Nearly every day, in board rooms all over America, executives and their investor relations staff huddle around a speaker phone and put their best collective face on the financial figures they have just filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

RIM CEO Jim Balsillie was excited about the not-so-popular Blackberry PlayBook during a 2011 earnings call.

With the advent of earnings season, when dozens of such calls are taking place each day, it’s a good time to reflect on the value of this business communication ritual for business journalists.

And “ritual” is the correct word for “the quarterly earnings conference call.” These events have an eerie sameness if you listen to enough of them. Despite their best efforts to sound conversational, executives often come across as stilted or nervous as they read their carefully prepared scripts. Some even have scripts for anticipated questions and have gone through rehearsals with other staff posing as pesky analysts. Investor relations professionals view earnings calls as one of the critical events of their year, so they leave little to chance. (On the website “Inside Investor Relations,” one article details “30 tips for better conference calls,” including “avoid excessive exuberance.”)

The primary audience for an earnings call are the analysts who follow the company for investment banks and institutional investors; these folks are invited not only to listen to the call but also to ask questions at the end of the presentation. A moderator calls on the speakers one by one, so the exchange is far from free-wheeling. But an earnings call can still be mildly revelatory and, thanks to a regulation adopted by the SEC in 2000, anyone else can listen in, including small investors, competitors and journalists.

Regulation Fair Disclosure, or Reg FD, arose to ensure that everyone is able to receive material information about a company at the same time. Prior to its existence, companies might disclose important information selectively in private sessions with analysts or big investors, a practice that put smaller investors at a disadvantage.

If you are a journalist following a particular company, listening in on a conference call should be part of your regular beat responsibilities, just like monitoring SEC filings and insider stock trades. Sure, it’s unlikely that anything unexpected will happen, but you never know.

Perhaps the most infamous – and newsworthy – earnings conference call in history took place in the spring of 2001, when Jeffrey Skilling, then CEO of Enron, responded to a question from a persistent analyst with the epithet, “We appreciate it…a–hole.” Several years later, Al Lord, CEO of Sallie Mae, may have topped Skilling’s gaffe when he ended a conference call by muttering “Let’s get the – out of here.”

Although you are unlikely to hear something as colorful as an offhand expletive, the calls still have value for several reasons:

• You can learn what the company believes are most salient about its filings and develop some context about its strategies.
• You can get beyond the obvious in a quarterly earnings story and provide readers something of value that they are unlikely to seek out on their own.
• You can eavesdrop on concerns informed investors and analysts have about the company during the Q&A session.
• You can hear directly from top executives and quote them in your stories, even if these are people who will never return your call. Simply attribute the comment by saying something like, “the remark was made during the company’s fourth quarter conference call Tuesday.”
• If the executive is someone you plan to interview in the future, you can get a feel for his or her personality, even in a carefully scripted event.

Some executives take pains to be conversational and even jovial. Others are combative and prickly. Referring to a comment made in a conference call when you have that interview can be a good reporting habit. It conveys to the executive that you’ve done your homework.

Yahoo!'s Cutline column liveblogged News Corps' earnings call in August 2011. Photo: Yahoo!

The vast majority of publicly traded companies have conference calls. It’s easy to find out when they are scheduled by looking at a company’s website, usually under a tab labeled “investor relations.” Some make the time and date available a month or more in advance. Others wait until closer to the call. Many financial sites compile a calendar of upcoming calls, including Yahoo Finance, Marketwatch, Reuters, Seeking Alpha, Earningswhispers.com and Earnings.com.

To listen to a call real time, you often have to complete an online registration in advance via the company’s website. Then you just dial in at the appointed hour and listen. Some companies use technology that allows listeners to view charts and graphs on their computer screens as the call is taking place.

A call usually opens with a moderator or coordinator reading a disclaimer about “forward-looking statements.” Then the CEO typically has a few opening words about the quarter just ended and turns the microphone over to the chief financial officer.

Depending on the news and the company, other executives might be given a chance to elaborate on a particular development or strategy. Finally, the moderator will open the call to questions.

If you miss a company’s live call, don’t despair. A recording is usually archived for a month or so on the company’s website and at financial websites. Some archived recordings conveniently allow you to jump ahead in the call rather than listen to it linearly. Another time-saver is transcripts, many of which can be obtained free from seekingalpha.com; other services offer transcripts for a fee.

Be sure to check the provider’s linking or quotation policy before including information from a transcript in your reporting. And it’s a good practice to double check a quote in a transcript against the original recording, if that is still available. Like the conference call itself, the transcript probably comes with a disclaimer.

Pam Luecke was the initial Reynolds Endowed Chair in Business Journalism; her success at Washington and Lee University paving the way for the naming of subsequent business journalism chairs.

David Brancaccio, PBS.

We’ll chat live with David Brancaccio, a special correspondent for Marketplace’s Economy 4.0 and host of the Marketplace Index, on Tuesday, Jan. 31, from 11:30 a.m-12:15 p.m. ET.

Brancaccio, a broadcaster for 33 years, was previously the anchor of public television’s NOW, an award-winning newsmagazine of investigative reporting and in-depth interviews. He also hosted California Connected.

Before joining PBS, Brancaccio was a Marketplace’s European correspondent based in London. He hosted the public radio program from 1993 to 2003. Among his beats: politics, human rights, national security, the environment, health care, and science policy.

From his Marketplace biography:

“Brancaccio specializes in telling stories important to our economy and our democracy through the eyes of the real people who live in the cross hairs of crucial issues. His accessible yet authoritative approach to investigative reporting and in-depth interviewing earned his work the highest honors in broadcast journalism, including the Peabody, the Columbia-duPont, the Emmy, and the Walter Cronkite awards.

A new version of Brancaccio’s public television special about Main Street as an engine of economic innovation called “Fixing the Future” will soon be a feature-length documentary.  He is author of a book about Americans applying their personal values to their money, entitled “Squandering Aimlessly.”

Brancaccio has a bachelor’s degree from Wesleyan University and a master’s degree in journalism from Stanford University.  He has appeared on CNBC, MSNBC, and BBC television and his newspaper work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the BaltimoreSun, and Britain’s The Guardian.”

Tuesday’s chat will be on CoverItLive.  You can register below and we’ll send you a reminder as the time nears.

Come back on Tuesday with questions for Brancaccio.

This is the third in a four-part series by Colin Tetreault on energy and its effects on the business world. Tetreault holds a Master of Arts from Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability and is a sustainability consultant and expert to numerous organizations.

No single source of energy is without consequences from its respective production. The move to protect natural resources and have more environmental protection is not without tradeoffs itself.

Unintended consequences and economic and environmental externalities permeate our energy supplies and choices. The National Academy of Science has an insightful report on the Hidden Costs of Energy , which  details some of the specific impacts choices of energy supplies have on local economies, environment, and health. It’s probably not surprising that some of the biggest public figures in energy (coal, gas, petroleum) contribute to significant environmental degradation, unincorporated negative economic impact, and causes lingering health concerns. According to the report, the aggregate damages caused by adversely impact the environment amount to more the $120 billion for 2005, alone.

In order to help reign in environmental protection, several policy-based solutions have been proposed to help mitigate emissions production while trying to minimize the impact or positively impact the overall economic environment. The Congressional Budget Office details many of these policy options and their potential impacts (positive and negative) in a report on how environmental protection plays into a greater economic milieu.

Not to fear, there are alternatives. We have renewable energy production, right? Solar, wind, and biomass will certainly fill the void of energy needs while simultaneously reducing environmental impact, right? Author and scientist David MacKay discusses the implications of land-use and unintended environmental consequences of some renewable energy pursuits.

So how is it possible promote responsible energy use and environmental protection? A few seminal federal pieces of legislation include: National Environmental Protection Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (aka Superfund). How are these being applied – and potentially contested – in your region?

When it comes down to it, how do we incorporate the externalities into our current and future energy production? Some questions for you to dig into in your area may include:

• How do renewable energy technologies designed to have a positive environmental impact, have a potentially deleterious environmental impact?
• What organizations are working to incorporate and lead the way in blending environmental protection with a robust system of governance and economics? Look to the Northeast, Acid Rain Program and its SO2 trading. Are there local examples moving towards this type of regulation?
• What notable advances in environmental protection in your area that have resulted in increased economic and business opportunity

Here are some additional resources on the intersection of environmental protection and business:

•  Land management, agricultural productivity, and the downstream impacts on the Gulf of Mexico region from farming and land use in the Mississippi watershed region.
•  The multiple stories of nuclear waste storage and disposal. With Yucca Mountain on an indefinite hold, what is being done in your region around nuclear waste storage or disposal?

This is the second in a four-part series by Colin Tetreault on energy and its effects on the business world. Tetreault holds a Master of Arts from Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability and is a sustainability consultant and expert to numerous organizations.

The hard truth of our energy situation is that our thirst and desire for energy is increasing. As population inevitably increases, our desire for more energy parallels it. This brings us to the issue of energy efficiency.

Do you remember your parents or grandparents’ avocado green or harvest gold refrigerator? While it was the harbinger of tasty treats, it also hummed like a neighborhood transformer and used nearly as much energy. Surely, the items we use on a regular basis have become more energy efficient, no?

Let me pose this question: How many televisions, computers, and electronic gizmos did you have in your house growing up? What about now? Hard truth: Our U.S. energy use, per person is up 39 percent from 1950 levels.

Finding additional sources and increasing the available supply of energy will only get us so far. For a sustainable future, energy efficiency should be pursued in all areas of society. While a comprehensive list of all efficiency opportunities would be too much for this post, here is a truncated list of coverage opportunities:

The Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards present a ripe area for increasing the efficiency of a major source of energy consumption. Are there local, municipal, or state regulations in your area that require a higher fuel efficiency that the national average or potential use of alternative fueled power options like LNG, CNG, biofuel, or hydrogen? The impact not only drastically impacts carbon dioxide production, but can add up to significant expenditure savings.

Built environment standards for efficiency, like LEED, green building construction and retrofits can make a significant impact on energy consumption. According to the U.S. Census, there were 131 million housing units, of which nearly 75 percent were single-family units. What significant steps has your region made in energy efficiency for built structures? Are there unique examples of projects that marry efficiency with those in lower income areas to alleviate costs of inefficiency to those who need it most? Example: California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards have saved the state significant amounts of money, reduced environmental impact, and led to a better quality of life for many people. There is a growing market for energy efficiency firms that help people reduce their footprint and save money. Find some in your local area.

Supporting innovation and entrepreneurial solutions to energy efficiency can lead to a wealth of benefits. The Advanced Research Project Agents – Energy (ARPA-E) invests in a multitude of projects across the U.S. that may lead to breakthroughs in energy use and efficiency. Some of them may be in your neighborhood or applicable to your particular region. The Business Innovation Laboratory and Santa Fe Innovation Park are taking steps to create an innovative community laboratory focused on finding solutions to energy efficiency and other pressing energy issues. Chances are there are unique collaborations in your local area that are finding innovative ways to bring stakeholders together to address the local, regional, national, and global issues of energy efficiency.

Here are some resources for deeper exploration of energy efficiency:

McKinsey & Company: Unlocking energy efficiency in the U.S. economy
American Energy Innovation Council: A Business Plan for America’s Energy Future

This is the first in a four-part series by Colin Tetreault on energy and its effects on the business world. Tetreault holds a Master of Arts from Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability and is a sustainability consultant and expert to numerous organizations.

Energy. It’s the singular force that helps keep our lives running smoothly. It brings cool in the summer and warm in the winter. Energy powers our cars for a vacation road trip and  helps to run the computers searching for a cure to cancer. I often justify that extra piece of pizza as “more energy” for my next exercise endeavor. Indeed, energy is the driving force behind keeping the entire Earth moving in a positive direction.

Taken in part from a course I co-teach at Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability with the former president of Shell Oil, John Hofmeister, this series will help you dig into energy supply, technology for efficiency, environmental protection, and infrastructure. We will discuss some truths behind energy and topics that you can investigate in your local region. This is a big subject to discuss in just a few posts, so if you have additional questions, feel free to contact me.

Let’s start with the framing and context for energy in the United States.

Trivia question: How many decision makers are involved in setting energy policy, regulating development and infrastructure, controlling market opportunities, and setting the general tone for U.S. energy? Hint: it is more than just the secretary of energy.

Answer: Nearly 1,000 separate individuals, including the president, Congress, about a dozen Congressional committees, 874 federal judges, 50 Governors, state corporation/utility commissions, county leaders, and individual city leadership. That’s a lot of cooks in the proverbial kitchen. That doesn’t include the innumerable businesses attempting to operate and lobby in this space.

Here is a brief primer on the mechanics of energy supply:

1. Photons pay the bills. Energy is neither created nor destroyed. It simply transforms.
2. We live in a closed material system, but an open energy system (sunlight comes in, but nothing leaves).
3. We have a lot of options on how we harness and use our energy supplies.
4. All energy sources, at present, have tradeoffs associated with their use.
5. Depending how you want to cut it, there are 10 sources of energy – 5 traditional (coal, oil, gas, nuclear and hydropower) and 5 alternative (biofuels, wind, solar, geothermal and hydrogen, which is technically a carrier, but we’ll include it for now).

In order  to dig into your own local stories, you must first understand where we get our energy from. Check out the Energy Information Administration to drill down on sources of energy supply by state. Compare the amount of traditional energy production to that of alternative production. Now put that next to a list of projected population growth by  state.

Here is a hard truth: Population is increasing and our associated energy demand, overall and per capita, is also increasing. Can alternative energy supply, at its current rate of development and implementation, keep up with the growth in your area?

There is opportunity for alternative energy supplies to grow at a rapid rate and help us transition from a carbon-based energy system. However, there are constraints to our current system. If fundamental issues on a local, regional, state, and national level are addressed, serious progress towards a more sustainable energy future could follow.

Here are some questions to consider:

• Where do your state and regional energy supplies come from? What is the current mix of energy supply?
• How much energy is your area currently using? Given the rate of population growth in the region, how much more energy is your area anticipated to need?
• What businesses are utilizing unique public/private partnership in order to advance energy supply in innovative ways?

Energy supply is only one piece of the energy puzzle. Increasing the available supply of various energy sources alone does not solve the myriad of issues. The next post will discuss energy efficiency and the role it plays in ushering in a more sustainable energy future.

I recommend some of the following sources for continued learning on aspects of energy supply and setting. These should help give you a holistic perspective on the collective energy supply and future.

General energy readings:

• National Petroleum Council: Facing the Hard Truths - Advisory council to the secretary of energy.
• National Academy of Sciences: What You Need to Know About Energy - A good overview of energy basics.
• U.S. Energy Information Administration: International Energy Outlook 2011 - What our energy future may hold.

Supplies:

• MIT Natural Gas Report - A timely report, as natural gas is becoming more and more prominent in our future…heard of fracking?
• National Academy of Sciences: Liquid Transportation Fuels - Are there alternatives to gasoline made from petroleum? Can coal or biofuels be a supply source?

This is the fourth in a four-part series by Colin Tetreault on energy and its effects on the business world. Tetreault holds a Master of Arts from Arizona State University’s School of Sustainability and is a sustainability consultant and expert to numerous organizations.

So far in this series, we have discussed supply, efficiency and environmental protection and how each relate to energy. The preceding aspects of energy exist and operate within a larger general structure and framework: infrastructure.

Infrastructure primarily gets labeled as any physical capital investment or improvement. Look out your windows; notice those high-voltage power lines?

Now put on your X-ray goggles and look beneath you; the veritable cornucopia of civil engineering has provided for a multitude of infrastructure related to energy. Good infrastructure serves to figuratively and literally bridge not only electrons, but cultures together. As a nation that was built upon the premise of cultural enlightenment and Manifest Destiny, we should be proud of what we have been able to accomplish in establishing a complex and sophisticated network of interrelated infrastructure that serves our benefit. That is if we stopped progressing sometime in the early-20th century.

While our infrastructure acts to serve our will silently – often being overlook or ignored – it is often most visible when it doesn’t function properly. While not ubiquitous, we are operating on an energy infrastructure that consists of 3,200 distribution utilities, 10,000 generating units, and tens of thousands of miles of transmission and distribution lines. This is all under the auspices of no true unified national power grid. Yet are you amazed how the lights turn on every time you flick the switch?

Let’s discuss energy infrastructure further in three chunks – physical, political and educational.

Our physical infrastructure is pretty apparent. We have power lines and distribution networks – lots of them – that move electrons from point of production to our wall outlets. What is the significant issue is that we haven’t been able to keep pace with or built a sophisticated enough grid to service the growing number of people and their per-capita demand. To put it plainly, our stuff is getting old. There are opportunities to deploy advanced technologies within our nation, states, and regions that can drastically help balance and distribute our electrical load in a more sophisticated and efficient manner. What are the “Smart Grid” developments in your area?

There is a political side of infrastructure. In fact, it goes in lock step with our physical infrastructure. With so many individual power production facilities – add our desire to drastically ramp up renewable-based production in, often, more remote areas – it’s difficult to connect all the dots. There are lots of rules, regulations, and laws to navigate. There are nearly 1,000 decision makers in the energy arena. That’s a lot of cooks in the kitchen.

Compounding this is an increased number of stakeholders in the process. It can cost a significant amount of money to install infrastructure. For some relaxed Sunday reading, I suggest you look into “citing regulations” within your local region. You will most often find this hot-button political issue embedded within the state-level utility/business commissions and the legislature. I’ll provide an example of one from my home state: Arizona. The Devers-2 transmission line. In short, a very long, expensive transmission line is planned to be built from Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station to California. The California Public Utilities Commission approved it; the Arizona Corporation Commission did not. It is now in discussion with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It’s a sticky political knot that is yet to be worked out.

Lastly, infrastructure is educational. I can imagine that some of the preceding may have been news to you. Imagine what it will be to the general public? Do most people think, long and hard, where their energy comes from, how it is delivered, and the impacts of it? A close colleague of mine and a leader in a utility company once said, “We’re in the cold beer and hot shower business” when discussing his customers’ expectations. This is absolutely brilliant. If the shower isn’t hot or the beer isn’t cold, people get upset. Otherwise, it’s pretty lassie-faire. Our current educational curriculum, even in STEM intensive areas, doesn’t often drill down into the integrated world of energy. Should it? How do we help move the needle on aspects of supply (debates on coal, gas, nuclear and wind), efficiency standards (car and power plants) environmental protection (tradeoffs, needs and rules), and our aging infrastructure? Whose responsibility is it?

Some examples of organizations starting the discussion include the Energy Education Council in Illinois and the the North Dakota Petroleum Council, which offers education to state teachers. Also, check out what Ohio does with the industry-funded Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program. I’ll leave it up to your judgment. By whom and how do we educate a new cadre of energy leaders and thinkers? Dig into what is happening near you.

Discussing the future of energy is a complex topic. Here are some additional recommended resources on energy infrastructure and the overall paradigm:

• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: This is the regulatory body around many aspects of energy, especially around interstate transmission. Why is this important? Does your state produce renewable energy? Have you heard about the big plans to blanket many places in Wyoming with windmills? How will your region physically sell the electricity produced?
• State corporation commissions: These are a veritable cornucopia of fun when it comes to the intersection of business and energy. Spend time reading their proposals and upcoming issues. You’ll find lots of story ideas here.
• “Physics for Future Presidents,” by Richard Muller. A great read on a science-based approach to, among other things, energy production and our future. While politics are great at obfuscation, physics can cut through the quagmire.

The Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism have been awarded by the Donald W. Reynolds National Center for Business Journalism since 2007. They recognize the best in print and online investigative business journalism and are named after two-time Pulitzer Prize winners Don Barlett and Jim Steele.

Here are all of the previous winners:

2011

Gold: The Arizona Republic for “Public Pensions, A Soaring Burden” by Craig Harris. The series focused on questionable public-pension practices and their cost to taxpayers. The project, which involved 67 public-records requests, uncovered elected officials making more in retirement than when they were employed and pensions paid to convicted felons removed from office for official wrongdoing.

The winners of the 2011 Barlett & Steele Awards: (from left) Craig Harris, Michael J. Berens, Jim Steele, Raquel Rutledge and Rick Barrett.

Silver: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel for “A Case of Shattered Trust” by Raquel Rutledge and Rick Barrett. The series revealed how a firm with a decade of serious regulatory violations of sanitary conditions was allowed to operate while the Food and Drug Administration did nothing. As a result of the stories, the FDA revealed the name of the bacterium that it found in the manufacturer’s contaminated alcohol wipes. Following a permanent federal injunction against the firm, the product is no longer manufactured.

Bronze: The Seattle Times for “Seniors for Sale” by Michael J. Berens. The series investigated the growing trend toward seniors being moved from nursing homes into less expensive “adult family homes.” The investigation uncovered more than 230 deaths that indicated neglect or abuse in these homes but were not reported to the state. (The bronze award was added in 2011.)

More on the 2011 winning articles.

Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism: 2011 Winners from Reynolds Center on Vimeo.

2010

Gold: Reuters for “Diagnosed with Breast Cancer, Dropped by Insurer” by Murray Waas, whose four-month investigation revealed that a giant health insurer had targeted policyholders recently diagnosed with breast cancer for aggressive investigations with the intent to cancel their policies. An exhaustive study of records, hearings and federal data, as well as dozens of interviews with experts, officials and patients led to the story.

Silver: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel for “Side Effects: Money, Medicine and Patients” by John Fauber, whose stories uncovered conflicts of interest that can compromise a doctor’s judgment. An example was a surgeon receiving millions of dollars in royalties annually from a medical device company while serving as editor of a medical journal that published favorable research on the company’s projects.

More on the 2010 winning articles.

2010 Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Reporting from Reynolds Center on Vimeo.

From left: Don Barlett, Rob Barry, Matthew Haggman, Jim Steele and Andrew Leckey

2009

Gold: The Miami Herald for “Borrowers Betrayed” by Jack Dolan, Matthew Haggman and Rob Barry, whose nine-month investigation and resulting series uncovered poor oversight by Florida mortgage regulators that permitted thousands of individuals with criminal records to conduct business in the state’s home loan industry.

Silver: Bloomberg Markets for “AARP’s Stealth Fees” by Gary Cohn and Darrell Preston, who found through public documents and scores of interviews, that the world’s largest organization for seniors collects hundreds of millions of dollars annually from insurers who pay for AARP’s endorsement of their policies.

More on the 2009 winning articles.

2008

Gold: BusinessWeek for “Prisoners of Debt” by Robert Berner, Keith Epstein, Brian Grow and Geri Smith, who revealed how large financial firms regularly collaborate with doctors and hospitals to turn unpaid medical bills into high-interest consumer debt.

Silver: The Seattle Times for “The Favor Factory” by Hal Bernton and David Heath, who uncovered thousands of purchases that the U.S. Congress has forced the military to make in recent years, including a $4.5 million Navy vessel that sits unused by a Seattle pier.

More on the 2008 winning articles.

2007 Gold Award recipient Walt Bogdanich

2007

Gold: The New York Times for “A Toxic Pipeline” by Walt Bogdanich and Jake Hooker, who documented China’s role in supplying a counterfeit drug ingredient that killed at least 100 people in Panama and is suspected of killing thousands of others around the world.

Silver: The Baltimore Sun for “On Shaky Ground” by Fred Schulte and June Arney, who tracked how Baltimore’s arcane system of property fees initiated in Colonial times had evolved into a system of greed and lax oversight that preyed on the poor and elderly.

More on the 2007 winning articles.

Learn more on how to apply for the annual Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism.

The Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism are named for two-time Pulitzer Prize winners Don Barlett (left) and Jim Steele.

The Donald W. Reynolds National Center for Business Journalism celebrates the best in print and online investigative business journalism each year with the Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism.

Named for two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists Don Barlett and Jim Steele, the awards were first given in 2007 and have featured a gold award of $5,000 and a silver prize of $2,000. Due to the growing number of exceptional submissions each year, a bronze award of $1,000 was added in 2011.

Entries for the 2012 award must have appeared in the year ending June 30, 2012. Each media outlet may submit no more than two entries. Submission deadline is Aug. 1, 2012, at 11:59 p.m. PT.

The Barlett and Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism from Reynolds Center on Vimeo.

QUALITIES OF WINNING ENTRIES

“Don and I have an informal motto: ‘Tell the reader something they don’t know,’” said Steele. “It sounds simple. Yet a lot of journalism is a rehash of what people already know.”

Judges will be looking for investigative enterprise, strong business theme, elegant writing style, clarity and impact.

The awards are conferred in January during Reynolds Business Journalism Week at Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication in Phoenix.

Read more about previous winners.

Barlett & Steele Awards for Investigative Business Journalism: 2011 Winners from Reynolds Center on Vimeo.

HOW TO APPLY BY AUG. 1, 2012

Applications will be accepted only online and from editors or the contest coordinator designated by your news organization. Applicants will need to provide the following on the Barlett & Steele Contest Entry Form (coming soon).

• Contact information for the editor submitting the entry.
• An editor’s letter outlining any (a) obstacles in reporting, (b) reforms or impact after publication and (c) corrections or challenges to accuracy. It can be submitted as a Word document (.doc) or an Adobe Acrobat PDF (.pdf) file.
• Up to four articles, submitted as either an active URL or as a Word document (.doc) or Adobe Acrobat PDF (.pdf). A sidebar counts as an article.

Applicants do not have to file all elements in one sitting, but all elements must be uploaded before the application is submitted for consideration. The deadline for submission is 11:59 p.m. PT on Aug. 1, 2012.

Questions? Email Andrew Leckey, Reynolds Center president, or call 602-496-9186.

As an experienced radio journalist, Nici offers tips of how radio reporters can produce high-quality stories.

PROFESSORS SEMINARS

The business journalism professors discussed editors’ expectations and how to prepare students for the job market with Linda Austin, executive director of the Reynolds Center; Ilana Lowery of Phoenix Business Journal; Kathy Tulumello of The Arizona Republic; and Jodi Schneider of Bloomberg News.

Session Recordings

• What Editors Expect (panel discussion moderated by Andrew Leckey)
• Preparing for the Job Market — Schneider

Handout (PDF)

• Preparing for the Job Market – Schneider

STRICTLY FINANCIALS

The Strictly Financials Seminar fellows, who are professional journalists, studied financial markets with Gary Trennepohl of Oklahoma State University-Tulsa.

Session Recordings

• Financial Markets in 2012: Where are the Stories?
• Financial Markets in 2012: Where are the Stories? (continued)