Triple Word Score!

I've personally thought that when it comes to spelling and grammar, some people definitely take it too seriously.  What would make me care more? Perhaps my interest would spike if there were points involved.

I've played Scrabble only a few times in my life, and have vague memories of arguing over made-up words to get the highest score possible.  Maybe it's these repressed memories of losing terribly that have left me with such disdain for spelling.  There was a link to an article on the front page of Yahoo! that caught my eye. 

The article discusses how there are people other than journalists who really take word choice seriously, and competitively for that matter.  Right now, there is an argument over a change in the rules to allow three little words on to the board.  "Za," "qi" and "zzz" have now been added to the official list, allowing these high-valued letters gain players more points because Zs and Qs have the highest value in the game.

For those still scratching their heads over the meanings, "Za" refers to the slang term for pizza, "qi" is a Chinese-originated word for breathing, and "zzz" is what I'm sure a little bubble says that pops over my head when I sleep during my math class.

I know this may seem like a weak link to news editing, but it reminded me of how word choice continues to matter in so many different realms and helps me refrain from word enthusiasts as silly.  It also made me think of the "Man Bites Dog" headline game, which I hope to play again soon!

There really is value in language, in more ways than one.

Watch your language!

F--- you.  Son of a b----.

I'm pretty sure you blog readers know exactly what the missing letters are.

It takes a lot to offend me.  Growing up, that whole, "sticks and stones" rhyme stuck with me and presently, it really takes some kind of racial slur and just the right combination of intentionally hurtful words to get to me.  However, I realize that not only do people have different standards of offense than me, and that actual publication of these censored words result in a different effect than just hearing them out loud.

Editors really need to make careful decisions regarding language in stories because someone is bound to be offended regardless of how careful one is with these cuss words.  However, experienced editors already know that it is impossible to completely satisfy every reader with a publication because someone will always find something that bothers them in the paper.  I do think that as with most other editing decisions, one question that should always come to mind when deciding to not censoring certain words is whether or not publishing them is really worth the consequences. 

I suppose it is generally safer to censor the cuss words.  Those of us who swear like sailors and are desensitized from this will get what you're saying.

The Ethical Line: Photography Part II

After yet an insightful journalism lecture, I felt the need to readdress the photographic decisions of my previous post.  While I do stand by my personal choices regarding the publication of each photos, I think that there are some other key elements to these editing decisions that I didn't think of.  

The background information of each picture and involvement of those photographed in the editing decision can definitely offer some insight into the ethics of publishing each more sensitive photo.  How the photo was taken, if initial permission to take the photo was granted and ultimately whether or not those photographed give their blessing for it's publication are all great ways to make such difficult decisions.

One background story that particularly struck me as memorable was the photo of the young boy whose dog was killed by a car.  Knowing that the photographer actually took the time to call and report the incident to authorities first to make sure the dog was taken care of exemplifies how one can still have a heart, no matter how eager for a good story and amazing photograph that person is.  The newspaper then called to check if the dog had survived or not, and when he was informed of his death, pulled the photo.  It was then the boy who asked that it be published because despite his grief, he wanted the picture to have a message to the community.  He wanted drivers to be more careful on the road.

A good portion of the other photos did go through thorough decision processes, often consulting legal advice, organizations and professionals who could offer their opinion, and when possible, the opinion of those in the photographs.  I think that this kind of careful consideration shows that good, responsible reporting is still possible and that even taking an extra minute to think about the consequences of every editing decision should be upheld today.