sources. Rakhimov had led the autonomous Muslim republic for the past 16 years and, along with longtime Tatar President Mintimer Shaimiyev who resigned in April, was one of the last regional leaders left in Russia appointed by former President Boris Yeltsin.

An Example on Site

And still more in the nut graf (context and thesis):

These two regions were some of the last strings the Kremlin had yet to tie up in its consolidation of Russia. With the old leadership being pushed out in both Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, the Kremlin is showing it is confident it can eliminate the last relics of the Yeltsin era, manage the Muslim populations in the country and bring the final pieces of Russia’s mighty economic wealth under Kremlin control….

PitfallsPitfalls

• No clear thesis.• Buried thesis.• Dull lead.• Repetitive points.• Long, dense, impenetrable paragraphs.• Garbled thoughts.• Verb-subject disagreement.• Clichés. • Cuteness.• Too many dashes and parentheses.• Too many acronyms.• Long writing.• Contradictory comments.• Being too rushed to do a final read-through.

Pet PeevesPet Peeves

• “This is something that will warrant close scrutiny moving forward.”

• “Shift.”• “Potentially could.”• “Not only…but.”• “That” and “which.”• “As” meaning “because.”• “As such.”• “A” and “the.”• “Only.”• “Forces” vs. “troops.”• 300-word paragraphs.• Gratuitous self-praise.• “Police-blotter” style.

A Case StudyA Case Study

“Monster Trucks in Mexico: The Zetas Armor Up”

• When submitted for edit, this recent analysis lacked a summary and any semblance of an introduction to orient the reader. It was also redundant, cliché-ridden and too long. So I told the analyst the following when I returned the edited draft for fact check:

• We must consider our reader when we write and package our analyses. We have to assume he or she is busy, or at  least being bombarded with information that is competing with our information.

A Case StudyA Case Study

• In all likelihood, our reader is not as knowledgeable of the subject matter as we are, so we must add certain supporting points of fact to create the context for our discussion.

• It is simple: Tell a story. Allude to your thesis, early on,

and make it clear why our reader should continue reading. And we need to make it relatively easy for him or her to do that. All the information should be presented in a logically structured way with clarity, brevity and well-chosen words. The fewer words the better. Be specific. Don't be redundant. Stay away from clichés. Make no attempt to be cute.

A Case StudyA Case Study

• The most telling weakness of your original draft was the placement, at the top of page 6 (close to the end of the analysis!), of this sentence: “So where are we going with this?” This was followed by this first sentence of a new paragraph: “If you waded through the nitty-gritty details we discussed above, you can now grasp to some extent the limitations of the Zeta armored trucks....”

• Can you see how completely backwards that is? You were challenging our busy reader to an analytical obstacle course, and rewarding him or her at the very end after all that hard work. You should begin the discussion in some interesting way and present your main point up front, briefly, then elaborate on it and support it by the facts.

Case StudyCase Study

• The best way for you to understand all this is to compare your to-edit draft with my fact-check draft. You can also learn a lot about writing in our particular niche by reading The Economist, The Atlantic, The New Yorker and The Wall Street Journal. It is also helpful to read stuff written by George and Stick for the STRATFOR site to understand how they lay out their arguments (don’t simply try to mimic their “style”).

• To be a good writer you must first be a good reader.

Guidance

• Encourage analysts to write their own summaries.• When you write a summary, glean its parts from the body

of the piece during edit.• Make the paragraph the unit of composition.• Tell it like it is.• Use synonyms.• Use the active voice.• Be specific, definite and concrete. Don’t just say it rained.

Tell the reader how much.• If you’re not sure about the meaning of a word, look it up.• Keep it tight.• Be willing to kill your kittens.• Listen to the rhythm of the writing.

GuidanceGuidance

• Read your sentences out loud.• Ensure analyst availability for fact check.• Rely less on instant messages and more on

conversations.• Always confirm receipt of things.• Keep fact-check questions simple and brief.• Develop your own personal balance of speed and

thoroughness.• Don’t let analysts bully you. Hold your ground. Dial the

operations-center in if need be.• Don’t keep doing the same thing over and over again

expecting a different result.• Remember that reading a STRATFOR analysis should

be a pleasure, not a struggle.