Blunderov
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 3160
Reputation: 8.90
Rate Blunderov
"We think in generalities, we live in details"
  
|
 |
RE: virus: How to read a column
« on: 2005-01-24 06:35:37 » |
 |
[Blunderov] Safire is retiring, or rather, moving on to other things.
After a lifetime of experience in journalism he must know a thing or
two.
Best Regards.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/opinion/24safire1.html?th
How to Read a Column
By WILLIAM SAFIRE
Published: January 24, 2005
At last I am at liberty to vouchsafe to you the dozen rules in reading a
political column.
1. Beware the pundit's device of using a quotation from a liberal
opposition figure to make a conservative case, and vice versa. Righties
love to quote John F. Kennedy on life's unfairness; lefties love to
quote Ronald Reagan. Don't fall for gilding by association.
2. Never look for the story in the lede. Reporters are required to put
what's happened up top, but the practiced pundit places a nugget of
news, even a startling insight, halfway down the column, directed at the
politiscenti. When pressed for time, the savvy reader starts there.
3. Do not be taken in by "insiderisms." Fledgling columnists, eager to
impress readers with their grasp of journalistic jargon, are drawn to
such arcane spellings as "lede." Where they lede, do not follow.
4. When infuriated by an outrageous column, do not be suckered into
responding with an abusive e-mail. Pundits so targeted thumb through
these red-faced electronic missives with delight, saying "Hah! Got to
'em."
5. Don't fall for the "snapper" device. To give an aimless harangue the
illusion of shapeliness, some of us begin (forget "lede") with a
historical allusion or revealing anecdote, then wander around for 600
words before concluding by harking back to an event or quotation in the
opening graph. This stylistic circularity gives the reader a snappy
sense of completion when the pundit has not figured out his argument's
conclusion.
6. Be wary of admissions of minor error. One vituperator wrote recently
that the Constitution's requirement for a president to be "natural born"
would have barred Alexander Hamilton. Nitpickers pointed out that the
Founders exempted themselves. And there were 16, not 20, second
inaugural speeches. In piously making these corrections before
departing, the pundit gets credit for accuracy while getting away with
misjudgments too whopping to admit.
(Note: you are now halfway down the column. Start here.)
7. Watch for repayment of favors. Stewart Alsop jocularly advised a
novice columnist: "Never compromise your journalistic integrity - except
for a revealing anecdote." Example: a Nixon speechwriter told columnists
that the president, at Camp David, boasted "I just shot 120," to which
Henry Kissinger said brightly "Your golf game is improving, Mr.
President," causing Nixon to growl "I was bowling, Henry." After
columnists gobbled that up, the manipulative writer collected in the
coin of friendlier treatment.
8. Cast aside any column about two subjects. It means the pundit
chickened out on the hard decision about what to write about that day.
When the two-topic writer strains to tie together chalk and cheese, turn
instead to a pudding with a theme. (Three subjects, however, can give an
essay the stability of an oaken barstool. Two's a crowd, but three's a
gestalt.)
9. Cherchez la source. Ingest no column (or opinionated reporting
labeled "analysis") without asking: Cui bono? And whenever you see the
word "respected" in front of a name, narrow your eyes. You have never
read "According to the disrespected (whomever)."
10. Resist swaydo-intellectual writing. Only the hifalutin trap
themselves into "whomever" and only the tort bar uses the Latin for "who
benefits?" Columnists who show off should surely shove off. (And avoid
all asinine alliteration.)
11. Do not be suckered by the unexpected. Pundits sometimes slip a
knuckleball into their series of curveballs: for variety's sake, they
turn on comrades in ideological arms, inducing apostasy-admirers to gush
"Ooh, that's so unpredictable." Such pushmi-pullyu advocacy is
permissible for Clintonian liberals or libertarian conservatives but is
too often the mark of the too-cute contrarian.
12. Scorn personal exchanges between columnists. Observers presuming to
be participants in debate remove the reader from the reality of
controversy; theirs is merely a photo of a painting of a statue, or a
towel-throwing contest between fight managers. Insist on columns taking
on only the truly powerful, and then only kicking 'em when they're up.
In bidding Catullus's ave atque vale to readers of this progenitor of
all op-ed pages (see rule 10), is it fair for one who has enjoyed its
freedom for three decades to spill its secrets? Of course it's unfair to
reveal the Code. But punditry is as vibrant as political life itself,
and as J.F.K. said, "life is unfair." (Rules 1 and 5.)
---
To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
|
Author
Logged
