A friend recently sent the following link to me:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/01/why-newspapers-suck-a-theory.html
The author, Ron Dreher, and his friend, magazine publisher Wick Allison, think newspapers are losing readers primarily because they are boring, and they are boring because of the writing style (i.e., The Associated Press style of newswriting).
"As I travel around the country, I always pick up the local newspaper, and inevitably the prose in the news sections is dry and bland," Dreher writes. "There's not much personality there. This is no accident. It's part of the mentality of American newspapering."
I don't share their opinion. I don't think straightforward AP style newswriting is boring at all. I don't read news stories to be thrilled by the writer's clever turn of phrase, and no lack of artful writing has ever deterred me from starting and finishing any particular news story.
In fact, when writers wax poetic in news stories, if only by their word choices, it can often make the news less than boring. It can make it downwright irritating, in the same way the squeal of fingernails on a blackboard can jar the brains of those hearing it.
Too many spelling errors, grammar errors, punctuation errors, syntax errors, as well as poor organization and incomplete information, have stopped me in my reading tracks far too often, and I think that kind of writing ought to cause readers to abandon a particular newspaper in droves.
But I don't think that's the phenomenon we're observing in the continuous decline of newspaper readership any more than I think it's a lack of brilliant prose that's turning off readers.
In fact, I'm not sure readers are turned off at all, yet newspaper readership is in decline nationwide, and everyone in the business is trying to figure out why.
I don't think Dreher's theory gives the industry a real answer or a real solution.
What say you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
22 comments:
I think a definition of artful prose depends on what you consider art.
If writing according to a set of precise rules decided by some traditional authority works for you, then cool; If writing is to be only defined by the purist, then fine.
On the other hand, I think newspapers do suck. I enjoy the quirkyness of conversational writing by someone who speaks to us common folk not overly concerned with traditional ways of communicating.
It's an elitist perspective to take if your so easily offended by writing that doesn't conform and obey.
What's undeniable is that more people are writing now more than anytime in history, thanks to the net.
Conversational dialogue is free flowing, and I think that's what non-profrofessional writers seeak and practice today.
Who is anyone to tell anyone else how language, grammar and syntax should change or remain the same? No one owns human speech or one's ability to express themselves.
That say I....lol
I don't agree with the last post entirely, but somewhat.
Clear writing is established through a set of rules such as grammar and syntax.
I get why less people read newspapers today though.
Newstypes spend far less time digging for truth and much too much time dazzling themselves with creatively stacked clauses in their own writing. They're pretty snobbish about their profession too.
Information many professional writers do come about is so mundane that more time is left spent on editing what came to them conveniently, as opposed to sketching out diverse ideas. It's too costly for them to do their own research. And "free news" is now considered a commodity.
This is part of the reason why traditional papers and broadcast formats have been so frantic about integrating their coverage with the internet and encouraging public feedback.
The old pyramid style of journalism is dead. People want to hear what you think, even if they hate it. It's about describing the evidence as much as regurgitating fact.
Newsies simply didn't keep up with the ever changing and more sophisticated consumer.
It's like the dinosaurs when the comet hit....lol
Blue blood said,
"I think that's what non-profrofessional (sic) writers seeak (sic) and practice today."
and,
"It's an elitist perspective to take if your (sic) so easily offended by writing that doesn't conform and obey."
It is clear that Blue Blood is not easily offended by non-profrofessional writing that doesn't conform to established rules of spelling and grammar.
However, I am, and and have decided to not read Blue Blood's posts in the future.
I don't think that newspapers "suck", I think the popularity of newspapers in declining because they do not communicate with the public like they used to. I like reading newspapers when I travel to different states, and I have to agree that most of the content is boring, especially the associated press stories. Writers are trying to get the point across so that they are taken seriously, but I think they should lighten up.
The reason online blogging and chat rooms are full of , opinionated, sometimes sarcastic information, is because the non-professional writers are talking to the public (online) like real people, and not like zombies.
The popularity of newspapers in declining because our generation has so many ways of accessing information we don’t NEED newspapers. If news writers would maybe change the tone of their writing, they could attract more readers.
The writers in the newspapers write too predictably. As the new generations keep coming, conservative writing is fading away. Americans are not as conservative as they use to be. Bold words, new ideas for writing, and especially a little drama attracts readers. I know that the newspaper is for presenting factual news in a proper way, but it needs to be spiced up. People want the cold hard truth, but it needs to be written in an appealing manner in order to receive attention. Also, there are easier ways to get news. I would much rather get online and find what I need instead of flipping through a huge paper and getting lost in it. By the time I am done with the newspaper, it is just a big mess everywhere. Who wants that?
Joann Babbitt
Yes and no...
This summer I was talking with a woman who told me she didn't subscribe to the local newspaper because the newspaper made too many grammatical and puncuation errors. Through more conversations with this woman, I learned that she didn't know what proper grammar was and maybe didn't recognize it when she saw it.
The fact of the matter was/is, this probably had nothing to with why she didn't subscribe. Newspapers have not been able to keep-up with the changing times.
According to a Harvard study published last year, broadcast news and newspapers have seen a drastic decline. This has little to do with how something is written as much as it does with the fact that people want instant gratification. People no longer want to thumb through a newspaper, or tune into the local broadcasted news. People want what they want when they want it.
Some of the largest online newspapers, e.g. The New York Times and The Washington Post only average about eight and half million hits per month, when google, yahoo, etc. average 100 million hits a month. This is hard for smaller to moderate sized newspapers to handle. And while they are trying to change things, they are playing catch-up.
MSN is my home-page; therefore, everytime I get on my computer, I have national news right in front of me that is only a click away (if it interests me). I still read my Pueblo Chieftain this morning and I will tomorrow morning and the next........... Why? Because not all of the national news was covered in my instant click. Because I am interested in local news/events. Because I am curious to see how much a house sold for in a certain area.
Here is some food for thought-children who are subjected to newspapers are more likely to grow-up and have active roles in their communities and are more likely to get a higher education.
Is it really the writing styles or the information in the newspapers that make them suck?
i believe that its not so much the way the stories are written but that the same stories are printed over and over again in different ways. There's always the same type of story in a newspaper that really if you read it once, you've seen enough for awhile unless something important comes up like a national crisis. America is too concerned with stories involving blood and guts and if the newspaper can't provide that at the time, it will lose readers. Also readers have so many ways to obtain that same info from the internet or the news on tv that they don't care to pick up a paper anymore. i can't think of a way to save it but im thinking the good old fashioned newspaper has become just that...old fashioned, and maybe even out dated...imagine that.
I don't think that newpapers suck... they are outdated... they have no interactivity... they waste paper... They are usually bias, and cover the same story with different people involved: murder here, murder there; scam here, scam there... I will recant my first statement and correct myself "newspapers do suck"
The main reason I will not read a paper is because of the stories mainly. They always seem to be the same thing.. sorta like a soap opera.
Also the interactivity, the waste of paper and cost isn't worth it to me. Why pay for a paper; that chops all the trees down, that i probably won't read and can't do anything with except get movie times and i don't even think that they are in there all the time anymore.
In my last thoughts, I believe that newspapers are declining due to new technologies, not boring writing styles and bias opinions. I don't know the outcome, nor have a prediction for newspapers... but it probably isn't good.
FRED CARLEY MCNNM101
correction
FRED CARLEY MCCNM 101
Newspapers have a little too much information sometimes. I usually browse through the headlines and if the headline is interesting then I may read a story. Otherwise most of the time I just skip over the story. I only read the comic strips in the Sunday newspaper. Newspaper do not entirely suck, but they can be boring sometimes.
Posted By
Jessica Brown
Newspapers Suck. They are becoming more and more outdated everyday. With so many new media vehicles that are interactive and compelling, the low quality printing and lack of interaction makes the paper a dinosaur. At least I feel this way and with news papers around the country showing a decline in readership I would have to say that I'm not the only one who feels this way. Out with the old and in with the new. The only thing that keeps local papers in business is the habitual lifelong readership of adults. They grew up with the paper,like my generation has grown up with the internet, and maybe in the future a college student will be constructing a piece on how the internet was, ''So 2000's"
Blair Cooper is b said
I don't believe that it is a matter of the writing style as much as it is the change in the psycho-graphics of the readers. As we discussed in class, the rise of the internet has been blamed for a general decrease in the sales of books, and newspapers.
I would venture to say that it is the "ADD generation" that has caused the decrease in readership. With online news papers, people can skip to the news they are interested in. I think it is important to have a good "hook" to get the population to continue reading. Descriptive, almost "flowery" writing is necessary to get the attention of many readers.
I do agree, however that there are some types of stories that it is better to just be straight forward, rather than wordy. Still, with the short attention span of the next generation of news readers, it is almost a written form of "Paul Harvey." And just as he makes the news stories short, they are still interesting.
The biggest reason newspapers everywhere are feeling the pinch in readership isn't because of the writing quality, though I'm sure they'd love it if it was. Writing quality is relatively easy to fix.
In my opinion, as one of the "new media" consumers as well as someone who works in the industry, is that newspapers are doing a lousy job of playing to their strengths. Citizen journalism is all the rage, and I think that's great, but there will always be a place for professional journalists when it comes to sorting the wheat from the chaff. The problem with newspapers is they're all regurgitated stuff off of the AP wire with a few local stories mixed in. When I can get the same story from Yahoo News or CNN.com, I'm probably going to read it there. The newspapers' big opportunity is to find a niche where CNN, AP and Reuters aren't, and that's covering local stuff.
People are passionate about their communities, espeically the smaller-to-midsize communities. They want to feel like their paper is a part of the community and that means actually covering the community. Sure, we all know the economy is in trouble and the housing market sucks, but how does that effect Joe Public in Pueblo, CO? That's the role the local newspaper can play, and they don't do it nearly enough.
Of course, they also need to embrace the web and it's economic realities. You're not going to be able to charge for access to your news stories. Maybe if the idea of micropayments ever takes off, charging for stories may become feasible, but no one's going to pay $39.95 for a yearly subscription to your online site just to see and print out the story that mentions their grandkid.
Another aspect of embracing the web is coming to the realization that "the news" is no longer just words and photos on dead trees. On the web it costs rediculously little to add a video or soundbite to your news story. This is another way to engage the reader (and possibly a different reader who wouldn't have actually read the story) and when the cost is negligible, you need to stop hemming and hawing about how that's not what a newspaper's about and just do it.
You're also not limited by a hole on a page you have to fill. Put the condensed version in the news hole and put the whole story on your web site (along with other, supporting stories) and point people there. Stop treating the web as a necessary evil that needs to be mitigated and start treating it as the powerful extension to your capability and reach that it is. Newspapers that get that will survive, the ones that don't probably won't.
I think that news papers do suck which is why i dont look at them especially the ones you have to pay for. i mean they are out dated by far and just just interesting enough for me to look at, i think that goes for a lot of people also. plus there is technology in the world today where u can get on the internet and find any information that you want. so why get a newspaper that is going to limit what you can know. newspapers have had the same look for years is time for a change.
I do think news papers Suck, but not entirely.It pretty much depends on what particular news paper you are looking at or subscribed to.Some can be very beneficial, when it comes to distributing information correctly. on the other hand there are a lot that lack in that area completely.I don't read news papers often nor am i subscribed to one. when I do see a news paper that is that looks eye catching and worth reading is very rare. I would have definitely have to be caught by surprise to read one or actually be engage into what information is being displayed.
I always thought that newspapers sucked. I never wanted to read them, I thought the stories were boring and down right depressing. However, now that I have taken my news writing class, I have learned to look at the style of the writing and think about how much work actually went into that one piece.
Newspapers will be around in the future but only very popular ones. I am one of the children of immediacy and i want my news now. I don't want to get up in the morning to find out whats happening in the world, and thats where the net come into play. Giving that many sites are not my generation friendly and appealing it is the wave of the future if you like it or not. i personally like to site down with some nice print form time to time but who knows how long that will last as techonogy is growing faster then me.
Brad L
I feel that the decline of readership might have something to do with the advancement of technology. For instance, the entire Pueblo Chieftain is online and you can access any news paper from the past several weeks, even months.
I had heard a kid that I went to high school with was going to jail for a fatal car wreck. So I went online to the Pueblo Chieftain website and typed in his name and the article from a newspaper a week prior came up the the entire story. I could never have done that with out the technology of the internet. There probably isn't even a newspaper from that day that still exists.
So what I'm getting at is that technology is much easier to obtain and is more possible for any past or present events that you may need.
As a journalism major, I definately disagree with the opinion that news writing is boring and newspapers "suck". News stories are written first of all to imform. The news writing style mocks the scenario of being on your dying cell phone and having to tell the other person as much important information as you can before your phone dies.
The AP style of writing is changing all the time too. There are new words added frequently to keep up with the times. While I agree that there are more exciting ways to get the news, I think that reading the news at your pace at your conveinace in the traditional style of a newspapaer will always be the best way to "get the point across".
Newspapers are slowly dying out because they have been replaced by technology. You can access information on the television or the web. Updating the AP style and format of newspapers could help in bringing them back to life.
Megan Moran MCCNM 101 9:30
One reason newspapers may be receiving a decline in readers maybe because the news industry can now post articles online. For many people, it is much more convenient to get there news online and for others who are concerned about the environment it is more conservative read articles online.
I find myself not reading the newspaper as often as I use to. I do find that it is slightly dry and boring. Why read a boring story in the newspaper when I can get the same facts in a magazine where the writing has some spunk and creativity. Or why not just read that same newspaper article on the internet and save some trees!?
Post a Comment