Observed

Today’s “AFTER DEADLINE” post offered the following example of the misuse of the word “like” along with a suggested fix:

At times it seems like the mayoral race here between the two front-runners — Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, who is seeking a second term, and Vincent C. Gray, the City Council chairman — is boiling down to a personality contest.

Make it “seems as though,” “seems as if,” or simply “seems that …”

I’ll go one better.

At times, the mayoral race here between the two front-runners — Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, who is seeking a second term, and Vincent C. Gray, the City Council chairman — seems to boil down to a personality contest.

I call this editing by subtraction.

OK, maybe the only place where size counts is in sumo wrestling.  After reading a reporter’s account of what it took to cover the Tour de France, however, I was reminded of the size of the platform it takes for some stories to get told.

It’s not that newpaper reporters are typically smarter or harder working or whatever than bloggers and others in the non-MSM. (more…)

It’s not that crowdsourcing news doesn’t have its benefits.  Before it released its Afghan War Diary, however, Wikileaks first shoveled the unfiltered secret documents to three mainstream media — The New York Times, The Guardian and Der Spiegel.

Was it because the three papers have a reputation for leaning to the left and might, therefore, use the leaks to bash the war effort?  Maybe, though I hardly think opponents of the war need much help in that regard.

A more plausible explanation is that Wikileaks went to the MSM because that’s where the reporters are.  The ones who, by and large, make a living out of gathering, processing and synthesizing lots of information.

What could ensure a more accurate portrayal of What Happened than having someone there?  Someone who was there and felt what it was like to be there.

That’s what I read when I learned this morning that the United States Marine Corps has an artist in its ranks, a painter deployed to capture combat scenes.  “We have somebody who was there who can tell the story,” according to Col. Robert Oltman, USMC, referring to Sgt. Kristopher J. Battles, the lone remaining Marine combat artist.

Why not photography?  I’ll let the New York Times answer that one. (more…)

A debate is under way about the pluses and minuses of books versus the Internet.  There’s mounting evidence, for example, that books do a better job helping us develop critical thinking, reading and math skills.  All of these seem to suffer once a home gets hooked up to a high-speed ISP.

This news comes at a time when I’ve been thinking (again) about the virtues of the tangible…particularly in marketing and business development communications.  It made me wonder about the many, varied ways we value the ability to touch, hear, smell and see a person, place or thing — ways such as… (more…)

What is it about Frank Rich?  What could he possibly have to say about media and politics and public affairs?

Here’s a guy who has spent most of his career as a film and theatre critic.  A guy who studied American history and literature on his way to his bachelor’s degree.

Not a lawyer, scientist, engineer or big-thinking PhD.  Or any other vaunted professional with *hard* credentials.

Yet, I invite you to read his column in this morning’s New York Times.  Regardless of what you might think about his bias, I bet you’ll finish feeling more respect for Rich’s facility with hard issues.

Rich can navigate the vagaries of Gen. Stanley McChrystal and our war in Afghanistan as easily as the plays of Moss Hart and life in post-WWII New York City.  Rich is an embodiment of what we used to regard as a well-educated person.

Is that because he pursued a liberal arts education?  Probably not…or probably not just because he pursued a liberal arts education.

But it didn’t hurt.

We tend to make major, lasting impressions based on the smallest, seemingly insignificant details.

This morning’s New York Times has an excellent article by Matt Bai offering a political angle to this truism.  While the hook was President Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill, the piece mentioned how other presidents have suffered from (or dodged) negative public perceptions…or, how well they’ve projected a sense of control over the chaos of events around them.

Bai’s piece reminded me of Jimmy Carter and how a potentially obscure wildlife encounter helped further tip things in favor of Ronald Reagan in the 1980 presidential election.  While the Attack Rabbit Incident might have appeared otherwise innocent or silly, it fanned doubts about Carter’s  strength as much or more than the Iranian hostage crisis, economic woes and the like. (more…)

The author of this week’s “After Deadline” column may have been a little too hard on the lowly cliche.  At least its use in journalism.

Idiomatic writing can be engaging.  It’s down to earth and can help grab and keep a reader’s attention.

It takes a very good writer-editor, however, to know when enough is enough.  Someone who knows the value of a cliche when used in the right place at the right time and in the right dosage.  And who, by the same token, isn’t such a schoolmarm that every cliche gets deleted.

Since none of us are perfect, this underscores the importance of good, second-party editing.  Someone more likely to spot Just Right.

I’d like to think that I can write the way Doug Quinn tends bar.  At least some days.  Once in a while.

Read on.

Thanks, Frank Bruni.

Candidate’s Words on Vietnam Differ From History.

I can’t help but wonder who wrote this headline for an article in this morning’s New York Times. An editor?

More likely, it was the paper’s corporate counsel.

A lawyer would be more sensitive to referring to Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut’s attorney general, as a liar.  Even though that’s what you may rightly call someone who offers facts which they know aren’t factual. (more…)