Look for places where you use a bunch of words when fewer words would suffice. And use direct language. Like here:
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident that happened at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Let's take out "that happened." What's left is this:
Erik Barsh is suing the city for last year's lightning accident at a municipal swimming pool which left him severely injured and his friend deceased.
Does the reader lose anything other than two words? I'd say no. So, if the words don't add anything to the lede, why add the words?
Also, in journalism we try to use direct language. So, instead of saying the accident left his friend deceased, why not just say it left his friend dead?
This next lede had several problems regarding bets word use:
Mayor Datolli proposes a controversial busing systems plan to assist vagrants to move on and out of the city.
First, did you need to say controversial busing systems plan? I would think controversial bus plan would suffice.
Second, how about move on and out? Couldn't you just say move out and not lose any conveyance of meaning?
Third, is it offense to refer to homeless people as vagrants? Let's try to avoid terms that can legitimately be seen as offensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment