When we last addressed Mr. Jobs he was taking a pass on Macworld.

More recently, unless you’ve spent the last week in the proverbial cave, you’ve seen the cavalcade of stories on Steve Jobs taking a leave of absence from Apple.

The common denominator in the stories revolves around understanding his replacement, Tim Cook.

It’s revealing to contrast a blog posting from The Wall Street Journal by Nick Wingfield with a story in the San Jose Mercury News penned by Brandon Bailey ”Iron Reporter”-style (further proof that I’m spending way too much time on the Food Network).

Let’s start with the headlines.

“When Steve Jobs Met Tim Cook” (Journal) versus “Tim Cook – Jobs’ temporary replacement at Apple – seen as strong manger” (Merc).

No contest.

The Journal story promises to put me in the room for the first Jobs-Cook interaction, with instant drama coming from the question “what happened?”  

Was it “like” at first sight?  

Did Cook wear a “Vote for Ike” button as an icebreaker?  

On the other hand, the Merc header indicates that we’re likely going to read a rehash of what’s already known by even pedestrian Apple watchers. 

And that’s about how it plays out. 

Wingfield deserves credit for tracking down the recruiter at Heidrick & Struggles who served as the matchmaker back in 1998. (The fact that the recruiter no longer works for Heidrick tells me that Heidrick PR did not pitch the story angle.) While the walk down memory lane won’t evoke foreshadowing like F. Scott Fitzgerald, at least it’s different from the thousands of Cook-knows-how-to-make-the-trains-run-on-time stories. The anecdote that Steve isn’t big on collecting barber chairs adds some levity. 

The Merc story kicks off with the premise that Cook is the right man for the short-term gig, supported by “scintillating” quotes from two sources: 

“He’s the guy that makes sure everything gets executed properly. He’s excellent at getting things done.” (Tim Bajarin from Creative Strategies) 

The 48-year-old Cook is “not a product innovator. But he runs a very tight ship.” (Brian Marshall from Broadpoint AmTech) 

Needless to say, we won’t be adding these quotes to our art of storytelling curriculum … which isn’t to diss the two sources. We know Bajarin, who is absolutely clued into Apple and often communicates with a compelling bent. But what shows up in this particular article from the sources interviewed doesn’t make for an enlightening read. 

It turns out that the best color in the Merc piece gets borrowed from Fortune’s profile on Cook last year: 

A recent article in Fortune magazine described a management meeting in which Cook was discussing a problem with Apple’s Asian operations. “This is really a problem,” Cook reportedly said. “Someone should be in China driving this.” Thirty minutes later, Cook turned to a subordinate and calmly inquired: “Why are you still here?” The man immediately left the meeting, the magazine said; he drove straight to the airport and flew to China without a change of clothes.

Even with the limitations of a 24-hour news cycle, you would think the paper in Apple’s backyard could do a little better on the original reporting front (although finding a tidbit in the Cook family’s hometown paper, the Robertsdale Independent was a nice touch).

I do recognize that both the Journal and the Merc have published multiple stories on this topic. It’s plausible that with a little more initiative on my part, I could have found a dull Journal piece and a Merc story with panache. 

It’s also not lost on me that the blog as a medium for reporting offers the latitude to capture vignettes that otherwise wouldn’t be substantial enough to make the printed page. 

Still, I think this exercise sheds light on how to create – or suffocate – drama in business communications.

I came across an enlightening piece called “Becoming a Storyteller, Not Just a Reporter” (you might need to scroll down to reach the article). 

While the entire piece is worth a read, the following advice caught my attention:

Don’t limit your inquiry, or your thinking, to the basics of journalism: Who, what, when, where, why, how. Think in terms of story elements: setting, character, plot, conflict, climax, resolution, dialogue, theme.

Yes.

This captures the essence of how journalism is striving for a greater entertainment quotient.

I studied journalism at the University of Arizona on the heels of Watergate, which in turn caused a stampede of “Woodstein” wannabes to the country’s J-schools. To prune the glamour seekers, the professors relentlessly preached the who-what-when-where-why-how principle - a bit ironic considering the drama that culminated with the resignation of President Nixon.

Today, this principle frames the article, with the storytelling elements outlined above often shaping the content.

That’s why communicating with only the facts falls short of meeting the needs of today’s media.

There’s nothing like contrast to accentuate the telling of a story.

In our “art of storytelling” training I like to discuss the difference between “what was” and “what is.” The greater the delta between these two points the greater the drama in the story.

There’s a terrific example of contrast in Monday’s USA Today profile on Teresa Phillips who heads a new startup venture called Graspr.com.

One doesn’t intuitively associate life on a farm with leading a new video sharing site striving to grab turf from YouTube. That’s exactly why the lead into the story works:

“Since she was a kid hunting and working on a 27-acre farm near the tiny hamlet of Allen, Kan., Teresa Phillips has pushed herself.”

Later, the story revisits Phillips’ farm roots:

“It’s been a whirlwind journey for Phillips, whose family raised horses, cows, mules, chickens, rabbits, hogs and sheep in America’s heartland. Allen (population about 216) is about 40 miles southwest of the state capital, Topeka. When she wasn’t tending to the animals with her six siblings, Phillips doted on her mule, Jack; hunted for rabbits and squirrels with a .22-caliber rifle; and fished.”

It’s all good stuff.

Not only does contrast provide a unique dimension to the story but you gain a sense of who Teresa Phillips is as a person.

It’s also noteworthy that the reporter resists the urge to close with a corny pun around “Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore,” a certain willpower obviously not shared by yours truly. 

When YouTube debuted, I remember thinking what’s all the fuss?

You obviously don’t want me reading tarot cards at the local county fair.

Universal McCann’s study on social media on video traction shows that more than 80 percent of Internet users watch video online:

With that said, I don’t know if anyone predicted that video would transcend the short-term gratification of youth and become a mainstay of business communications. Virtually every media product – from The New Yorker to The New York Times to EE Times – now showcases video.

The state of video creation today reminds me of the early days of desktop publishing when PostScript and the laser printer essentially put the tools of the designer, typographer and printing press at the disposal of the masses.

Not a pretty picture.

You see the same dynamic with business videos as everyone jumps on the bandwagon.

Like the early days of desktop publishing, most people don’t have basic video skills much less the ability to tell a story through video.

Back to EE Times (targets an engineering audience), take a quick look at a recent video in which the reporter Mark LaPedus interviews an executive from Global Unichip Corp.

I venture to say the only people who watched all 399 “scintillating” seconds were Global Unichip employees.

I know LaPedus, and he’s a damn good reporter. No doubt the powers that be at EE Times have charged their reporters with creating videos but have neglected that one small detail called training.

On the positive side, compelling videos in the business realm are finding their way to various media platforms. And thanks to increasing demand, there’s a huge opportunity for those who can package a compelling yarn on video.

The concept of reader engagement championed in the blogosphere is now making the rounds in the traditional publishing world.

BusinessWeek serves as a good exhibit A.

MediaShift captured changes afoot at BW in a far-reaching post that included an interview with the big cheese himself, EIC John Byrne.

On the topic of reader engagement Byrne shared:

“We have had a very rigourous, very lively reader involvement on the site for a long time. In any given month, roughly 15,000 people participate in conversations on our site, but they are largely hidden from view. You have to either go into a blog and see how people are responding, or you have to go into a forum to see how people are exchanging views, or go to the end of a story to see the comments on it. We want to elevate those conversations and make them more apparent to everyone that these conversations are occurring …

“This is about elevating our conversation and giving credence to the rhetoric that everyone has, that the web is a dialogue and not a lecture. The truth is that very few people are delivering on it, having reporters actively engage with readers or elevating comments and saying, ‘This is as important as any story we have, any video we have, any audio we have.’”

Byrne went on to say:

“Time spent [on the BW Web site] is not as important to me as making a contribution to the site. I look at it as input and output. In any given month, we probably publish 800 to 1,000 stories on the site and get 15,000 comments in. So that’s about a 15-to-1 ratio and I want to triple that by the end of the year. So for every story we put out, I’d like to have 45 contributions from our readers.”

If BW inspires readers to pontificate with posted comments, no one can argue the virtues that come with such engagement.

So far I’m with you, Mr. Byrne.

But here’s where things go off track.

BusinessWeek is now looking to its readership to generate genuine editorial content as part of its engagement mantra.

Under the banner, “What’s Your problem? You’ve got workplace issues. Together, we’ll find answers,” the book is looking to readers to contribute essays, photos and even videos about the challenges that come with coping in today’s workplace.

Can the average Joe write compelling content?

Can people who don’t write for a living storytell in a way that captivates?

I’d say not likely.

And if you’re a grizzled reporter – or even an ungrizzled reporter – how do you feel about the arrival of amateur hour?

I’m guessing mixed feeling to say the least.

It will be interesting to see how this workplace content comes together starting August 14.

In the meantime, Mr. Byrne’s July 11 blog post hypes a new milestone at BusinessWeek: A column by an everyday reader cracked the top five most-read stories.

Ironically, the post didn’t generate one reader comment (as I put this view to rest), so reaching utopia in the form of a 45:1 ratio of user comments to story just took a hit.