Ultimately, I feel like Bazelon’s story offered a broad-but-shallow look at the key issues in Phoebe’s case. A lot of fascinating threads were brought up and left unexplored. The ones that really interested me included:
- Sean, the “strong kid who had looked out for weaker ones.” When Bazelon identified him that way early in the story, I thought for sure that he’d be profiled closely, but that didn’t happen. (Guess she didn’t have the interview access . . . ) I didn’t get a sense of Sean—or few others from South Hadley High—as one who tried to protect Phoebe. And then there’s that interesting moment where a boy shows Phoebe what others are saying about her on Facebook, but instead of reprimanding them himself, he allows her to type a response in his name. It all plays into that issue of bystanders rarely standing up to bullies or reporting them.
- Culture clashes: How the kids considered themselves “true Irish,” while Phoebe was a “poser.” Clearly they thought of themselves as Irish, and yet they always called Phoebe the “Irish” slut, “Irish” bitch, etc. So, what’s the disconnect between being native Irish and American Irish? There was also that passing remark about how Phoebe was “excited that in [the U.S.] you could talk and express yourself in class.” The immigrant experience of being bullied by American peers could have served as an interesting lens for this story.
- The fact that several of the kids involved had either lost or were separated from their fathers. I don’t know if there’s really a story there, but Bazelon made a point to mention this fact when she introduced the characters, so it really stuck with me.
To Bazelon’s credit, I feel like “What Really Happened to Phoebe Prince?” highlighted the complex, far-reaching nature of this story. But what if it had been presented as a series of shorter, more focused articles that each zoomed in on a certain issue in the case? I could imagine building a really cool graphical interface off the base of a cluster graph . . . Phoebe’s story could be in the middle, with articles examining the contributing factors in greater depth: suicide in teens, bullying in American schools, profiles of the accused, etc. All would contain that common thread of Phoebe’s experience, and they could have the cumulative effect of a case file—each distinct article contributing a piece to the larger puzzle.
I apologize if that doesn’t make sense . . . It looks nice in my head, at least! I did like how Slate worked technology into the present form of this article, though:
- Embedded video – Emily Bazelon’s interview on The Today Show.
- Links to court cases, other reporting on the story, etc.
- The little (+) story notes. The first time I read through I zoomed right past them; the next time, I slowed down and realized what they were. I actually really liked them as a non-intrusive means of including supporting—or even tangential—information. The Atavist uses something like this in the iPad editions of its stories, right? I wonder how everyone else felt about it.
- The comment section. This is a pretty ubiquitous feature, but it’s really active for this piece. The local D.A.’s response to the story—in addition to input from readers—inspired a response from Bazelon.
No comments:
Post a Comment