163 karma · joined November 6, 2013
The most common example is journalists' aversion to repeating words like 'said' or 'told'. People don't _say_ things any more, they: continue, explain, add, verbalise, enunciate, vocalise, and so on.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/press-gazette-launches-duopoly...
:: Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
:: Never use a long word where a short one will do.
:: If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
:: Never use the passive where you can use the active.
:: Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
:: Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
It's not so much about having no trust in my superiors. I work at a newspaper company but in editorial and the idea is on the business side of the "church and state" divide.
It's an ailing industry, which could do with any revenue stream it can get its hands on, and I just want to help where I can.
I'm of the motherfuckingwebsite.com school of thought--an evangelist for simple design--but I think simple and unique often go hand-in-hand.
Take my industry: newspapers. Ninety-nine percent take a flat-pack, everyfuckingwebsite.com approach. I think that conformity compromises design. Readability should be at the heart of most sites--let alone news sites--yet I find most hard to read for colours, distractions and so on.
The news websites I enjoy are simple and unique--like the Drudge Report and Hacker News, which are pretty much just a list of links with minimal layers. I think that gets to the core of my purpose as a reader: no bullshit clicking around for ages to find what I want/need to read--just here's the news in our view.
For me, that's a big reason for the Daily Mail's success too. Content aside, I think their presentation of news is second to none. You could argue it's like a lot of sites but I disagree: few run tall pictures, nine-deck headlines and so on. MailOnline's production is similar to the way editors put a page together for print. They've transitioned much of the craft online. I think that's how the website retains something of a newspaper 'feel' which most have lost.
Anyway, I should stop writing, I'm going off on tangents and probably talking gibberish, just wanted to chuck in my 2p.
1.) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2.) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
3.) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
4.) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
5.) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
6.) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
First thing I'd do? Get rid of the blurred background for readability's sake, it makes me feel like I've got glaucoma.
Also, I whitelist scripts and I'm oddly outraged when I land on a page which hardly functions without. At least tell me I have to enable JS. It's a minor thing but first impressions and all.
I'm intrinsically uncomfortable with websites moving without my say so but it may grow on me in this case (just don't over do it ;).
The only other thing that's grinding my gears is more general and counterintuitive. Namely, news being weighted toward what people want to read, rather than need to read.
However, I'm probably just being an idealist... after all, who doesn't need to see a raccoon riding an alligator?
Edit: Just found the pause button, it's a good compromise.
Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, himself said PR is a just polite term for propaganda.
I've had news stories that were in the public interest spiked because of spin doctors meddling.
In the UK, central government alone employs more than 1,500 communications staff[1]. I think that's bad for democracy and a waste of public money.
I'm with Noam Chomsky who said: "Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state."
[1] http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/central-government-has-nearly-...
To clarify, I have no problem with you using JS. I know I may have to enable it go gain functionality sometimes. My gripe is that on your sites I get zero functionality without it.
I don't mean to cause offense either. Thought it may be something you hadn't considered is all.
Also, making the panels on the right of the landing page opaque would aid readability.
(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
--Politics and the English language by George Orwell: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm