Get the name of the dog

The Washington Post has a fun continuing focus called "Department of Data," and today's was particularly informative and, well, odd.

Someone on the staff noticed that there had been about 30,000 first name changes processed by Social Security over the past five years, and wondered what might be going on.

Here's a relevant graf from the story: 

Apparently, it’s hard to spell after you or your partner have just gone through labor: The two most-changed names are “Issac” and “Chole,” and the two most-adopted names, as you might expect, are “Isaac” and “Chloe.”

The article included a fun angle about a young woman who acquired the misspelled version of Chloe and who became "Chole" when a friend signed her up to vote as a class project... and created the typo. The real Chloe has filed for a name change (that matches her birth certificate). Her careless friend, BTW, was also named Chloe.

I found the entire piece fascinating, particularly at this time of year. I recall opening a new term with what I called "the ritual butchering of student names," asking each enrolled student to correct my first tries at calling the roll. It was always interesting to learn what name students preferred to be called, and I tried to honor their requests (though official school records could not change, of course).

For student reporters, getting the name right is the very first task for any interview. Never assume we know how to spell "Jane," for instance. As soon as you print that you will find that your source goes by "Jayne." It's good to discuss this with all reporters, and to remind them that no one likes to see their name misspelled (or mispronounced -- a true challenge for broadcast journalists). 

One of my favorite writing coaches -- Roy Peter Clark -- urges reporters to "get the name of the dog." To not just settle for some vague mention of a canine important to the coverage. To take the time to add one more important detail that helps make the scene vivid.

And we know that a dog or horse might end up being a key character in our reporting, though without any direct quotes. 

Clark's larger point is to gather an abundance of information to work from as a reporter. A few extra minutes asking those questions can produce much more effective scenes or moments. Those added details are what distinguish a "report" from a narrative.

And we all know how many blah reports we are inundated with in school.