Editing writing for the ear

There is a huge difference in writing for the eyes and writing for the ear. This past summer, I was fortunate enough to work for a radio station in Olds, Alberta and one thing I noticed when going going through the weekly list of PSAs is that a lot of them were not written for the ear. The same thing is happening now when I announce U of M Bison games with the sponsor script. A fair number of them are written well for the eyes; grammatically correct, proper syntax, etc, but sound awful to the ear. 

Sometimes I realize this much too late as I am already half way through the script and have no real choice other than to plow ahead in full knowledge that what I’m about to say is going to make little or no sense.

This is not to fault anyone, because unless you have done it, it’s hard to tell. Complicated verses or words don’t translate when saying them “with style”. This isn’t a poetry reading. An announcer needs to have the correct tone, flow and inflection to sound proper and bad scripts don’t allow the proper breathing room for this to happen.

The other big one is that the important information jumps around. Instead of writing one, two, three, the author has written two, three, one. Again, this might work when writing an award winning piece of fiction but does nothing for the announcer. It doesn’t make sense to the ear, and as such I end up sound ridiculous. 

Many of the PSAs needed a serious rewrite before I could go on the air with them, and some were so bad that I just plain refused to say them. Same thing would happen for radio commercial scripts that clients would write themselves. But since the clients were paying for them, there wasn’t much I could do.

Here are a couple tips for those of you who find yourself writing PSAs or any thing else to be heard on the radio:

• No long sentences.
• Who, what, where, why, when, in that order. Short, sweet and concise.
• If you’re unsure what to write, just put the facts down in point form. We can figure out the rest.
• No complicated words. Nice easy vocabulary that isn’t likely to get jumbled.
• Spell tricky names phonetically somewhere on the release so we don’t pronounce it wrong and look dumb.
• EDIT!!!!!!! Nothing is worse then reading a PSA and halfway through, catching a typo. It freezes the announcer.

By following some of these simple rules, your writing will make it much easier on the announcer and there for be much more likely to be aired.

We don’t have time to edit your work for you. These things happen on the fly, so the easier, cleaner and more concise a message is, the better.

Editing Expectations

I’ve been a Leafs fans since I can remember. My father was a Leafs fan, his father was a Leafs fan.. I would say it’s in my blood, but the appropriate term to use would be that I drank the blue Kool-aide. 

Leafs haters are familiar with this one. 

One thing that being a life long Leafs fan has taught me, is to manage my expectations. I’ve learned how except things for what they are, and never too get to high- or too low for that matter- about anything.

This is really important as a Leafs fan. We had some good teams in the 90’s and again at the turn of the millennium, but for the most part, it’s been a tough trek through the trenches. 

You can’t put too much into a good prospect who shows some flash in a game or a nice  little four-game win streak. It takes more than that to build a successful team. You need to have consistency, be flexible in your game plan and have the depth to go the long haul.  Don’t be surprised either when everything comes crashing down because it will happen more often than not.

I’m not being pessimistic here either.  I have hope. I always believe that the Leafs can win on any given night, and I cheer for them the same game in and game. I’m just practical and know a bad hockey team when I see one.

The Leafs are now 3-0-1, or seven out of a possible eight points, so I’m pretty happy. Phil Kessel appears to be playing like the player we all thought we were getting for two first-round draft picks, and the the goaltending issue seems to have been resolved with Reimer between the pipes. 

It’s hard not to get excited right now. The defence is playing well, and the top six finally seems to be creating scoring chances on a regular basis, AND putting the pucks in the net.

The point is, is that there is reason for optimism. This is dangerous territory for Leafs fan, as it is easy to see that we are a better team; yet better than the rest of the east? I think not. 

I will hesitate to say the Leafs will make the playoffs, for they are the entire reason I’ve learned to manage my expectations. But I can still hope!

Editing Comments: An Enigma

Comment sections are interesting places to gauge public opinion on a topic and explore new insight. By the end of the weekend I’ve usually spent enough time on these sites to have at least added to my knowledge of a particular topic.  

The problem is that it’s easy to get dragged into a debate on the internet. Being anonymous gives certain people the courage to say things that they say things on the internet that they might not if their identities were public. 

As a friend of mine once eloquently put it “... the problem with winning a debate on the Internet, is that you’re still a loser.”

Fair enough, but then where’s the fun at?

It is usually up to moderators on forums and news sites to regulate these comments an ensure that nothing gets too out of hand, that the conversation doesn’t fall into complete anarchy. 

It is important to note here that forums and news websites have different standards and styles when it come to posting, so from here on out, I’m just going to focus on news sites. 

I follow three major news sources on the internet. I read the articles and the comments,  and occasionally participate in the discussion myself. These three being the Winnipeg Free Press, TSN and CBC- fairly reputable news sources. 

Each of these organizations has a right and responsibility to edit the comments posted by their readers, and each do it in a certain way. 

The Winnipeg Free Press will initially publish anything it seems, until someone either complains to the comment editor, or the offending remark is caught by a moderator and removed. I appreciate the way that the Free Press does this, even though comments can slip through the cracks that illicit hatred, racism, or are just plain stupid. I find many outrageous and ignorant comments here, but they are easy enough to ignore. The majority of people who comment on the Free Press  seem reasonable, educated and polite enough to encourage discussion without too much school-yard name calling.

TSN is slightly different. It takes some time before your comment is posted and I would attributed the comment section more akin to a Facebook wall with random thoughts, insults or jeers than to a public forum for debate. Many people feel the need to make their point heard loud and often without any apparent regard for the headline they are commenting it on. To often have I read articles about the concussed Sidney Crosby, to find the comments centered around how and why the Leafs suck.  I can only speculate, but it seems that TSN edits for swear words and racist remarks. Content doesn’t enter into their comment editing decisions. 

Part of the problem could be poor grammatical skills among most TSN posters. I would bet that less than one and 10 comments are error free. 

FInally there is CBC. CBC is regulated like any other arm of the government. It almost boarders on fascism to tell you the truth. Comments go through a strict screening before they are published, which can take up to a couple hours. It seems that any comment questioning the integrity of the CBC or  the Canadian identity is rejected. (Comments bashing the Prime Minister are acceptable, just don’t imply that maybe Canadians aren’t as hot as we think we are) Unsurprising, shallow reflections are they types of comments that are published on the CBC. Debates do happen, but ultimately, anything with any sustenance is left on the floor. I know this because I have all but given up commenting on CBC stories and find myself visiting their site less and less. (There’s a PR lesson in here somewhere)

It’s not an easy job editing the comments on these sites- one I would not want. But I feel there is room to improve. The Free Press, though not perfect in my opinion, has found a good balance between constructive debate and moderation. Possibly because its audience isn’t a national source, feel offending comments can be edited after the fact, without to much detriment to their reputation.

The CBC and TSN are both losing their luster for me. Neither one really helps propel conversation and I would begin to lean on the side of stifling it. I would hope that eventually commenting on news pieces would become the norm for people to do, without resorting to childhood insults and bitter sentiments that plague these news sources.

Editing on the fly

I have a rather unorthodox editing method I’m been implying since the end of the previous semester last spring, and I would like to share it with you.

This is solely my method, and I wouldn’t necessary recommend it to anyone else. If you have ever read my blogs, you would understand that editing has never been my forte. 

Whenever I finnish an assignment I go through an editing process that covers the three major editing checks in a disjointed sweep through different mediums. 

The first edit is for content. That happens upon the completion of my assignment, when I’m more concerned about checking what’s upstairs in the fridge. After I return belly full, I sit down at my computer and slowly comb through my work like I was reading it for the first time. I check for thought progression, clarity in voice and patch up any holes or obvious questions that I’d neglected to mention. Not an easy task, but I’m improving.

The second edit is for style. This is important in making sure that the language chosen for this particular piece hasn’t become tangled and twisted with tired eyes and mind late at night. This edit happens in the morning and rightfully so. First thing after the my first sip of coffee and the cold air’s window of opportunity to ravish my face, I hop on the bus and ensure my language is fit for my audience and fit for me too. I don’t like boring writing, and appreciate it more when it has a little flare. Some rhythm, little spice.

Of course I couldn’t do this without my iPhone. Technology is a blessing. I couldn’t imagine having to type my papers out on a typewriter and hand in an error-free document. I don’t believe I can get through a single sentence with out hitting the backspace key at least half a dozen times. There is no way. I would have had to be a plumber or something man kind was still confined to the manual typing machine. (No offense to plumbers or typewriter enthusiasts)

Finally I do my edit at school, where I sit in the Mac lab with my headphones on, blasting that 90’s gangsta rap. I don’t know why, it just seems to help me concentrate, as I sit there and comb through each individual word looking for errors. They can be as small as an apostrophe or big as a wale! 

That las’t wale was on purppose. 

So was that.  

The point is, is that for my third edit I sit there with a hard copy, reading line by line, word by word and letter by letter making every tinny tiny correction I need to make as to salvage some of my credibility as a communicator. 

Finally after three edits, I feel confident enough in my work to publish it to the world, or hand it into an instructor.