Rant: Writing Clever Journalism

Today I learned how to write clever.

I learned that alliteration is cool and makes you look like a leader in light language. I learned that putting any metaphor--any metaphor at ALL!--into writing makes you Stephen Hawking (smart!--see what we're doing here. Nifty, eh? I thought so, too).

Simple language can be beautiful, and I've heard many examples of this over the course of going on five years in J-School. There's also nothing I hate more than reading some cooked-up, purple-prosed, overwritten piece of artistic drivel, whether it happens to be fiction or non-fiction.

Nor do I want to seem like I'm discouraging metaphor and writing techniques like alliteration in journalism. The CP Styleguide could certainly use the odd little flourish, and too often news writing is devoid of personality. Writing with feelings gives it back.

What I take issue with, in the discussion of trying to write, is that there is a lot more to this craft than throwing a metaphor in or trying a little bit of mood. I'm by no means a great writer, but I know I'd cringe if I ever threw anything into any piece of writing, non-fiction or fiction, without reason or reflection. There is a craft here.

My general impression--and it is no more than general--is that too many people try to write, often quickly, and forget that a certain conservatism and selection is, in fact, a very good thing. At least, I suppose, they're using metaphor. There is more there, though. Do people who try to use metaphors know the difference between a symbol, an image, and a metaphor? I hope so, because if not, they get mis-used.

The opening of a news story is probably not a great place for metaphor or symbolism. It's too literary when you need to get news high in a story. You want to capture your reader/listener, but you don't want to mislead him or her, either. And metaphor, by its very nature, misleads. It presents one thing and means another. There must be a vehicle and a tenor. And you probably won't know the ground in the first graf of a news story.

Misusing metaphors gives all of them a bad name, so to speak. It means even fewer people actually know how to employ one. And using them is addictive--heaven only knows it's addictive--and overuse is very, very easy. That said, it might be interesting to try and read a newscast in verse, or stream of consciousness.

The wonderful combination of these two pursuits--and the people who get this balance exactly right--are the narrative non-fiction writers. Travel and magazine writers (at least the good ones) and those journalists who specialize deeply or who approach every story with patience and discipline (Stephen Brunt comes to mind) are the ones who seem to have enough craft and poise to sit back and think. It takes time to pick your spot and write well, to search and destroy, and to revise properly. Most news writing does not allow much time.

I don't want to come across as pretentiously suggesting that news writers are incapable of these things. They are, and I firmly believe anyone thoughtful can write well with enough practice. One can't assume, however, that complex narrative elements can just be thrown around at random. They take planning and they take care. As the saying goes, you have to learn the rules before you can break them.

So next time you think about using a meaty metaphor (alliteration and imagery in one phrase! Wow!), think whether you need it. Think about the effect it has. If you don't have the time or practise to think like that, do everyone who enjoys good prose a favour and stick to the simple language. It works, that's why we use it.