A good story in journalism rests on good information, sources, and narrative.
A good story in journalism rests on a simple but demanding equation: good information, good sources, and a good narrative. If you take out any one of them, the story falls short, no matter how compelling the subject is.
Good information
Every piece of information in your story needs to clear the following tests before it earns its place:
1-Is it accurate? Have you covered all relevant angles?
2-Is it credible? Does it hold up against what other reliable sources say?
3-Is it relevant? Does it serve the story, or is it just a filler?
4- Is it current? Are you working with the most up-to-date figures available?
Good sources
Not all sources carry equal weight. When you quote a person ask yourself who they are speaking for – themselves or an institution – what is their reputation and do they have known biases or not.
When you cite an organization, consider its credibility at the local, regional, and international level, and who funds it. The same scrutiny applies to media sources you rely on for data.
Good narrative
Information and sources alone don't make a story, structure does. A strong narrative moves through five elements: a character whose journey carries the reader forward; context that explains why the story matters; conflict, the tension or high-stakes opportunity that gives the story its momentum; a climax where that tension reaches its peak; and a conclusion that draws out what it all means.
One structural note that confuses many journalists: your story doesn't begin at the beginning. It begins at the turning point, the moment something changed and works outward from there.
What this looks like in practice
The story "The grass isn't greener across the sea", published at The Continent, is a useful example of all three components working together.
It opens with a specific character: a 16-year-old Oromo boy who arrived feverish on Yemen's shores after a 10-hour sea journey, was abandoned at the coast by the boat crew, and collapsed walking inland. That's the character and the conflict: immediate, human, specific.
The context follows: Yemen's health system has been collapsing since 2014, producing repeated cholera outbreaks. About 2.5 million people were infected between 2016 and 2021.
Then the story's real tension surfaces: Migrants were estimated to make up around 80% of cholera cases in southern Yemen by the end of 2023, and authorities began blaming them for bringing the disease in.
The climax lands in the testimony of Hamza Adis, who described being treated with open aversion at a health centre because of his Ethiopian origin. He survived. The closing line does the rest: "not all African migrants are so lucky."
What worked:
A character whose specific experience unlocks a systemic story, context that explains the stakes to a reader with no prior knowledge of Yemen, a conflict that is both personal and political, and a closing line that carries the weight of everything that came before it, without spelling it out.