PressEthic

Frank Ahrens continued the discussion on the plight of newspapers in this Washington Post article.

Though the article focused on “alternative ways to put the news in your hands,” Ahrens brought up another very significant point – the antiquated language used by newspapers.

Explaining the style of writing used typically in newspapers, Ahrens wrote, “The tone is formal and authoritative. It is aloof and addresses no one in particular, as in a textbook or a lecture.”

On Friday, my Writing and Reporting class visited the AP newsroom. Bruce DeSilva, the AP's writing coach, gave a brief presentation that reinforced Ahrens’ point. DeSilva said that no one speaks like a newspaper journalist writes. The language of newspapers is awkward, and it is meant to pack as much information as possible into each sentence. He said the style is out-of-date.

Ahrens wrote:

Among mainstream communications outlets, newspaperese is pretty much the last outpost of such strictly formal use of English. Think of how your nightly newscast sounds -- anchors speak of "your neighborhood," for instance. Now think of how many times real people use common newspaper words such as "slate," as in, "I'm slated to see a 7 p.m. showing of 'Wallace & Gromit.' "

In the past, people accepted this style of writing as a necessary way to communicate the news, but it is not the case anymore. People want their news communicated like the stories on the Internet. Ahrens, describing two paragraphs in his article, wrote:

The two paragraphs above it are chatty and inquisitive, provocative rather than definitive. They call attention to themselves and speak directly to you. Their tone is usually not considered appropriate in a newspaper, and certainly not atop a news story. Their tone is more at home on the Internet, with blogs and discussion groups and webzines.

And this is why the technology – specifically the foldable video screens that Ahrens described– is so important to newspapers: not only does it save people from paging through a ridiculously unmanageable newspaper, it allows journalists to write in a way that is more attractive to readers because the writers do not have to worry about the length of their stories. It also means that newspapers will continue to have a large, single-page area to sell advertising space.

I wonder though, what are the disadvantages? One concern I have is the effect of writing that is “chatty and inquisitive, provocative rather than definitive.” This type of writing can easily lead to a story that is subjective – such as in blogs. I hope that the possible loss of stories written in a “formal and authoritative” style does not mean the end of objective news reporting. Call me “old school,” but it is still something I truly believe in.