Journalists need to recognise and then avoid using journalese, jargon, and clichés. Their writing must be clear, easy to understand, and informative.

Clichés

It’s a cliché to advise writers to avoid clichés. Every time you have a story about a child being left unattended you can reach for the phrase ‘home alone‘; every time two motorists exchange angry words it’s obviously a case of ‘road rage‘; escapes from prison are always ‘daring‘ and inquiries always ‘in depth‘.

The regular use of these predictable words and phrases is numbing and indicates a lack of thought and effort.

In themselves, clichés are a form of shorthand and we would be hard pressed to do without them altogether.

There are probably some lurking within the pages of this site. However, in the final analysis, Clichéville is a town which bears all the hallmarks of the angry clashes which occur with monotonous regularity.

Journalese comes from newspapers, which have developed a particular style to meet their own needs. Some of them have moved a long way from standard English.

Some journalists assume that newspaper English is the language of all journalism. It is not.

Broadcast journalism, written for the ear, requires a different approach. Writing has to be simpler, clearer and more natural.

“Hello Tim. Have you heard that Matt’s job has been axed and he’s pledged to fight on in a bid to block the move.”

You do not often hear people in conversation use words like bid, probe, pledge, axe, plea and all the other short words in the headline writer’s sack. Good radio and television writers avoid them.

“One man’s meat is another man’s poison”, and one man’s list of clichés might be another man’s list of useful sayings and phrases.

However, if you find yourself including any of the following in your script or summary, take yourself to one side and ask yourself if it really is the best you can do.

• a question mark hangs over
• conspicuous by its absence
• the situation remains confused
• leaves much to be desired
• combing the area for clues
• leave no stone unturned
• grind to a halt
• point blank range
• quiet but tense
• moving the goalposts
• full-scale search
• level playing field
• the bottom line
• armed to the teeth
• blessing in disguise
• spread like wildfire
• calm before the storm
• horns of a dilemma
• wealth of experience
• in the final analysis
• in the pipeline
• hail of bullets
• shrouded in mystery
• reign of terror
• ripe old age
• last-ditch effort
• rushed to the scene
• vanished into thin air
• beginning of the end
• limped into port
• burn the midnight oil
• emotions ran high
• moment of truth
• riot of colour

This is a sample – there are lots more where these came from.

Uninspired journalists are also very fond of nouns and adjectives which go together so inevitably that they have lost any force or colour they might once have had. Feel free to add your own favourites to this list.

• glaring omission
• bated breath
• weighty matter
• blissful ignorance
• bitter end
• hot pursuit
• serried ranks
• breakneck speed
• sweeping changes
• true colours
• chequered career
• daylight robbery
• whirlwind tour
• brutal reminder
• marked improvement
• absolute rubbish
• foregone conclusion
• strife torn
• wreak havoc
• open secret
• luxury yacht
• cherished belief
• gory details
• deafening crash
• psychologically important
• blazing inferno

The words and phrases in these lists are not banned. There will be occasions when you choose to use some of them, but at least be aware that when you do you are straying into the superficially attractive word store which produces second-hand, second-rate writing.

A large part of your personal style comes from the vocabulary you use, so choose wisely.

Journalese

Journalese is a specialist form of cliché writing. People who use it presumably want to sound urgent, to make an impact and to be, well, journalistic.

Even though you are a journalist, whether in the field or in the office, try to avoid it. How often have you heard something like this?

“The beleaguered President Humboldt’s grip on power in strife-torn Benguela is weakening. The ailing leader of this oil-rich desert country is said to be literally fighting for his political life.”

“An uneasy peace was brokered after a marathon negotiating session with leaders of the
breakaway Gulf rebels, but it’s almost inevitable that the once undisputed strongman of the region is heading for a bloody confrontation which will plunge Benguela into chaos.”

Please resist the temptation to write like this. It is a style that goes with a trench coat and a trilby hat with a card saying ‘Press‘ tucked in the brim.

Here are some examples of journalese for your consideration.

• Aim – rarely heard in real life except at shooting or archery clubs.
• Amid – does anyone ever use this, or its close relative amidst, in normal conversation.
• Axe – the jobs axe remorselessly falls in much journalism.
• Bid – another one straight from the Hack’s Book of Wee Words.When was the last time you said to a colleague: “Leaves on the line foiled my bid to get to work”?
• Blaze – a potentially useful synonym for fire, but not all fires are blazes.
• Blow – try setback or disappointment.
• Blunder – a word that seems to exist only in journalese, along with its close friend bungle.
• Boost – nearly always accompanied by major, and much the worse for it.
• Boss – a catch-all short word that covers everyone from the director general to the football club manager.
• Centred around – makes no sense, but is much heard.
• Chaos – a hardy perennial in the hack’s garden of delight.
• Chiefs – and their deputies remind us of Hollywood westerns.
• Clash – still hugely popular in news and sport.
• Crucial – often used to suggest significance, often misused.
• Death toll – why not simply say how many people have been killed?
• Dramatic – see crucial.
• Eleventh hour – somehow makes time stand still.
• Emerged – often used when we are late on a story or to suggest spurious journalistic endeavour.
• Fighting for his/her life – the subject is probably unconscious in a hospital bed and making no attempt to do anything.
• Full scale – often added to search or inquiry for no good reason.
• Garner – as in She garnered three awards. Only ever used by hacks.
• Gunned down – probably first used in the Tombstone Sentinel.
• Gunshot wounds – what are they? Bullet wounds or shotgun wounds?
• Hammered out – leave it for metalwork, not negotiated settlements.
• Helping police with their inquiries – being questioned or interviewed is shorter and to the point.
• House fire – most people would say a fire at a house.
• Inferno – this is a really serious state of affairs, not just a fire.
• Joyriding – can lead to death and great anguish.
• Key – heard too often to mean much.
• Launched – barely a day goes by without some report, initiative or investigation being launched.
• Literally – if you mean it literally, it’s not really necessary to say so.
• Mandarins – leave them to the greengrocer. The phrase civil service mandarins is not compulsory.
• Manhunt – police search or murder hunt.
• Marathon – talks which go on for a long time do not demand this adjective.
• Mercy dash – good grief.
• Miraculous – nothing to do with religious belief or theological teaching.
• Oust – top class journalese.
• Plea – ditto
• Pledge – properly belongs in a wedding service or a pawnbroker’s.
• Probe – best left to doctors or one of those tiny cameras.
• Quit – another ditto.
• Quiz – the noun is fine, the verb is an abomination.
• Row – not all differences of opinion justify the use of row.
• Rush – especially to hospital. Use it only when you really mean it.
• Scheme – a great favourite, but what about plan, proposal, idea, project?
• Set – as in A is set to do B. A useful but overworked expression.
• Spark off – would anyone but a journalist use this?
• Spree – shopping or killing?
• Sustain fatal injuries – or die.
• Sweeping changes – the bristles on this must be worn out by now.
• Today – broadcasters should hardly ever need to say this.
• Tracker dogs – specially trained? Or just sniffer dogs. Or even simply dogs.
• Trigger off – see spark off.
• Vital – are you sure?
• Vowed – when was the last time you vowed anything?
• Walked free – from court. This phrase is not compulsory after successful appeals.

Jargon

From doctors to decorators, lawyers to lorry drivers – any group of people working together or in the same field is likely to develop a specialised, shared vocabulary.

As journalists, we can become honorary members of these groups if we use the language correctly.

The danger is that we become so familiar with the jargon that we use it in our writing, which is at odds with our aim to be understood as clearly and universally as possible.

So, the obvious advice is: avoid jargon. Unfortunately, this is often not as easy as it sounds.

Journalism is littered with supply-day motions, three-line whips, the usual channels, corporate governance, collateral damage, affirmative action, throughput, and constructive dismissals.

Police officers say they have attended the scene (been there), that twelve people were apprehended (caught), that evidence was detected (found), and that death was due to immersion (drowning).

The hospital press officer says the driver was fatally injured (killed) and a passenger received a broken leg (his leg was broken) and is undergoing surgery (having an operation).

And what does comfortable mean when someone is lying in hospital? And also describing a patient as critical; does this mean they don’t like the food, the nurses, or the colour scheme in the ward, or is the patient critically ill?

There is a lot of jargon about, but if you recognise it, you can do the audience a favour and substitute real, accessible language instead.

Here are some examples from business:

“The chairman said he was bullish on the company’s sales” (he believed they would increase).

“They can charge more because of tight supply and demand” (prices are going up because demand is high and supplies are low).

“The company says the new model will cause a paradigm shift” (it’s a big change in the generally accepted point of view).

“They are currently evaluating their health care delivery system” (they are looking at the medical services available to staff).

“She was concerned about the granularity of the deal” (she had worries about the details).

Journalists must learn to recognise journalese, jargon and cliches and try their best to avoid them and, instead, use words that help explain and deliver information to the audience.

By John Allen

The original text for this article first appeared in a BBC Style Guide. The BBC gave Media Helping Media permission to rework this material and publish it.

In the relentless pursuit of delivering timely and accurate information, journalists wield immense power. Their words shape public perception, influence policy, and ultimately, contribute to the fabric of our understanding of the world.

However, this power comes with a critical responsibility: to communicate with clarity, precision, and authenticity.

That’s why the pervasive use of clichés, journalese, and jargon is a disservice to both the audience and the profession itself.

The plague of clichés

Clichés, those overused phrases that have lost their original impact, are the antithesis of insightful reporting.

“At the end of the day,” “a perfect storm,” “thinking outside the box” – these phrases, once perhaps vivid, now serve as linguistic placeholders, requiring minimal thought from the writer and offering little substance to the reader. They dull the senses, stifle originality, and suggest a lack of effort.

Instead of relying on tired tropes, journalists should strive for fresh, evocative language that paints a clear picture. For example, instead of saying “it was a perfect storm of events,” a journalist could describe the specific contributing factors and their interplay, allowing the reader to understand the complexity of the situation.

The murky waters of journalese

Journalese, the specialised language often used within the news industry, can be equally problematic. Phrases like “slammed,” “tapped,” “panned,” and “inked a deal” may be efficient shortcuts for journalists, but they often obscure meaning for the average reader.

They create a sense of exclusivity, alienating those unfamiliar with the industry’s vernacular.

Clear, accessible language is paramount. Journalists should aim to explain complex events and concepts in a way that is understandable to a broad audience. This doesn’t mean “dumbing down” the news; it means respecting the intelligence of the reader by providing context and avoiding unnecessary jargon.

The exclusionary nature of jargon

Jargon, the specialised vocabulary of a particular field or profession, poses a similar challenge. While it may be essential for communicating with experts, its use in general news reporting can create a barrier to understanding. Terms like “quantitative easing,” “algorithmic bias,” or “net neutrality” require careful explanation for a general audience.

Journalists have a responsibility to demystify complex topics. This involves breaking down jargon into plain language, providing definitions, and illustrating concepts with relevant examples. By doing so, they empower readers to engage with critical issues and form informed opinions.

The importance of clarity and authenticity

Avoiding clichés, journalese, and jargon is not merely a matter of style; it’s a matter of substance. Clear, precise language fosters trust and credibility. It allows journalists to convey information accurately and effectively, ensuring that their reporting has the intended impact.

Furthermore, authentic language reflects genuine thought and engagement with the subject matter. It demonstrates respect for the reader’s intelligence and a commitment to providing meaningful insights. When journalists rely on tired phrases and industry jargon, they risk sounding detached and formulaic.

In conclusion

In an era of information overload, the demand for clear, insightful journalism is greater than ever. By ditching clichés, journalese, and jargon, journalists can elevate their craft, build trust with their audience, and fulfil their vital role in informing and empowering society. It’s time to move beyond buzzwords and embrace the power of authentic, impactful language.

Questions

1. What is the main focus of the text concerning journalistic writing?
2. Define “journalese”.
3. Why should journalists avoid using clichés?
4. Identify two examples of journalese and explain their typical usage.
5. How should journalists should handle jargon in their writing?
6. Discuss the impact of using clichés and journalese on the quality of journalistic writing.
7. Analyse the difference between broadcast journalism and newspaper journalism in terms of the use of clichés, journalese and jargon.
8. What are some challenges journalists face when trying to avoid jargon?
9. Evaluate the statement: “One man’s list of clichés might be another man’s list of useful sayings.” What does this imply about language use in journalism?
10. Sum up the main strategies for journalists to improve their writing style.

Answers

1. The primary purpose is to guide journalists in avoiding journalese, jargon, and clichés to ensure their writing is clear, easy to understand, and informative.
2. Journalese is a style of writing used in newspapers that often includes clichés and sensational language to sound urgent and impactful.
3. Journalists should avoid clichés because they are predictable, numbing, and indicate a lack of thought and effort in writing.
4. Examples include “axe” (used to describe job cuts) and “bid” (used to describe an attempt). These words are often used in headlines but are not common in everyday conversation.
5. Journalists should recognise jargon and replace it with clear, accessible language to ensure their writing is understood by a broad audience.
6. Using clichés and journalese can make writing seem second-hand and second-rate, reducing its impact and clarity.
7. Broadcast journalism requires simpler, clearer, and more natural language because it is written for the ear, unlike newspaper journalism, which can use more complex language.
8. Journalists may become so familiar with jargon that they inadvertently use it, making their writing less accessible to the general audience.
9. This statement implies that language use is subjective, and what is considered a cliché by one person might be seen as a useful expression by another, highlighting the importance of context in journalism.
10. The text recommends avoiding clichés, journalese, and jargon, and instead using clear, precise language to improve journalistic writing style.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Clichés, journalese, and jargon‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

The post Clichés, journalese, and jargon first appeared on Media Helping Media.

Basic literacy is a core element of the job of a journalist. Words are powerful and they need to be used properly.

Words are classified according to the job they do in a sentence.

Word classifications

The following are the most important word classifications that journalists will use in their work. It is important to understand their role in sentence construction:

• Noun
  • Common nouns are naming words (editor, television, albatross).They can be singular or plural.
• Proper noun
  • Proper nouns are names which usually start with a capital letter (Denmark, Mars, Angela). Nouns which refer to collections of people and things are called collective nouns (the team, the Cabinet).
• Verb
  • Verbs express action or a state of being (write, hit, be).
• Pronoun
  • Pronouns take the place of nouns (he, her, we, them).
• Adjective
  • An adjective is a describing word (Welsh, big, blue).
• Adverb
  • An adverb describes a verb or adjective (clearly, gracefully, finally, suddenly).
• Preposition
  • Prepositions are the little words which hold a sentence together, often by showing direction or location (in, to, from, by, with, beyond).

Word usage basics

The first rule of writing is to know what you want to say. This may seem a statement of the obvious, but items are often broadcast and published which are not exactly what the writer intended

“For the second time in six months, a prisoner at Durham jail has died in his cell.”

The ability of some people to die more than once is also illustrated in this headline:

“A suicide bomber has struck again in Jerusalem.”

The key to good writing is simple thoughts simply expressed. Use short sentences and short words. Anything which is confused, complicated, poorly written or capable of being misunderstood risks losing the listener, viewer, or reader, and once you have done that, you might just as well not have come to work.

In broadcasting, the basic sentence structure Subject-Verb-Object works every time. The
audience grasps what you are saying straight away. Anything more flamboyant, such as a subordinate clause, is a potential barrier to understanding.

• Do not describe news as good, bad, shocking or horrendous. Tell the story and let the listener/reader decide.
• Do try to get a strong active verb in the first sentence. You want to make an impact and keep people listening.
• Do not start a news report with a question. The audience wants to be informed, not take part in a quiz.
• Do not begin a story with “As expected…‘ If your item was predictable and you have nothing new to say, why should the listener or viewer pay attention?
• Be positive. Make assertions wherever possible, and try to avoid negatives. It is more direct to say “The plan failed” than “The plan was not successful“.

The most interesting writing often involves creating something unexpected, and rules tend to get in the way, but daily journalism has its discipline that should be observed.

Frequently confused words

English is full of traps for the unwary. Words which sound similar can mean very different things. The audience expect the right words to be used.

Consider these examples:

“A boy of twelve is in intensive care in hospital after a group of teenagers doused him in inflammatory liquid and then threw a lighted match at him.”

The writer did not mean this. She meant inflammable, capable of being set on fire, not inflammatory, tending to stir up trouble.

This writer of the sentence below also chose the wrong word.

“The union’s decision will mitigate against a settlement.“

The word required was militate, working against. Mitigate means to appease, to soften, as in mitigating circumstances, which means circumstances that reduce the seriousness of an offence.

Here is a list of frequently confused words. If you are not confident about their meanings, look them up. If you want a longer list, along with definitions, see our article ‘Frequently confused words‘.

• Affect/effect
• Alternate/alternative
• Appraise/apprise
• Biannual/biennial
• Continual/continuous
• Dependent/dependant
• Discreet/discrete
• Disinterested/uninterested
• Distinctive/distinguished
• Flounder/founder
• Flout/flaunt
• Fortuitous/fortunate
• Inflammable/inflammatory
• Loathe/loath/loth
• Luxuriant/luxurious
• Meter/metre
• Militate/mitigate
• Peddle/pedal
• Practical/practicable
• Principle/principal
• Refute/rebut
• Regretful/regrettable
• Repel/repulse
• Resistant/resilient
• Stationary/stationery
• Titivate/titillate

Confusing sentence structure

There are some topics which seem to have an inexhaustible ability to cause confusion and sow doubt in people’s minds.

Fewer and less

Fewer means not as many, less means not as much. A commonly quoted example used to highlight the distinction is “There are fewer cars on the road”, which means there is less traffic.

These two sentences offer another useful reminder of the difference:

“The fewer people know about this the better.”

“The less people know about this the better.”

The rule does not work if the number is counted as a quantity or as a unit.

“She paid less than ten pounds for it.”

“His last jump was less than fifteen feet.”

Over and more than

Over refers to height, more than refers to quantity.

Consider these sentences:

“Over 10,000 people attended the first day of the festival.”

“More than 10,000 people attended the first day of the festival.”

The second sentence is correct.

That and which

This is not something to get too concerned about. It is not right to suggest that which is somehow grander than that, and on many occasions you can miss out the pronoun altogether, as “The car she was driving”, or “This is the outfit I’ll be wearing tonight“.

When you do use it, a useful guide is that defines, which informs. This is not a cast iron rule but it can help:

“This is the house that Jack built, but I think the one next door, which Jack also built, is more attractive.”

This is another example which illustrates the point:

“The police stopped the second car that was driven by a woman.”

“The police stopped the second car, which was driven by a woman.”

Split infinitive

There is no grammatical rule which says you cannot split an infinitive, but there are people who get almost upset if they hear one.

Sometimes, it is definitely better to split:

“Can dot.com companies ever hope to fully recover their share values?”

This sounds much better than moving fully in front of to recover or behind it. The main consideration is not to write anything which is ambiguous or inelegant.

May or might

The difference between these two words is gradually being eroded and there are many occasions now when they are quite interchangeable.

They offer varying and subtle degrees of certainty.

“The governor might resign” – suggests a possibility.

“The governor may resign” – indicates a little more probability.

May have and might have cause even more difficulty.

“We may have beaten Australia” suggests a lack of knowledge; perhaps we did, perhaps we didn’t, I’m not sure.

“We might have beaten Australia” suggests that if things had been different (wetter, drier, breezier), if that disputed try had been given, or if our forwards had been a little more effective, there was a chance that victory could have been ours.

Superlatives

If you are ever tempted to use a superlative, think about it. Are you absolutely confident that you are right? The audience is an enormous reservoir of information, and it does your reputation no good if you write about things which are incorrect.

Do not try to add impact to your stories by using superlatives you cannot justify, so make sure of your facts before you use words such as:

• exceptional
• exclusive
• fastest
• first
• greatest
• heaviest
• inimitable
• irreplaceable
• largest
• last
• least
• longest
• matchless
• most
• only
• record
• slowest
• smallest
• sole
• tallest
• unique
• unmatched
• unprecedented

If possible, it is best to attribute claims: “A Bridlington man has made what he says is the world’s biggest model of the Empire State Building using only matchsticks”.

If he is challenged, he can slug it out with the competition.

Simple words

Simplicity is the central to understanding. Short words in short sentences present listeners, viewers, and readers with the fewest obstacles to comprehension.

In many cases there are longer, more decorative alternatives but think twice before you use them. They take up more time and they can give the audience more to think about.

Here are some examples:

• approximately = about
• apprehend = catch
• ameliorate = improve
• ascertain = learn
• assistance = help
• attempt = try
• commence = start
• exceedingly = very
• discontinue = stop
• magnitude = size
• manufacture = make
• numerous = many
• possesses = has
• purchase = buy
• remuneration = pay
• requested = asked
• residence = home
• subsequently = later
• terminate = end
• utilise = use

Troublesome words

Some words are often misused. Using the wrong word detracts from your journalism, and prevents you from saying what you really wanted to say. Here are some words to look
out for:

• Anticipate and expect are thought by some people to be interchangeable, but that takes away a useful distinction. If I am playing chess and I anticipate my opponent’s next move, I see it coming and act accordingly. There is action as well as expectation. So if you think Liverpool will beat Manchester United, say you expect a Liverpool victory rather than anticipate one. It is simpler and more direct.
• Assassination should be kept for the violent deaths of royalty and seriously prominent members of society, such as political or religious leaders. Everyone else is murdered or killed.
• Cohort originally meant the tenth part of a Roman legion, and when statisticians use it, they mean a group with a shared characteristic. Despite recent American usage, it does not mean a group of colleagues, cronies, friends, Romans or countrymen.
• Crescendo is a gradual increase culminating in a climax, so it is wrong to say that something rose to a crescendo.The word you want is climax.
• Decimate originally meant to kill every tenth person but is now often used to indicate the destruction of a large part of something. Devastate or destroy are just as good.
• Disinterested means impartial; uninterested means not interested in.
• Draconian is much overused, usually by people with no idea who Draco was. (If asked, say he was an Athenian judge who ruled that the penalty for almost everything should be death.) Try severe or harsh instead.
• Effectively is often confused with in effect. If something is effective, it produces a satisfactory result, so effectively means with a satisfactory outcome. “The outbreak of plague in Birmingham has been effectively contained” means the rest of us are safe. In effect means in practice, and often indicates an unplanned outcome, as in “The new tax has in effect made it more sensible for Jane to remain on benefits”.
• Electrocution means death by electric shock. As such, it is always fatal.
• Enormity does not mean large size. It means great wickedness or outrage, although the correct usage seems to be under attack from all sides.
• Evacuate The rule used to be that only places or buildings were evacuated, not people (unless they had been given an enema). This is at odds with common usage so let the people be evacuated.
• Execute means to put to death after a legal process. Terrorists or criminals do not execute people, they murder them.
• Fatwa is often misused. It is a formal legal opinion handed down by a Muslim religious leader or court. It may or may not be a death sentence.
• Forensic does not mean scientific. It means belonging to courts of law, so a forensic expert knows a lot about the legal process. Forensic scientists produce evidence that might be useful in court cases. Avoid forensic tests; you probably mean scientific tests.
• Fulsome is not a close relative of full, and does not mean generous. It means gushing, cloying, effusive or sickeningly fawning. If that’s how to want to describe a speech or tribute, then this is the word for you.
• Go missing is inelegant and unpopular with many people, but its use is widespread. There are no easy synonyms. Disappear and vanish do not convince and they suggest dematerialisation, which is rare.
• Historic is a popular word with journalists. It is nice to think that the events we are describing will resonate down the decades, but who are we to judge? Use with great care, and never confuse with historical, which means belonging to history.
• Hopefully generates much heat in some quarters. It certainly means in a hopeful manner, as in “It is better to travel hopefully than to arrive”, but it is now generally also used to mean it is to be hoped that, as in “Hopefully there will be an improved train service to London”. There is no confusion, so it can justifiably be used in both senses.
• Immolate is not another word for burn. It means to sacrifice or give up something in exchange for something else.
• Infer does not mean the same as imply. If I imply (suggest indirectly) that my programme has an interview with Elvis Presley, and you believe me, you infer (come to the conclusion) that we have the greatest showbiz scoop of all time. Put simply, the inference follows the implication.
• Innocent bystanders and their close friends perfect strangers should not be in your contacts book.
• Ironically does not mean by an odd coincidence. Irony is using words to say the opposite of what they literally mean, and something is ironic if it is the opposite of what might have been expected. It is a subtle concept and is probably best avoided.
• Major is so overused as to be almost meaningless. Think at least twice before you write major operation, major speech, major incident or major changes.
• Massive is regularly misused.As the word implies, it concerns mass, weight and bulk, not quantity.
• Momentarily properly means for a moment, not in a moment, but its misuse is common. If the aircraft pilot says he’ll be landing momentarily, does he mean the plane will touch the ground briefly and then take off again? Probably not.Try to be one of those who uses it correctly.
• Near miss is understood by everyone, even though some people argue that near collision is more accurate. Think of it as shorthand for a miss that came very near to being a collision.
• Refute has a particular meaning. To refute a statement means to prove it wrong. So do not write “The Chancellor refuted opposition claims that he had mishandled the economy”, because it is very unlikely that he did so. Refute is not a synonym for deny, disagree or contradict.
• Surrogate means substitute, so it is the mother who is a surrogate, not the baby.
• Transpire means to come to light or become known, as in “It transpired that the editor had been to school with his secretary’s brother”. It does not mean happen or occur.
• Unique has a unique meaning, and it is that there is only one of something (uni as in unicycle, unicorn or unisex). Nothing can be almost unique. You should be saying distinctive or unusual.
• Viable gets knocked around by many journalists and is often misused. It does not mean workable or feasible, but capable of living and surviving, capable of normal growth and development. If a foetus is not viable it means it cannot survive outside the womb.

Other words are a problem because they are tendentious. For example:

• Ethnic cleansing. This apparently inoffensive term covers a multitude of sins, including massacres, murders, concentration camps, and the forced removal of people from their homes. Not to be used lightly.
• Pro-life is used in the United States to denote the lobby which opposes abortion. In the UK, there is an implication that if you are not pro-life then you are anti-life or pro-death. Avoid this moral minefield by using anti-abortion.
• Reform can also cause problems because it carries a suggestion of improvement, of making things better. When politicians call for the reform of the health service, local government, or the police force, there is no guarantee that their proposals will be positively received by the people directly involved. One man’s reform is another man’s misguided, ill conceived, impractical, vindictive political interference.
• Modernisation is another word to be wary of. It can be used to mask a lot of unpleasant things like job losses, changes in working practices, and getting employees to do more for less. But there’s just a chance it can also mean improved working conditions, new equipment or premises, more flexible hours and a better life for everyone.

Vogue words

There is fashion in language as in most things, and some words are suddenly everywhere. Islamist is regularly used as a synonym for Muslim and seems set to have a long and happy life in stories about terrorism and the threat posed by terrorists.

A raft used to mean a flat structure made up of planks or logs tied together so they formed a floating platform, but journalists and politicians have seized on it as a synonym for a lot of, and they are doing it to death.

• “We are putting together a raft of measures to tackle homelessness.”
• “The bill has attracted a raft of amendments.”
• “The government has unveiled a sweeping raft of proposals.”

What is a sweeping raft? When was the last time you heard someone in the pub say I must get home. I’ve got a raft of ironing to do?

Another word much loved by politicians, diplomats and journalists is broker. Again, do you hear people saying We have brokered a good price for our house? They would be much more likely to say negotiated.

Some people use vogue words because they think it shows they are clever and up with the times. Others believe it demonstrates a lack of original thought and individuality.

Good writers will try to avoid vogue words because they know everyone else is using them.

Here is a brief list of words and phrases. None of them is banned, and nor should they be, but you should approach them with care.

• asymmetrical
• caring
• dichotomy
• ecosystem
• epicentre
• eponymous
• exponential
• fashionista
• infrastructure
• interface
• kickstart
• leading edge
• lifestyle
• meaningful
• overarching
• parameter
• pivotal
• quantum leap
• scenario
• step change
• surgical strike
• synergy
• take on board
• traumatic
• underpin
• warfare

Superfluous words and phrases

English is full of groups of words which go round together filling up sentences. We know them and we are comfortable with them.

But if you want to be concise and clear in your writing you might want to discard them. Here are some examples:

• At this moment in time = now
• By virtue of the fact that = because
• In the absence of = without
• Made good their escape = escaped
• Leaves much to be desired = poor
• Was of the opinion that = thought
• Put in an appearance = appeared
• On account of the fact that = because
• In conjunction with = and
• A large proportion of = many
• Placed under arrest = arrested
• In the event that = if
• With the exception of = except

There are lots more, and none of them should earn a place in your text.

Another way to save time is to be aware of words which go together but actually mean the same thing.

For example, an added bonus does not need the word added because by definition a bonus is something additional.

An aircraft need not plummet down to earth because plummet means falling down. Nothing plummets in any direction other than down.

Here are some more repeater phrases. You can add your own examples.

• New innovation = innovation
• Surrounded on all sides = surrounded
• Red in colour = red
• Razed to the ground = razed
• Exactly the same the = same
• Close proximity = close
• Free gift = gift
• In the field of biology = in biology
• Collaborate together = collaborate
• Temporary reprieve = reprieve
• Consensus of opinion = consensus
• Personal opinion = opinion
• Oblong in shape = oblong
• Future plans = plans
• Close scrutiny = scrutiny
• Minute detail = detail
• Shorter in length = shorter
• Prior experience = experience
• Combine together = combine
• Revert back = revert
• Patently obvious = obvious
• Exact replica = replica

By John Allen

The original text for this article first appeared in a BBC Style Guide. The BBC gave Media Helping Media permission to rework this material and publish it.

Questions

1. What is the primary role of a noun in a sentence?
2. How do proper nouns differ from common nouns?
3. Define the term “collective noun” and provide an example.
4. Explain the difference between “mitigate” and “militate“.
5. Why is it important for journalists to use short sentences and simple words?
6. Analyse the sentence structure of “The plan failed” and explain why it is preferred over “The plan was not successful.”
7. Discuss the significance of using active verbs in the first sentence of a news report.
8. Evaluate the use of the word “unique” in journalism and explain why it should be used cautiously.
9. Synthesise the guidelines provided in the text for avoiding confusing sentence structures.
10. How does the text suggest journalists handle the use of superlatives in their writing?

Answers

1. A noun primarily serves as a naming word in a sentence, identifying people, places, things, or ideas.
2. Proper nouns are specific names that usually start with a capital letter, while common nouns are general names for a class of objects or concepts.
3. A collective noun refers to a group of individuals or things considered as a single entity. An example from the text is “the team.”
4. “Mitigate” means to make less severe or to appease, while “militate” means to work against or hinder.
5. Short sentences and simple words help ensure clarity and prevent misunderstanding, keeping the audience engaged and informed.
6. “The plan failed” is direct and assertive, making it clearer and more impactful than the passive and less direct “The plan was not successful.”
7. Active verbs in the first sentence create impact and engage the audience immediately, encouraging them to continue reading or listening.
8. “Unique” should be used cautiously because it implies that something is one of a kind, and misuse can lead to inaccuracies or exaggerations.
9. The text suggests avoiding complex structures such as subordinate clauses and using clear, direct language to prevent confusion.
10. Journalists should ensure they can justify the use of superlatives with facts, as incorrect use can damage credibility and mislead the audience.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘Word power‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

Related article

We have another article covering this topic which you might want to read.

The post The power of words first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The six questions are What? Why? When? How? Where? and Who?

And it’s worth asking yourself these questions to ensure you have not missed out anything which ought to be included in your story.

You don’t have to answer all six questions.

There might be times when you choose leave out one or more of them. That’s fine, as long as you have made a conscious decision to do so.

But use the six as a checklist. Run through them as a matter of routine to assure yourself that you have not omitted anything by mistake.

What – happened?
Why – did the event to take place (the cause)?
When – did it happen?
How – did it happen?
Where – did it take place? and
Who – are the people involved?

Usually, the two most important questions are who? and what?.

News is often about people doing things (or sometimes not doing things) so the who and the what are frequently the most crucial parts of your story.

How much other detail you include is down to your news judgement and the time and space available to you.

But never try to answer all six questions in your opening sentence or paragraph.

It will result in a cluttered report and leave you with little else to write about.

Try this example.
“A climate change protester, John Smith, today drove the wrong way down the M6 motorway in Birmingham in a protest against the building of a new runway at Heathrow airport.”
All six questions have been mentioned, but the sentence isn’t elegant or interesting.

Ration your information. Use it sparingly and to good effect. Try to keep your audience interested.

In this case, the what is more interesting than the identity of the who, so something like this would have more impact:
“A climate change protester caused mayhem today by deliberately driving the wrong way down a motorway.”
There are lots of other ways of writing this story, but however you choose to start, the other details can be incorporated into the next two or three sentences.

By John Allen

Analysis

Let’s delve deeper into the six questions – What, Why, When, How, Where, and Who – and explore their significance in crafting compelling narratives.

While presented as a simple checklist, mastering these questions involves nuanced judgment and strategic deployment.

The foundation: A structured approach to inquiry

The six questions provide a framework for thorough reporting. They encourage journalists to move beyond surface-level observations and seek a comprehensive understanding of the event or issue at hand.

This systematic approach helps ensure that no crucial element is overlooked, leading to more informative and impactful stories.

Think of it as a mental scaffolding that supports the construction of a robust narrative.

Beyond the checklist: Strategic omission and prioritisation

The text rightly points out that answering all six questions isn’t always necessary, and sometimes, strategically omitting one or more can enhance the narrative.

This isn’t about laziness; it’s about journalistic discretion. Perhaps the “when” is less relevant than the “why,” or maybe the “where” is already widely understood.

The important factor is conscious omission, a deliberate choice to prioritise certain aspects of the story over others.

This decision should be guided by news judgment, considering what information is most crucial for the audience’s understanding and engagement.

The interplay of questions: Unveiling the narrative

The suggestion that “who” and “what” are often the most important is a good starting point, but the relative importance of each question can shift depending on the story.

Sometimes, the “how” is the most compelling element, particularly in investigative journalism or stories involving complex processes.

The “why” is almost always crucial, as it provides context and helps the audience understand the motivations and underlying forces at play.

A story without a “why” risks being superficial and lacking depth.

The art of revelation: Structuring for impact

The example of the climate change protest highlights the importance of pacing and strategic information release.

Trying to cram all six questions into the opening sentence creates a cluttered lead.

Instead, journalists should employ a “pyramid” structure, starting with the most compelling lead and gradually revealing more details.

This approach allows for a more natural flow of information and keeps the audience engaged.

The lead: Capturing the reader

The example demonstrates how prioritising the “what” – the act of driving the wrong way down the motorway – creates a more immediate and dramatic lead than focusing on the “who” – John Smith.

The lead’s primary function is to grab the reader’s attention and make them want to continue reading.

This often involves highlighting the most unusual, surprising, or impactful aspect of the story.

Beyond the opening: Developing the narrative

After the initial lead, the journalist can then weave in the other details – the “who,” “why,” “when,” “where,” and “how” – in a way that builds upon the initial intrigue.

This might involve providing background information, exploring the motivations of the individuals involved, or explaining the broader context of the event.

The importance of context: Adding depth and meaning

Consider the climate change protest example. Simply reporting that someone drove the wrong way down the motorway is sensationalist but lacks context.

By explaining that the act was a protest against a new runway at Heathrow, the story gains depth and becomes more meaningful.

The “why” provides a crucial layer of understanding, transforming a seemingly random act into a deliberate expression of a particular viewpoint.

The evolving nature of news: Adapting to the medium

While the six questions remain a cornerstone of journalistic practice, their application can vary depending on the medium.

In a short news bulletin, brevity might be paramount, requiring the journalist to prioritise the most essential information.

In a longer feature article, there’s more space to explore the nuances of each question and provide a more comprehensive account.

Online journalism allows for the incorporation of multimedia elements, such as videos and interactive maps, which can enhance the storytelling and provide additional context.

In conclusion

The six questions are more than just a checklist; they are a tool for critical thinking and effective communication.

Mastering these questions requires not only understanding their individual meanings but also recognising their interconnectedness and strategically deploying them to create compelling and informative narratives.

It’s about understanding the audience, prioritising information, and crafting a story that resonates and leaves a lasting impact.

Questions

1. What are the six questions a journalist should consider when crafting a story?
2. Why is it important for journalists to use the six questions as a checklist?
3. Which two questions are often considered the most crucial in news stories, and why?
4. How can a journalist decide which details to include in a news story?
5. What is the potential downside of trying to answer all six questions in the opening sentence of a news report?
6. In the example provided, why is the “what” considered more interesting than the “who”?
7. How does the example illustrate the importance of rationing information in a news story?
8. What role does news judgment play in determining the amount of detail included in a story?
9. How can a journalist maintain audience interest while providing necessary information?
10. In what ways can the details of a story be incorporated after the opening sentence to enhance the narrative?

Answers

1. The six questions are What? Why? When? How? Where? and Who?
2. Using the six questions as a checklist ensures that no important information is omitted from the story.
3. The two most crucial questions are “who?” and “what?” because news is often about people doing things, making these elements central to the story.
4. A journalist can decide which details to include based on their news judgment and the time and space available.
5. Trying to answer all six questions in the opening sentence can lead to a cluttered report and leave little else to write about.
6. The “what” is considered more interesting because it involves an unusual action that captures attention, whereas the “who” is less significant in this context.
7. The example shows that by focusing on the most compelling aspects first, a journalist can create a more engaging and effective story.
8. News judgment helps determine which details are most relevant and how much information should be included to convey the story effectively.
9. A journalist can maintain audience interest by using information sparingly and strategically, ensuring the story remains engaging.
10. Details can be incorporated in subsequent sentences to build the narrative and provide a fuller picture without overwhelming the reader initially.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: ‘The questions every journalist should ask‘ which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

In the next lesson we look at story construction.

The image at the top is licensed through Can Stock Photo Inc / PixelsAway in accordance with the End User License Agreement (c) – License # 1397576 and released under Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.

The post The questions every journalist should ask first appeared on Media Helping Media.

The conclusion is at the bottom with all the supporting arguments and information above. News writing is the opposite.You start with the essence of the story, for example, let’s imagine the following headline which reads: “The price of cotton has fallen by 15 per cent”.

You then add extra information such as the impact on producers, the textile industry, the economy, consumer prices, employment, etc.

Details such as whether it was expected, what is being done about it, whether it is short- or long-term, and how people are reacting to the news are then added.

A reader or listener can stop after the headline and summary knowing the basic facts.

The person who wants to know more can continue for added information.

Some journalists refer to this method as the inverted pyramid journalism, as set out in the graphic above, others refer to it as the inverted pyramid. But no matter how you look at it, the headline is at the top, and more information is added according to its relevance and newsworthiness.

Those who need to understand the essential information will be able to access it in the first few lines, while those who are fascinated by the story can continue reading background information that supports the main thrust of the article. And those who are not that interested will have moved on to another news item.

It’s a simple but effective technique that relies entirely on how well focused you are.

You, the journalist, must decide what the top line is, what comes second, third, and so on.

And you must alway keep in mind that you risk losing your audience if you get too bogged down in detail and offer too much of one kind of information at the expense of other aspects of the story.

By John Allen

Analysis

Let’s explore the nuances of the inverted pyramid structure of news writing in greater depth.

The fundamental principle remains: prioritise the most crucial information at the beginning, followed by progressively fewer essential details. This structure caters to readers with varying levels of interest and time constraints.

Imagine the headline: “Local Council Approves Funding for New Park.” This concise statement immediately conveys the core news.

A reader stopping here grasps the essential fact. However, the inverted pyramid allows for layers of additional information for those who want a more complete understanding.

The next paragraph might elaborate on the “What, Why, When, How, Where and Who”

• What exactly is being funded? Is it just the land purchase, or does it include playground equipment, landscaping, and ongoing maintenance?
• Where will the park be located?
• Why was this decision made?
• When will construction begin?
• How will it be paid for?
• Who is involved? Perhaps it’s the local council, specific council members, and community groups advocating for the park.

Subsequent paragraphs can then delve into the specifics.

Perhaps the article details the budget breakdown, outlining how much money is allocated for each aspect of the project.

It might include quotes from council members explaining their rationale for the decision, or from residents expressing their opinions on the new park.

The article could also explore potential challenges, such as environmental concerns, zoning regulations, or community opposition.

Consider the impact of this structure.

A reader skimming the article gets the gist from the headline and first paragraph.

Someone with moderate interest might read a few more paragraphs to learn about the project’s scope and timeline.

A highly engaged reader can continue to the end, gaining a comprehensive understanding of the decision-making process, community perspectives, and potential challenges.

The inverted pyramid isn’t simply about organisation; it reflects a deep understanding of audience behaviour.

Readers often scan headlines and the first few lines before deciding whether to invest more time.

Journalists, therefore, must craft compelling leads that grab attention and convey the most important information concisely.

This requires careful consideration of what constitutes “news.”

• Is it the mere fact of the funding approval, or is it the potential impact on the community?
• Is it the political manoeuvring behind the decision, or the environmental considerations?

The journalist must make these editorial judgments, prioritising the most relevant and impactful aspects of the story.

The inverted pyramid forces journalists to be economical with their language. Every word counts, especially in the early paragraphs.

There’s no room for meandering introductions or lengthy explanations. The focus must be on delivering information clearly and efficiently.

This disciplined approach to writing benefits both the reader and the journalist, promoting clarity and conciseness.

However, while the inverted pyramid is a valuable tool, it’s not a rigid formula.

Journalists must adapt it to fit the specific story.

Some stories might lend themselves to a more narrative approach, while others might require a more analytical structure.

The key is to always prioritise the reader’s needs, ensuring they can quickly grasp the essential information, regardless of how much of the article they choose to consume.

The inverted pyramid, at its core, is a reader-centric approach to storytelling, designed to maximise information delivery and engagement.

>Questions

1. What is the primary difference between traditional writing for school projects and news writing as described in the text?
2. How does the pyramid structure benefit readers who are only interested in the essential information?
3. What is meant by the term “pyramid journalism,” and how does it relate to the structure of a news article?
4. Why is it important for a journalist to determine the “top line” of a story?
5. How does the pyramid structure help maintain a reader’s interest in a news article?
6. In what ways can the pyramid structure impact the way a journalist presents information about the economy, consumer prices, and employment?
7. Analyse how the pyramid structure might affect the reader’s perception of the news story’s importance.
8. Evaluate the effectiveness of the pyramid structure in conveying complex news stories. What are its strengths and potential weaknesses?
9. Synthesise the information given in the text to propose an alternative method of structuring a news article. How might this method compare to the pyramid?
10. How might the pyramid structure influence the way journalists prioritise different aspects of a news story?

>Answers

1. Traditional writing builds up to a conclusion, while news writing starts with the essence of the story and adds details in order of relevance.
2. It allows them to get the basic facts from the headline and summary without reading further.
3. “Pyramid journalism” refers to the pyramid structure where the most important information is at the top, followed by additional details.
4. Determining the “top line” ensures that the most crucial information is presented first, capturing the reader’s attention.
5. It provides essential information upfront, allowing readers to decide if they want to continue reading for more details.
6. It allows journalists to present the most critical economic impacts first, followed by less crucial details, ensuring clarity and focus.
7. It emphasises the most important aspects first, potentially shaping the reader’s perception of the story’s significance.
8. The structure is effective for clarity and quick understanding but may oversimplify complex stories or omit nuanced details.
9. An alternative could be a narrative structure that weaves details throughout, offering a more engaging but potentially less clear presentation.
10. It encourages journalists to prioritise information based on newsworthiness and relevance, potentially affecting the depth of coverage for less critical aspects.

Lesson plan for trainers

If you are a trainer of journalists we have a free lesson plan: The inverted pyramid which you are welcome to download and adapt for your own purposes.

The post Essential elements of a news story first appeared on Media Helping Media.

A journalist writing a news story is the author, organiser and decision maker. Without them the story may never be told.

They assemble the material they have at hand and which they have researched and uncovered, and then they make the most important decision of all by asking the question – is there a story?

Thousands of possible stories disappear each day because they fail to make it through this first stage of the production process, let’s try to make sure that yours don’t.

If you decide that there is a story, you then need to think through which part or parts of it are of potential interest.

This affects how you should tell the story, what angle you should take and the main points you should try to get across. Perhaps even more importantly, what you can leave out.

There is almost never enough time or space for all your material. Something usually has to go, and it’s best to start thinking about this sooner rather than later.

Despite what you may hear about the objectivity of news, you as the writer cannot help being subjective because you are applying your own judgement and values.

The important thing is that your judgement is not just a personal preference. It is guided and based on journalistic principles.

If you are knocked down by a car and break a leg, a limited number of people will be interested – your family and friends, of course, your employer, your insurance company, and just about nobody else. The incident is unlikely to make a news item.

If the president of your country is involved in a road accident, that is front-page news and probably even the lead item in broadcast news bulletins.

Is a story newsworthy?

The different responses to these two events are a matter of judgement, of news judgement.

A range of considerations comes into play every time you have to decide if a story is newsworthy or not. Here are some of them:

• The source: Is it reliable, trustworthy, independent, honest, believable? If you have doubts, can you carry out checks?
• The subject: Does it fit my output? If you are writing for a sports magazine, you will probably not be too interested in finance, crime, science, international trade or health, unless there is a sports angle.
• The people: What interest is there likely to be in what the individuals in the story are doing? If it’s a choice between you and the president, you lose every time.
• The audience: Will this story appeal to many of my readers, viewers, or listeners? There’s not much point in carrying serious financial news in a celebrity-centred popular newspaper.
• The surprise: How unusual is this event or development? Something unexpected is more likely to make the news than a routine happening.
• The knowledge: Is this story new or has it been published before? If so, by whom? Will it have been widely circulated, or will most people be learning about it for the first time?
• The timing: Even if the story is not recent, and the event is many years old, it can still be worth running if the information has only just come to light.
• The yawn: Have we just had too many stories on this subject? Let’s look for something else before we lose our audience through boredom?
• What next? You have decided to run a story. One of the key stages in preparing it for publication comes next – how do you organise and structure the material?

Questions

1. What is the primary role of a journalist when constructing a news story?
2. Why is it important for a journalist to determine if there is a story before proceeding?
3. How does a journalist decide which parts of a story are of potential interest?
4. What factors influence a journalist’s decision on what to include or exclude in a news story?
5. How does subjectivity play a role in news writing, despite the aim for objectivity?
6. What are some key considerations in determining the newsworthiness of a story?
7. How does the source of information affect the credibility of a news story?
8. Why might a story about a president’s road accident be more newsworthy than a similar incident involving an ordinary citizen?
9. How can the timing of a story impact its newsworthiness?
10. What are the next steps after deciding to run a story, according to the text?

Answers

1. The primary role of a journalist is to be the author, organiser, and decision maker of the news story.
2. It is important to determine if there is a story to ensure that the journalist’s efforts are focused on newsworthy content that will engage the audience.
3. A journalist decides which parts of a story are of potential interest by considering the angle, main points, and what can be omitted due to time or space constraints.
4. Factors influencing what to include or exclude include the story’s angle, the main points to convey, and the available time or space for the story.
5. Subjectivity plays a role because journalists apply their own judgment and values, guided by journalistic principles, in deciding how to present a story.
6. Key considerations for newsworthiness include the source’s reliability, the subject’s relevance, the people’s interest, the audience’s appeal, the element of surprise, the novelty of the information, and the timing.
7. The source affects credibility because a reliable, trustworthy, and independent source enhances the story’s believability.
8. A president’s road accident is more newsworthy due to the individual’s prominence and the potential impact on a larger audience.
9. Timing impacts newsworthiness because even old events can be newsworthy if new information has just come to light.
10. After deciding to run a story, the next steps involve organizing and structuring the material for publication.

There are two main models for news writing. One the pyramid, the other involves ‘six honest men’. We will deal with this in our next module titled ‘Essential elements of a news story‘.

The post News writing for beginners first appeared on Media Helping Media.