Payback

I read "Commodity Futures Trading Commission discloses investigation of crude oil contracts," an article Dan wrote May 30, 2008 for the AP.

The 83 character headline is well under the 94 character maximum, and is pretty straightforward at telling you what you're going to get with this story. The lead comes as no surprise after the headline, telling you the who (Federal investigators), what (investigating oil markets), when (for the last six months), where (the U.S.), and why (price manipulation). How they are conducting the investigation is kept secret, so that is why that part of the six essential elements of the lead is left out. Overall the lead is good and properly represents the body of the story.

After reading through the article the first time, there is one thing that catches my eye before I even start the breakdown of each paragraph. In the last graph, "Speculation has been cited as one on many factors contributing to surging petroleum prices," seems to have a little typo. I believe the word on is supposed to be of.

The third graph has six numbers in it. It's a bit much for me to handle, but it is the nature of business reporting I suppose.

Most of the quotes in this story are partials and it seems kind of quote heavy at some points. I'm not sure if I'm a big fan of the use of so many partial quotes. It feels kind of boring and doesn't feel like I'm being told a story as much. The two graphs after Simons is introduced is an example where it seems like some of the quotes could have been broken up with more body or even removed. The phrase "will have a chilling effect" could have been taken out of quotation marks and just been attributed to Simons.

Overall, obviously I think the story is pretty good. If it's good enough for the AP, it's good enough for me. I would have included a few more direct sources, it seems like there are some that are quoted from statements and press releases.