Phish Returns to Feed Its Hungry Fans

Reporter Seth Schiesel begins his article on the triumphant return of jam-band Phish with a great roundup lede, which compares the excited crowd at the concert with sports fans and supporters at political rallies.  This technique tells the reader something about the magnitude of the crowd that a simple head count would not: its energy, and the emotional excitement that permeated Hampton Coliseum that night.

At no point in the article does Schiesel actually get into specifics about the band, whether its the reasons behind their decision to reunite, the instruments they plan to use on this tour, or the songs they plan to perform.  Instead, he chooses to focus the article on the people who were there watching the event unfold- the piece is filled with interesting quotes about the atmosphere, anticipation, and most interesting of all- the "what I had to do to get here" stories from the most devoted Phish fans.

By doing this, Schiesel adheres to one of the most important rules for writing good journalism- stories are interesting because of the people involved in them, and the best stories are about people and their personal experiences.  A diehard Phish fan might love a story about the specific gear that guitarist Trey Anastasio uses to create his sound, but everybody loves a story about diehard Phish fans.

Speaking of which, the amount of money that these people paid to get into this concert was ridiculous.  The sums some of these diehards shelled out is mind-boggling to the average person, which is what makes the article so interesting to read about.  Its hard to imagine how devoted these fans are- who pay around a thousand dollars for a ticket that started at the box office at fifty dollars.  This is a great example of how interesting people can make for interesting journalism.  It may not be the most provocative or thought-provoking piece the Times has produced, but its a highly enjoyable read.