1. I believe it depends on the purpose of the newspaper.
For example, the Sydney Morning Herald reports more national news, business news and financial news, which are not likely to interest readers at a secondary school education level.
Using Newcastle as an example, the majority of secondary school students probably would not understand the world of business, or the full extent of the implications of interest rate rises – nor might they care.
But they might pick up the daily Newcastle Herald.
Not only is it physically easier to read because it’s smaller, the stories mainly deal with local issues readers can relate to and understand.
I do not think newspapers need to write for a specific ‘educational level’, but I do think they should write simple, easy to understand stories.
Most people these days do not have much spare time to read a full newspaper, especially if they do not understand the stories.
Conley & Lamble quote Ernest Hemingway, who said “Use short sentences. Use short paragraphs” (quoted in Conley & Lamble 2006, p. 141). This is what newspapers should aim for, not a particular educational level.
News articles/stories are more comprehensible if presented in step by step style, as suggested by Susie Eisenhuth (Conley et al 2006).
The Newcastle Herald stories are written in this style and are therefore hitting the mark. Stories in the Herald are, usually, one sentence paragraphs and not overly wordy.
This allows the reader to easily comprehend what is being written.
But short sentences and comprehension are not the only factor to consider when aiming for readability.
Katherine McAdams challenged this notion by saying “readability depends more on whether readers consider a topic ‘interesting’ rather than easy to comprehend” (quoted in Conley et al 2006, p. 154).
This may be the case, however I believe ‘interesting’ and ‘comprehension’ are closely related. If you are interested in a story, you are more than likely to comprehend what is being written.
For example, if you are a keen sports supporter reading about interest rates and world politics, you are probably not going to comprehend what you’re reading compared to if you were reading a sports report. And vice versa.
So ultimately I do not think there should be a specific ‘educational level’ aimed at. If newspapers stick to Hemingway’s opinion of writing style, they are guaranteed their stories will be read. In my opinion anyway…
2. If a reporter is reporting a factual news story, I do not think their own opinion should be included.
The inclusion of a reporter’s opinion could mean the story is biased toward a particular view. Even if the reporter had innocently done this, it could still restrict the reporter in what they are allowed to report/who they work for in the future.
For example, if the reporter writes an article with an obvious negative view on the privatisation of South Sydney Football Club, it is not likely they will ever work for the club. Nor might they want to work for the club, I was merely using it as an example.
However, if the article was more about a character profile on someone, I think it would be reasonable for the reporter to inject their own opinion.
It may be that their opinion is similar to the reader’s opinion anyway. I’m sure if a profile was written on Matthew McConaughey and the reporter added their opinion of Matt’s unbelievably good looks, I mean superior acting ability, I wouldn’t have a problem with that!
3. A global language would be easier, but so would a global newspaper writing style! Writing styles change between states, I can only imagine how different they are country to country. Even the date style varies, September 11 or 11th September, for example.
Each country has their own way of communicating with each other, and I think that’s what makes the world so interesting. If language was the same all over the world, it would be boring. Yes it would be easier, but easier isn’t always better.
Currencies are different, road rules are different, dress codes are different – it’s inevitable our language would be different.
It does matter that our language is tainted with Americanisms. Is the American language tainted with “Australianisms”? We are our own country and have our own way of life, our language should be unique to us and so should every other country’s language.
To adopt an American language – it’s just not Australian!
4. To some extent I think newspapers are committed to accuracy.
For example, the Sydney Morning Herald reports more national news, business news and financial news, which are not likely to interest readers at a secondary school education level.
Using Newcastle as an example, the majority of secondary school students probably would not understand the world of business, or the full extent of the implications of interest rate rises – nor might they care.
But they might pick up the daily Newcastle Herald.
Not only is it physically easier to read because it’s smaller, the stories mainly deal with local issues readers can relate to and understand.
I do not think newspapers need to write for a specific ‘educational level’, but I do think they should write simple, easy to understand stories.
Most people these days do not have much spare time to read a full newspaper, especially if they do not understand the stories.
Conley & Lamble quote Ernest Hemingway, who said “Use short sentences. Use short paragraphs” (quoted in Conley & Lamble 2006, p. 141). This is what newspapers should aim for, not a particular educational level.
News articles/stories are more comprehensible if presented in step by step style, as suggested by Susie Eisenhuth (Conley et al 2006).
The Newcastle Herald stories are written in this style and are therefore hitting the mark. Stories in the Herald are, usually, one sentence paragraphs and not overly wordy.
This allows the reader to easily comprehend what is being written.
But short sentences and comprehension are not the only factor to consider when aiming for readability.
Katherine McAdams challenged this notion by saying “readability depends more on whether readers consider a topic ‘interesting’ rather than easy to comprehend” (quoted in Conley et al 2006, p. 154).
This may be the case, however I believe ‘interesting’ and ‘comprehension’ are closely related. If you are interested in a story, you are more than likely to comprehend what is being written.
For example, if you are a keen sports supporter reading about interest rates and world politics, you are probably not going to comprehend what you’re reading compared to if you were reading a sports report. And vice versa.
So ultimately I do not think there should be a specific ‘educational level’ aimed at. If newspapers stick to Hemingway’s opinion of writing style, they are guaranteed their stories will be read. In my opinion anyway…
2. If a reporter is reporting a factual news story, I do not think their own opinion should be included.
The inclusion of a reporter’s opinion could mean the story is biased toward a particular view. Even if the reporter had innocently done this, it could still restrict the reporter in what they are allowed to report/who they work for in the future.
For example, if the reporter writes an article with an obvious negative view on the privatisation of South Sydney Football Club, it is not likely they will ever work for the club. Nor might they want to work for the club, I was merely using it as an example.
However, if the article was more about a character profile on someone, I think it would be reasonable for the reporter to inject their own opinion.
It may be that their opinion is similar to the reader’s opinion anyway. I’m sure if a profile was written on Matthew McConaughey and the reporter added their opinion of Matt’s unbelievably good looks, I mean superior acting ability, I wouldn’t have a problem with that!
3. A global language would be easier, but so would a global newspaper writing style! Writing styles change between states, I can only imagine how different they are country to country. Even the date style varies, September 11 or 11th September, for example.
Each country has their own way of communicating with each other, and I think that’s what makes the world so interesting. If language was the same all over the world, it would be boring. Yes it would be easier, but easier isn’t always better.
Currencies are different, road rules are different, dress codes are different – it’s inevitable our language would be different.
It does matter that our language is tainted with Americanisms. Is the American language tainted with “Australianisms”? We are our own country and have our own way of life, our language should be unique to us and so should every other country’s language.
To adopt an American language – it’s just not Australian!
4. To some extent I think newspapers are committed to accuracy.
Often if a mistake is made, an apology and correction is published within a day or so.
But I do think some stories can be misleading or directed toward a particular view.
For example, on the front page of The Newcastle Herald dated 13 August 2007 was an article headlined “Rudderless”.
The article was about Newcastle wanting to salvage the rudder of the Pasha Bulker and make it an exhibit at the Museum. The owners of the Pasha Bulker did not want Newcastle to take ownership of the rudder.
If you reader further into the article, the reporter mentioned there had been a “public outcry” by Newcastle residents to keep the rudder.
This is not true at all, therefore it’s inaccurate. There was no public outcry.
I will not detail the whole article, but it was fairly clear it was in fact the newspaper, or a person of high standing at the Newspaper, who wanted to keep the rudder.
So while it seems Newcastle will stay “rudderless” – an accurate headline – the story itself was quite exaggerated and not accurate at all.
It’s only being a journalism student I was aware of the bias in the story. I may otherwise have been oblivious to the politics behind it all and been persuaded into thinking we should keep the rudder, or that it would in fact make a worthwhile “tourist attraction”.
As Conley & Lamble say “inaccurate journalism is ineffective journalism..” (2006, p. 156).
5. If I made a mistake but no one contacted the paper and noted the mistake, I would still dob myself in!
It’s not just the readers you are writing for. Other journalists are reading your article and if they use your work as a reference tool in the future the mistake will be repeated. Ultimately it will affect your credibility because you were the source of the mistake in the first place.
Not only is it important for readers and other journalists that your information is accurate, it’s important if you have gained information from a source. Incorrectly spelling a person’s name, or incorrectly implicating a person in a situation, could be embarrassing or even have potential legal ramifications.
I expect to make mistakes, everyone does, but it’s the way you handle the mistake which I believe to be important.
You would gain more credibility, and maybe self pride, admitting the mistake and correcting it instead of dismissing it.
But I do think some stories can be misleading or directed toward a particular view.
For example, on the front page of The Newcastle Herald dated 13 August 2007 was an article headlined “Rudderless”.
The article was about Newcastle wanting to salvage the rudder of the Pasha Bulker and make it an exhibit at the Museum. The owners of the Pasha Bulker did not want Newcastle to take ownership of the rudder.
If you reader further into the article, the reporter mentioned there had been a “public outcry” by Newcastle residents to keep the rudder.
This is not true at all, therefore it’s inaccurate. There was no public outcry.
I will not detail the whole article, but it was fairly clear it was in fact the newspaper, or a person of high standing at the Newspaper, who wanted to keep the rudder.
So while it seems Newcastle will stay “rudderless” – an accurate headline – the story itself was quite exaggerated and not accurate at all.
It’s only being a journalism student I was aware of the bias in the story. I may otherwise have been oblivious to the politics behind it all and been persuaded into thinking we should keep the rudder, or that it would in fact make a worthwhile “tourist attraction”.
As Conley & Lamble say “inaccurate journalism is ineffective journalism..” (2006, p. 156).
5. If I made a mistake but no one contacted the paper and noted the mistake, I would still dob myself in!
It’s not just the readers you are writing for. Other journalists are reading your article and if they use your work as a reference tool in the future the mistake will be repeated. Ultimately it will affect your credibility because you were the source of the mistake in the first place.
Not only is it important for readers and other journalists that your information is accurate, it’s important if you have gained information from a source. Incorrectly spelling a person’s name, or incorrectly implicating a person in a situation, could be embarrassing or even have potential legal ramifications.
I expect to make mistakes, everyone does, but it’s the way you handle the mistake which I believe to be important.
You would gain more credibility, and maybe self pride, admitting the mistake and correcting it instead of dismissing it.
No comments:
Post a Comment