The phrase “the following story” is commonly used to introduce a narrative, explain an event, or frame a sequence of events in journalism, documentation, and everyday communication. This evergreen explainer covers the meaning, correct usage, and editorial best practices for employing “the following story” in a clear, accurate, and trustworthy way. It also outlines common misuses, source-backed standards, and practical guidance to ensure the expression adds clarity rather than confusion.
Definition and core meaning
At its simplest, “the following story” refers to a narrative or account that will be presented after the current introductory material. It signals that what comes next is a recounted sequence of events, often with context, cause and effect, and detail. The phrase is a transitional device that prepares readers or listeners for the substance of the story to follow. In editorial practice, it works as a framing element that helps structure content and set expectations for the audience.
Proper usage in journalism and documentation
Correct use of “the following story” depends on clarity, relevance, and transparency. It should point to a specific, identifiable narrative that is delivered promptly and coherently. Avoid using the phrase as a vague lead-in without delivering substantive content. Editorial standards recommend pairing it with concrete details—such as who is involved, what happened, when and where it occurred, and why it matters—so the story that follows is meaningful and actionable for the audience.
Key editorial guidelines
- Intention: Use the phrase only when you will present a focused narrative afterward.
- Brevity and clarity: Keep the setup concise and avoid unnecessary buildup.
- Transparency: If sourcing or perspectives are involved, disclose them early.
- Factual grounding: Anchor the story in verifiable facts and correct attribution.
- Flow: Ensure smooth transitions between the lead-in and the story itself.
Common misuses and pitfalls
Misuse occurs when “the following story” is employed as filler, clickbait, or an empty promise of depth. Common pitfalls include introducing the phrase but providing an anecdote that lacks narrative structure, using it before vague generalizations, or failing to deliver on the promised story. Overuse can erode trust, especially if audiences perceive a pattern of underdelivered leads. Avoid ambiguous references such as “the story behind this” without clarifying what the story entails and why it is relevant.
Sourcing, verification, and credibility
Trustworthy use of “the following story” depends on rigorous sourcing and verification. Identify primary sources—documents, eyewitnesses, official records—and corroborate details through cross-referencing. Attribute claims appropriately and correct errors promptly. When data or third-party analyses are included, provide enough context for readers to assess reliability. Clear sourcing and transparent methodology strengthen the story and uphold editorial integrity.
Not every story requires an exhaustive chain of custody, but readers deserve enough information to understand where the content comes from and why it is credible.
Practical framework for writing a clear, trustworthy story
Use the following structured approach when introducing and delivering a story after “the following story.” This framework supports clarity, depth, and accountability while aligning with editorial best practices.
| Attribute | Verified Detail | Source Type |
|---|---|---|
| Narrative focus | One main storyline or central development | Editorial plan |
| Key participants | Named individuals or entities involved | On-record statements, documents |
| Timeline | When events occurred and when they became known | Records, timestamps, interviews |
| Location and context | Where events took place and relevant background | Geographic data, backgrounders |
| Evidence and attribution | Direct quotes, documents, data points with clear sourcing | Primary sources, official reports |
| Impact and relevance | Consequences for audiences, communities, or systems | Analysis, expert assessment |
Practical examples and comparisons
Illustrative comparisons can help distinguish strong, trustworthy storytelling from weak or misleading usage.
| Use case | Strong usage | Weak usage |
|---|---|---|
| News article lead | The following story examines how the policy change affected tenants, based on interviews and housing data. | The following story shows how things changed. |
| Internal briefing | The following story outlines the timeline of the incident, drawing on email records and witness accounts. | The following story is what happened. |
| Feature segment | The following story traces a supply chain from factory to consumer, with verified production metrics. | The following story is about the product journey. |
Strategic placement and transitions
Effective placement of “the following story” improves comprehension and retention. Position the phrase after sufficient context so readers know what to expect, and deliver the promised narrative swiftly. Use subheads, brief summaries, or bullet points to segment the story when it is long or complex. Transitions should feel natural; avoid abrupt jumps that disconnect the introduction from the substance of the story.
Ethics, inclusivity, and harm reduction
When telling a story, prioritize accuracy, fairness, and respect for those affected. Avoid stereotypes, minimize harm, and consider how language may affect vulnerable groups. Use inclusive language where appropriate, correct harmful generalizations, and provide corrections or clarifications if new information emerges. Ethical storytelling strengthens public trust and long-term audience engagement.
Relationship to related concepts
“The following story” overlaps with related editorial concepts but differs in emphasis. Unlike a “hook,” which may tease without immediate clarity, “the following story” implies a substantive account is coming. It is distinct from a “teaser” that withholds key details, and it differs from a “trailer” that summarizes outcomes. Compared to “background,” it focuses on events and progression rather than static context. Understanding these relationships helps writers choose the right framing for their content goals.