Thursday, August 23, 2007

So simple a middle-aged writer can do it (or maybe not)


When it comes to technology, I feel like the Geico caveman: I understand enough to get by in today's hi-tech world, but look more closely and you can easily tell I'm a neanderthal when it comes to certain things involving computers. This blog is a good example. I'm happy with the content, but I know there are plenty of technological bells and whistles that should be added, like a blog roll.

So, until I muster the motivation to learn how to put one on here, let me list a few writing and communication blogs that I find worth reading. Maybe you will, too.

-- "My 2 cents" by public relations and communications expert David Reich offers cogent comment on marketing, media and PR. I like Dave's writing style, too.

-- Kenneth W. Davis' "Manage Your Writing" always seems to have something helpful to say on the craft. Check him out.

-- The great thing about Roy Clark's writing blog is that besides its outstanding content, it also introduces you to Poynteronline, an informative Web site that's aimed at journalists but is worth reading by anyone interested in effective communication. Take a look at Roy's post today on the art of revision.

-- Another must-see blog for me is Dan Santow's "Word Wise." Dan offers specifics on grammar, usage, punctuation and other vital topics, and he conveys them in a highly readable way.

That'll have to do until I can get that blog roll figured out.

Friday, August 17, 2007

Be careful what you ask for

I frequently have clients who, in asking me to exmaine something they've written say, "All it needs is proofread." I try not to cringe and then gently explain that what they're requesting may not be what they really want, or shouldn't be. Here's why.

To most professional writers and editors "proofreading" refers to a process of scanning a document for errors in spelling, grammar, usage and punctuation. That's it. Proofreading amounts to little more than what Microsoft Word's spell-grammar check function accomplishes, and we all know how effective that is.

Proofreading fails to encompass a vital, more time-consuming examination that every piece of written communication should undergo – editing. When professionals edit text, they not only proofread it, but they also examine it for problems of structure, logic, style, tone and other fundamental elements. Getting these things right is what marks the difference between an effective communication and one that baffles readers. In fact, you could have a piece that's free of errors in spelling, usage and grammar and still be utterly unreadable because of the other flaws I just mentioned.

If I had to have an error in my copy, I'd rather it be a typo or punctuation goof than an error in logic or structure. And what I'm saying doesn't just go apply to someone who's barely capable of stringing two words together. Even pros need edited, not just proofread. I believe so firmly in that advice, that if a client insists that he or she wants me to comb text only for mistakes in grammar, usage and punctuation, I refuse the assignment.

Thursday, August 2, 2007

No name calling


I was reading an article by Biz Stone on the Blogger Web site's help page recently when Biz (is that short for something?) referred to someone as a "grammar bitch." Ouch! That's a snarky way of referring to a person who suggests that if we're going to write in English we should observe its rules of grammar, usage and punctuation.

Actually, to give Biz some credit, he used the b-word in a paragraph in which he tossed a bone to the advocates of clear writing, advising that if you don't know a pronoun from a proverb, you should "fix yourself up a bit...have some respect for your readers."

Though I haven't been called a grammar bitch or bastard yet (not to my face, anyway), I have noticed that whenever I advocate the need to write well and observe the rules of grammar, I often get an icy response along the lines of "no one cares about that anymore."

I won't do as Biz does and resort to name calling. In fact, in the interest of playing fair intellectually, I'll conditionally concede that point by responding, "Sometimes no one cares." And even in those cases, the non-caring is limited to simple errors in capitalization, spelling, or some other flesh wound of a grammar flaw. But if you butcher sentence structure, disregard subject-verb agreement, or dangle your modifiers, people do care. They care enough to dismiss you as a buffoon and will go elsewhere for information. Now, that is a bitch.