You've gathered the information, done the reporting. You've  interviewed all the people involved, the eye witnesses to the explosion,  the police, etc, etc. And now you have to write the story. You have  pages in your notebook of facts, observations, quotes. You may have some  agency copy, some material from other media. The first thing to do is  stop and think. Do not start writing until you have a plan. Read through  all your notes, marking the most important pieces of information and  the quotes you want to use. The information you have gathered will not  have entered your notebook in order of importance. You need to decide  what is more important, what is less important, to establish a hierarchy  of pieces of information. And this is where you must think about your  audience. Not necessarily what interests you most, but what will  interest them. It may not be the same thing, and this is where knowing,  having a feeling for, understanding your audience is so important. As  you stare at the blank screen try to imagine the reader.
It  depends on the publication you are writing for, of course. You can  assume more knowledge if you are writing for a specialist publication,  or a specialist section of a newspaper. A cricket report or commentary  can assume knowledge of the rules of cricket; an article for a motoring  magazine can assume the reader knows what a supercar is. But some  specialist publications set out to educate - computer magazines are a  good example - and while interest can be assumed, knowledge of how to  use specific pieces of software cannot. So understand the intentions of  the publication you write for, or if you are a freelance you seek to  sell to. 
The market sector in which the newspaper is located is  also relevant to how you write. You will find longer sentences and  paragraphs and sometimes longer words in the more serious newspapers  selling relatively small numbers of copies than in mass-selling  newspapers with circulations 10 times as big. The reader of the Guardian  will tend to be better educated and to have a larger vocabulary than  the reader of the Sun. But do not, as a writer, show off your extensive  vocabulary. It is never better, wherever you are writing, to prefer the  less familiar word - "wordy" is always better than "prolix". Nobody is  impressed by the use of a word they do not understand or would not use  in everyday speech. The danger of talking down to the audience -  assuming vocabulary as well as knowledge - is that it insults readers,  makes them feel inadequate. And that turns them off and, worse, turns  them away. They do not read on, and you have not communicated with them.  The best writing for popular journalism is some of the best writing in  journalism, and is hard to do. It is readily understandable, instantly  readable and, if it is done well, makes you want to read on. Space is  always the most precious commodity in a newspaper. Long words and  sentences take up more space. Self-indulgent writing pleases nobody  except perhaps the writer.
Stephen King, who has sold more novels  than most, reflected on his craft in On Writing, and drew a similar  message: "One of the really bad things you can do to your writing is to  dress up the vocabulary, looking for long words because you're maybe a  little bit ashamed of your short ones. This is like dressing up a  household pet in evening clothes. The pet is embarrassed and the person  who committed this act of premeditated cuteness should be even more  embarrassed."
So the overriding message in journalistic writing  is: Keep It Simple. One of the greatest editors and journalists is  Harold Evans, who has written one of the best books on journalistic  writing, Essential English for Journalists, Editors and Writers. He  summed it up thus: "It is not enough to get the news. We must be able to  put it across. Meaning must be unmistakable, and it must also be  succinct. Readers have not the time and newspapers have not the space  for elaborate reiteration. This imposes decisive requirements. In  protecting the reader from incomprehension and boredom, the text editor  has to insist on language which is specific, emphatic and concise. Every  word must be understood by the ordinary reader, every sentence must be  clear at one glance, and every story must say something about people.  There must never be a doubt about its relevance to our daily life. There  must be no abstractions."
Below are a series of tips for keeping  things simple and encouraging the reader to read it. They are addressed  at news writing, but most apply to all forms of journalistic writing.
The  intro 
This is the start of the story, the opening  paragraph. The traditional news introductory paragraph, still the  dominant form, has two related purposes: to engage the reader instantly  and to summarise what the story is all about. The structure is known as  the "inverted pyramid" and dates back to the days of hot metal when  words on their way on to paper passed through a stage of being slugs of  lead. It was always easier and faster to cut a story from the bottom,  using a pair of tweezers. News stories always have to be cut because  reporters write them too long, and the (imperfect) theory was that a  well structured story could always be cut from the bottom so that in  extremis (do not use - see later) if the intro was the only paragraph  left it still made sense. The good intro depends on your judgment and  decisiveness. It declares why the story is being published, what is the  newest, most interesting, most important, most significant, most  attention-grabbing aspect of the story. It is not a summary of  everything yet to come. The best intro will contain a maximum of two or  three facts, maybe only one. In a popular tabloid it will consist of one  sentence, probably no more than 25 words. The worst intro will be  uncertain of what the story is all about and will contain several ideas.  The best intro will demand that you read on. The worst will make it  likely that you will move on.
As Tony Harcup puts it in his  Journalism, Principles and Practice: "The intro is crucial because it  sets the tone for what follows. A poorly written intro might confuse,  mislead or simply bore the reader - a well-written intro will encourage  the reader to stay with you on the strength of the information and angle  you have started with."
Rest of the story
Once  you've got the intro right, the second paragraph will be the most  important you write. And so on. Holding the reader's interest does not  stop until he or she has read to the end. You have already planned your  structure, the hierarchy of information. After the intro you are  amplifying the story, adding new, if subordinate, information, providing  detail, explanation and quotes. And doing all this so that the story  reads smoothly and seamlessly. News stories are about providing  information, and there is nothing more frustrating for the reader that  finishing a story with unanswered questions still hanging. Journalism  students are taught about the five Ws: who, what, when, where and why.  They are a useful tool to check you have covered all the bases, though  not all will always apply. It is always difficult to detach yourself  from your own prose when you read it through, but try. Try to put  yourself in the place of the reader coming cold to the story, interested  in it and asking the questions that will make it clear. Have you dealt  with them? The subeditor, or text editor, will soon tell you if you  haven't. There is always a problem over how much knowledge to assume,  particularly with a running story of which today's is another episode.  You cannot always start from the beginning for the benefit of reader  recently arrived from Mars, but you can include sufficient to ensure it  is not meaningless. It is a matter of judgement. 
Active  not passive
Always prefer the active tense in news  writing, and particularly in intros. The active tense is faster and more  immediate; it also uses fewer words. "Arsenal were beaten by Manchester  United last night ... " is slower than "Manchester United beat Arsenal  ... ", and if it is a London newspaper "Arsenal lost to Manchester  United ... " is still preferable. 
Positive even if it is  negative 
Not: "The government has decided not to  introduce the planned tax increase on petrol and diesel this autumn."  But: "The government has abandoned plans to raise fuel taxes this  autumn." News is more engaging if it describes something that is  happening, rather than something that is not.
Quotes
Long  quotes bring a story grinding to a halt, particularly if they are from  politicians, particularly local politicians, bureaucrats or bores.  Short, incisive, direct quotes change the pace of a story, add colour  and character, illustrate bald facts, and introduce personal experience.  Journalists paraphrase speeches and reports to focus on the main  points, and to make them shorter and more comprehensible. It is a vital  skill, as is using indirect quotation. But a quote will add a different  tone of voice, inject emotion or passion, answer the question "what was  it like?", "how did you feel?", "what are you going to do next?", "what  actually happened." Usually the reporter was not there and is gathering  the information after the event. The direct quote provides actuality.  And sometimes the quote has to be there to provide the precision, when  the actual words used are crucial, and sometimes the story itself.
Never  use a word other than "said" when attributing a quote. Affirmed,  opined, exclaimed, interjected, asserted, declared, are all tacky  synonyms which do nothing to help the flow of the story. When people  speak they "say". On rare occasions it might be relevant to the story if  they shout or scream; in which case break the rule.
Officialese
Language  used in letters from bank managers, council officers, utilities and  read from their notebooks by police officers giving evidence in court  should always be avoided. People do not "proceed"; they walk. Police do  not "apprehend"; they stop or arrest or detain. "At this point in time"  is now. 
George Orwell, in his essay Politics and the English  Language, converts a passage from Ecclesiastes and turns it into  officialese to make the point. Original: "I returned, and saw under the  sun, that the race is not to the swift, not the battle to the strong,  neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding,  nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them  all." Orwell's rewrite: "Objective consideration of contemporary  phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive  activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity,  but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be  taken into account."
Adjectives
Keith  Waterhouse, the veteran Daily Mail and Daily Mirror columnist wrote an  irresistible book on journalistic writing called Newspaper Style. It was  in fact an adaptation of the Mirror style book he had been commissioned  to write. In it he warns of the dangers of adjectives thus: "Adjectives  should not be allowed in newspapers unless they have something to say.  An adjective should not raise questions in the reader's mind, it should  answer them. Angry informs. Tall invites the question, how tall? The  well-worn phrase: his expensive tastes ran to fast cars simply whets the  appetite for examples of the expensive tastes and the makes and engine  capacity of the fast cars."
This test should be applied to all  adjectives used in journalistic writing. If they add relevantly to the  information being provided, they can stay. If not, strike them. Too many  writers believe adjectives add colour and style. Vague or general ones  add nothing. "Use specific words (red and blue)," says Waterhouse, "not  general ones (brightly coloured)."
Jargon, abbreviations,  acronyms and know-all foreign phrases
All of us who work  in organisations, professions, specific industries or bureaucracies are  surrounded by jargon. We may regard it as shorthand to speed  communication because we share the understanding of what it means, but,  whether intentional or not, it is a protective shield that excludes  those not in the know. That is the effect it has when used in newspaper  writing. Those in the know understand; the rest do not. Anything readers  do not understand makes them feel left out rather than included and  turns them against the story. They may well stop reading. Medical,  scientific and economic terms are a case in point. Avoid them or explain  them. Price/earnings ratios and capitalisation mean nothing to the  general reader. It is the same with abbreviations and acronyms. Today's  students have no idea what CBI stands for; they are more likely to know  FoI. A few could expand Nato, fewer the TUC. Many of the terms, although  still in use, are generational. They need to be spelt out or explained,  or another reader is lost. Just as long words speak down to those with a  smaller vocabulary - and there is always a simpler, and less space  consuming, alternative - so well-used Latin expressions mean nothing to  those who have not learned that language, apart from lawyers who have  had to mug up. Pro bono, inter alia and in extremis have no place in  newspapers, and usually mean the writer is showing off.
Puns  and cliches
Headline writers love puns and phrases from  60s pop lyrics and editors frequently have to restrain their use. They  sit even less easily in copy, where only readers over 55 can identify.  Again, the danger is excluding readers. Worst of all is the extended  metaphor or pun. Like this (real) one: "Kingsbridge Silver Band has hit a  high note with National Lottery chiefs to the tune of nearly £52,000.  Tired old instruments struck a chord with the lottery board, which has  drummed up enough cash for a complete new set, giving the band plenty to  trumpet about." Yes, really.
Apostrophes
The  printed word has done more to save the apostrophe than the whole of the  teaching profession. Given the pace of newspaper and magazine  production it is extraordinary that so few errors in spelling or  punctuation appear, a tribute to the subeditors who prepare copy for  publication. From advertising (shockingly, sometimes intentionally) to  the greengrocer's board we are bombarded with mis- (and missing)  punctuation, yet it is invariably correct in print, though seldom when  it emerges from the home printer. If in doubt, and most people are,  consult Lynne Truss (Eats, Shoots and Leaves). Often.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/25/writing.journalism.news