Citizen Journalism: A Primer

N.B. — This was originally posted to my business site on 21 February.

The Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism’s “2009 State of News Media” report contains an interesting section on citizen journalism. The report concedes that there has been a growing number of citizen-media sites, but that “citizen news sites provided much less reporting (57%), as well as opinion and special content like calendar items” on the day Pew conducted a comprehensive study, relative to sites maintained by traditional media outlets.

Indeed, in the Grand Rapids market, the typical options for online media are MLive.com (a statewide aggregation of print newspapers) or The Rapidian, a citizen-journalism project. Launched to great fanfare in late 2009, the Rapidian site today is infrequently refreshed and features content that seems geared more toward “press release” stories — that is, stories about non-profit events or minor cultural activities, and almost nothing in the way of genuine investigative reporting or traditional hard news.

The Rapidian’s content is not to be disparaged; the group’s stable of writers clearly is filling a need that they believe exists relative to The Grand Rapids Press, and more power to them for their dedication to their task.

Yet the Pew Project’s observations lead to an undoubtedly salient conclusion: As traditional newspapers decline in quality as their financial resources dry up, downstream media will correspondingly suffer. How many TV or radio reporters get their cues from the daily broadsheets? How many citizen journalists get their bearings from the print world? Exactly.

So we seem to be in a curious climate where emasculated daily newspapers compete with bloggers (who are often aspiring members of the commentariat instead of objective reporters), and citizen-media sites spring up with the goal of being an alternative source of hard news but end up being a catalog of periodically refreshed soft news.

One can indict the state of the infrastructure that has led to this outcome, but the challenge may not be with the media outlets as much as with the citizen journalists themselves.

A prominent J-School question: Is journalism a profession? The traditional professions — law, medicine, clergy — are largely self-regulated and adhere to a rigid internal code of ethics and practices. Unlike electricians or plumbers or even accountants, our doctors, lawyers and priests have a mission of substance to the community and it is the practitioners themselves and not government bureaucrats who determine the profession’s character and processes, including its judicial protocols.

Many capital-J journalists want journalism to be an accepted profession. The arguments pro et contra are myriad, but one conclusion seems inescapable. Unlike the traditional professions, with education and licensing barriers, anyone can be a journalist. Journalism isn’t about a mission — although many practitioners have a strong sense of one — but about work product.

I think the is-it-a-profession-or-not tension is what undercuts practical training in citizen media. Instead of providing aspiring public writers with a well-stocked toolkit of ideas and practices, many professional journalist-mentors focus on the softer side, of what it means to be a capital-J journalist with all its romance and mystery. So we train writers to think of themselves as part of a noble tradition of truth-tellers while conspicuously failing to impart the essential skills that make their efforts worth telling.

For that reason, a short primer on citizen journalism may be helpful. I developed a PowerPoint presentation in 2004, during the early days of my tenure as editor-in-chief of the Western Herald, to train off-the-street applicants the basics of being a staff writer. In those days, the Herald was a daily newspaper with an average daily circulation of 12,500, serving the Kalamazoo community. It was affiliated with Western Michigan University and it predominantly employed students, but the paper was published and governed by an independent board of directors that included a few faculty, administrators, students and community journalists. We were a non-lab, entirely self-funded paper,  printed under independent contract with the Battle Creek Enquirer (and not the university), with a mission to publish the news while training the next generation of beat reporters and columnists.

A Pulitzer-winning tenure at the Grey Lady, it was not. But serving as a Herald editor was a full-time job, with full-time responsibilities, and the lessons learned there (including from our competition with the Kalamazoo Gazette) provided a solid boots-on-the-ground instruction on the craft of public writing.

With that experience in mind, and in light of my own eyeballs-only content review of local media, I think there are some thoughts from that old PowerPoint that are worth carrying forward to a larger audience.

Jason’s Journalism Primer

  1. The media industry is generally profit driven. These profits are typically sourced from advertising, and in most commercial outlets, the content and quality of writing is an inducement for readers to buy the paper. The more people read the paper, the greater the circulation and hence the more that can be charged per column inch of advertising. For this reason, the “suits” push for sensational stories or gimmicks that will sell newspapers. It is not bad for profit to be a motive among media companies, and the push for “non-corporate media” is quaint but irrational. Without corporate advertising dollars, the independent media will cease to exist.
  2. Newspapers are hierarchical. Writers report to section editors who report to a series of managing, executive and chief editors. Small newsrooms may be collaborative and horizontal, but most larger, established bureaus are not. The media world has its bureaucracy like any other, and decisions about content are sometimes reflective of management-by-committee approaches that favor safety over innovation. New writers with the stars still in their eyes need to get over the romance and realize that journalism is a job — and even independent citizen-journalists have to deal with the administrative part of being a media figure.
  3. A writer’s best chance at distinguishing himself and making a genuine difference is to become a beat reporter. Beat writers are true content experts: They know the laws, the people, the histories, the processes of the subjects they cover. A crime-beat writer, for example, knows the desk sergeants at the police station, understands the basics of the criminal-prosecution process, grasps the issues around modern forensics, has the local prosecuting attorney on speed-dial, and maintains a solid personal file on high-profile cases and crime statistics. The idea of beat specialization is especially useful for citizen journalists; by becoming an acknowledged public expert on a subject (e.g., the city commission), a writer will gain in credibility and improve her access to the people and processes related to that subject. In media, being a master of one trade is preferable to being a jack of all others.
  4. Journalism is about access — to people, to data, to authority. Journalists should be skilled at cultivating relationships with people who have access, so that they themselves can use that access on behalf of the public good. Don’t be a fire-and-forget writer, who talks to a source once for one story and then erases that source from memory. Journalism is the ultimate industry where interpersonal networking is the chief criterion of success, and no reliance on Web portals or search engines can provide the critical access that is inherent in direct, person-to-person relationships over time with well-placed human sources. Not a social person? Then brush up on the professional networking literature. Journalism is the wrong pursuit for the anti-social.
  5. Track your beat. For this, RSS is your friend. There are enough blogs and news aggregators out there that even esoteric beats like creole cooking admit to dozens of potential daily feeds. Keep abreast of what’s going on. Contribute your own materials, through your own RSS feeds or by active participation in discussion groups or professional organizations.  Never stop gaining expertise.
  6. Archive, archive, archive. Keep everything. File every clipping, every interview note, every email, every audio recording, every image file. If, two years hence, a person mentioned in a story sues for libel, you must have all the materials that went into your work product. And never fork over your materials to police officers, either. Make them get a court order, every time. A source — especially a well-placed one — will have little confidence in a journalist who is seen to collaborate with authorities, and in some (rare) cases, its preferable to sit in jail on a contempt charge than to supply incriminating evidence to law-enforcement officials. And personal archives make research easier over time.
  7. Be completely honest. Attribute everything, be open to conflicting points of view, don’t advocate a “party line,” purge your writing of logical fallacies, and neverlie to an editor. Keep your quotes pure and unaltered, do not accept questionable assertions as fact, and do not provide a false sense of conflict (or lack thereof) by selectively emphasizing or de-emphasizing different perspectives on a story. Follow the basic principles of journalistic integrity advocated by The Associated Press.  If you want to be an advocate, be a community organizer, not a reporter.
  8. Remember the traditional news values:  Timeliness, currency, weirdness, conflict, proximity, personality, and relevance. Use these values to shape how a story is structured.  For example, a story with a high weirdness quotient can have fun and off-beat ledes, whereas a proximity story (e.g., the death of a local soldier overseas) could emphasize his community connections.
  9. Know and honor the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists.  Period.  End of discussion.  And check out Poynter for some interesting commentary on journalism ethics.
  10. Never accept money, gifts or preferential treatment in a capacity related to your experience as a journalist. Do not solicit benefits in exchange for favorable (or not unfavorable) treatment. If you have an unavoidable conflict of interest, disclose it unambiguously to your editors and reference it in the text of a story.  The perception of impropriety is often more damaging than the impropriety itself.
  11. Understand the state of media law with regard to libel, public access and fair reportage. The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Lawis an excellent introductory reference to the subject. No one should presume to be a journalist without having read at least the AP’s treatment on media law and its discussion of the Open Meetings Act, the Freedom of Information Act and laws about defamation.
  12. Conduct interviews properly. Be punctual, courteous, appropriately dressed and prepared. Document the conversation effectively and accurately — tape recorders are often helpful, but get the subject’s active consent before audio recording. Consent is required under many state wiretap laws; it is illegal in Michigan to make an audio recording of a phone call without disclosing the recording (which disclosure should, ideally, be recorded on the tape).
  13. Scrupulously honor “off the record” comments, but be wary of going OTR in general. If a source provides solid info OTR, ask if it can be used as unattributed source material, which is eligible for publication without a source identified if it can be independently corroborated. Grants of anonymity should be a last-resort option, undertaken with an editor’s advice and consent.
  14. Never give a source prior review over printed stories – feel free to offer to read back direct quotes, but never give a source the right to review the rest of the story before it goes to print.
  15. A good journalist will go to jail before giving up a source.
  16. Never use deception to get information. Although deceit is a valid method for gaining information, it is a very-last-resort tactic that should be considered with an editor and perhaps even a media lawyer present.
  17. Use good quotes. A good quote is easy to comprehend, provides fresh information, explains something directly that would be difficult to express indirectly, and enhances the news value of a story. Attribute every quote and every fact (except for “common knowledge” types of facts), and don’t get creative with language: the verb said is almost always sufficient and does not need to be replaced with litanies of explained and exclaimed and suggested and any other verbal tag that conveys, however slightly, an editorial slant. In general, more quotes equals better stories, and direct quotes are preferable to indirect quotes.
  18. The cardinal rule of facts: If it’s not documented, then it didn’t happen.
  19. The cardinal rule of fact-checking: If in doubt, leave it out.
  20. Consider the trustworthiness of sources and the origination of facts and statistics. Work done by advocacy groups, for example, may be useful but should never be considered as objectively authoritative. If Planned Parenthood sends a press release attesting that 200 abortions were performed in the city last year, don’t accept Planned Parenthood’s statistics as being true. A good journalist always understands the originalsource of a fact, and not merely who regurgitates (and often, interprets) it. So, demand that PP share its original data source. Was it a survey? Public-health documentation? Someone else’s press release? Much truth has been uncovered by journalists who looked past a fact or statistic to learn its original source. Don’t take the lazy way out by writing, “According to Planned Parenthood, ….”
  21. Triple-check statistics. It pays to have at least a basic understanding of mathematics, finance, statistics and related computational skills. Don’t just look at the source of information, check to see that math performed on those statistics makes sense. Many the journalist has been fooled because he didn’t understand concepts like margin of error or sample size.
  22. Put recalcitrant sources on the spot if they refuse to disclose information. Make them admit, on the record, that they are refusing to provide useful information, and challenge this refusal under relevant open-access laws. Don’t just take “no” as an answer.
  23. Craft solid stories. A news story should be as long as it needs to be, submitted in a timely manner, free of factual and syntactical error. A good story of any type will answer six core questions: Who, what, when, where, why, how, and why should I give a damn?
  24. Use the right story template.  There are several ways to structure a story. Hard news often uses an inverted pyramid — the story has a lede (first paragraph) that provides a quick synopsis in 35 words or so, followed by a nut graf that compliments the lede. Facts and information are shared in descending order of importance. A re-tread of a story may use a second-day lede, which fills in the reader on the major content of prior stories before adding new content. Many softer stories like personality profiles and news features follow some sort of logical sequencing of events within the story.  Bill Parks has a nice short summary of basic newswriting style worth looking at.
  25. Get the angle right. Most stories except hard-news briefs have an angle, or a focus point for defining the context of a story. For example, a story about a house fire might have a lede that focuses on the fact that the homeowner lost a collection of her deceased grandmother’s hand-made quilts — this fact humanizes and dramatizes the story, engaging the reader in a different way. There is a world of difference between a story that begins, “The fire department responded to a house fire in the 500 block of Main Street at 3:45 yesterday morning, according to Lt. Smith,” versus, “Although her house was totally destroyed in yesterday’s early-morning fire on the 500 block of Main Street, Susie Jones wept only for the loss of the antique quilt collection she inherited from her late grandmother.” Which lede catches you most strongly and pulls you into to the story? And make sure that the tone persists through the story; avoid leading with an anecdote like the quilt collection and then transitioning into straight news. Make sure the ending paragraph comes full circle: “But for Jones, rebuilding her house is the least of her worries. ‘I lost my last link to my grandmother, after that, everything else is just wood and iron and cloth,’ she said.”
  26. Craft solid ledes. Keep them short, concise, active and engaging. This is the hook to get readers interested — don’t belabor a trivial (and in context, obvious) point like, “Congressman Johnson conducted a town-hall meeting yesterday at the high-school gym.” Instead, write, “Citizens angry over a proposed tax hike grilled Congressman Johnson at a town-hall meeting yesterday.” Don’t lead with things like time or place or inflammatory adjectives or cliches. The passive voice should be avoided like the plague.
  27. Write with competence. Write at a sixth-grade level. Avoid complex sentences, stilted vocabulary, arcane cultural references, redundancies, one-source stories, spelling errors, passive constructions, and overt grammatical error. Short sentences with simple language are preferable to complex sentences with mellifluous phrases, because the goal is to present facts to the reader and not to show off the writer’s penchant for pedantry. Don’t let the medium of writing obscure the message of the story. This goes double-time for sports writers who use cliche like crack addicts use glass pipes.
  28. Opinion belongs in by-lined columns. It does not belong in a news story. News writers should strive to be neutral and fair at all times.
  29. Write solid reviews. When reviewing, don’t tell the staff that you’re a reviewer. Avoid turning a review into a mirror whereby the writer’s personal preferences are reflected upon the review’s subject, so that the review is little more than an exercise in ego. Never accept free admission or free products, and be moderate with both praise and criticism. Most reviews by subject type usually have a fairly well-defined internal structure — follow it. Don’t write a food review with a random sequencing of meal courses, for example, and don’t file a film review without mentioning the cinematography and soundtrack.
  30. News analysis is not opinion, but rather an attempt to explain the history or complexity of a subject to answer the question of “what does this mean” on behalf of the readers. A news analysis has more latitude to project impacts or trends than a straight news story might.
  31. Not everyone can be a good opinion columnist. Columns are about advancing an idea or opinion, not about axe-grinding. A good columnist never uses the word “I.” She finds recourse in logic and fact to advance an opinion into the public space; she does not play fast-and-loose with facts to make a point, or demean or belittle others in print. Respectable opinion writing is very difficult for those writers who strongly associate with the poles of political thought, because they tend to hammer a small subset of subjects with a winner-take-all mentality that does little, in the long run, to advance reasoned public discourse.
  32. Respect human differences. There is generally no reason to refer to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, partisan identification, or other identifiers unless they are germane to the story.
  33. Know thyAP Stylebook and keep it holy. The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law is a central resource for writers; it contains points of usage and punctuation that a word processor will never flag. A writer lacking a dog-eared copy of the AP Stylebook is, umm ….
  34. Social media is not journalism.

Thirty-four suggestions to help guide aspiring citizen journalists better understand the craft and practices of a the media world. Anyone have any other observations to add?

Next-Generation Web Search

The problem with Web searches is that they are Web searches — humble explorers can explore for key terms or concepts, but sorting and limiting by associated metadata is all-but-hopeless, and even the special terms people can use to narrow a search are not especially useful.

I was frustrated this morning whilst seeking information about battery-powered generators, to support an article I’m writing on emergency generation systems. The challenge is that, thanks to the awesome power of SEM/SEO, commercial sites hit the top of the site rankings charts. Useful sites (that is, non-commercial ones that aren’t blacklisted by my contract client), get lost in a sea of sales materials and poorly written articles intended to drive up AdSense revenue.

Current desktop-search features allow us to find files or substrings after limiting our selection criteria in dozens of possible ways. I can find a file that was modified within the last three weeks and is less than 25K in size and which was sent to me as an email attachment — all with no problem.

So why not something similar with the Web?

Yes, I know that the Web does not have handy sort points. There is no universally accepted META tag for “I’m a business site pretending to provide useful information so you will click through to me and maybe buy my product.” I get that. But with the powerful algorithms governing search nowadays, it seems that the major search providers (Google, Yahoo, Bing) could do something by way of multi-level/metadata searching.  I’ll gladly settle for 80 percent of a loaf.

Here’s a thought: Harness the oomph of Google and Microsoft to force a revision of the HTTP protocol to include a handful of volunary, basic, standard, indexed search parameters that get embedded in the META tags. To reduce manipulation, searchers could vote on how well a particular site conformed to the expected results of the search, with low rankings subject to downranking in the search engine, or even outright blacklisting.

In short, I want to partially bypass search for author-supplied tags or keywords and instead refine my search according to characteristics about the authors themselves.

The first engine that can crack metasearch, has (in this humble author) a dedicated user for life.

October Omnibus

Only 10 weeks or so left in 2009.  Wow.

An omnibus update:

  1. I recently finished Tom Holland’s Rubicon, a book detailing the final decades of the Roman Republic.  It was a fascinating read, made more interesting by his core thesis — that, essentially, the competitiveness of the ruling Roman families lost its constitutional check when the masses could be transparently bought off with bread and circuses.  Some argue that contemporary America is going the way of Rome. Maybe, or maybe not; in any case, Holland’s book provides some insight into human nature that endures across millennia and cultures.
  2. Jason’s must-have Blackberry apps:  Google Voice, BeeJive(a multiprotocol IM client), iheartradio, BuzzOff (a rules-based call blocker), Sprint Navigation (GPS), Bank of America, and Poynt.
  3. Jason’s must-have desktop apps:  GoodSync (file sync utility), Digsby (multiprotocol IM), TweetDeck, UltraEdit 32 (text editor), FileZilla (FTP), IrfanView (image viewer and light editor), WinRAR (archiver), and Bob Dancer’s WinPoker.  Of course, CS4 and Office 2007 are included; without InDesign and Outlook, I’m useless.
  4. Speaking of applications, I recently installed my free-from-Microsoft copy of Windows 7Ultimate.  I love this OS.  It’s Vista done right, and I’ve had no problems whatsoever.  It just works, and some of the tools (like the taskbar enhancements and better search) are already priceless.
  5. The workfront has been interesting.  There has been a lot of transition at the hospital, with people switching uplines and cost centers at a dizzying pace.  Not sure how all of this will shake out yet.
  6. However, Gillikin Consulting is going gangbusters.  I have a solid long-term contract-writing assignment with Demand Studios — I essentially write as much as I can, and DS will rebrand and resell it to commercial sites (e.g., eHow.com).  The cool thing:  I already have enough contract work to more-than-replace my hospital salary.
  7. Duane moved out last week.  He stayed with me for about three weeks, and now he’s living off of Knapp on the NE side.  He is adjusting well to his new position at the hospital.  Hooray!
  8. Duane did mention that November is some sort of national write-a-novel month.  In 30 days, write 50,000 words.  Maybe next year?
  9. I was accepted into Grand Rapids Community College as a “lifelong learner.”  Why?  I think I may take a C++ class in January. 
  10. The most addictive game ever, besides World of Warcraft:  Farmville on Facebook.  Eat my grapes, biotch.
  11. Biometric screening results for 2009 are in … I’m still doing pretty good.  Some values are creeping back up to “borderline” again, but it’s a problem with an easy fix.  Reduce stress, exercise more, eat healthier.  Simple.
  12. ArtPrize has come and gone in Grand Rapids.  This event offered a unique insight into art — as a creative endeavor, and as a business.  The art spanned the range from traditional to “look ma, no hands” and some artists proved better self-promoters than others.  In any case, this was a benefit to Grand Rapids and I hope it endures long into the future.
  13. The Rapidian, an experiment in community hyper-local journalism, seems to be faltering.  I had hopes but doubts about this, and looking at the Rapidian’s Web site, I see that my suspicions were confirmed — journalism is harder than it looks, and entrusting it to unpaid volunteers unschooled in the basics is not a recipe for success.  The articles appearing in the Rapidian right now tend toward opinion; there is almost nothing on entire categories of news, despite the “beta” being live for nearly a month.  Yet as experiments go, this one was instructive — although it’s an open question whether the key learnings will be accepted for what they are.

All for now.

Day of Labor

The Labor Day holiday weekend is upon us once again. The stark contrast between 2009 and 2008 is remarkable; unlike the wild social extravaganza of last year, this weekend promises a high degree of quiet and … well, labor.

I intend to continue with my writing as much as I can. I hope to get out a little, perhaps on Saturday, but that remains to be seen. It is as if a switched has flipped, and the old pattern of well-intentioned procrastination has yielded to a sense of “git-r-done” driven in large part by an ongoing frustration with how long it has taken me to finally get to this point, where I am just starting to realize income off my business efforts.

In any case, yes. A weekend at labor. But a good kind — the efforts that pay back in terms of goal accomplishment and a feeling of self-worth. It has been a long time coming, but Gillikin Consulting is finally real.

A Better Tomorrow

I’ve been working my tail off on my business-development work lately, in an attempt to substantially augment my meager hospital salary with some home-grown work product.  Highlights of my recent activities include —

  • Finishing a substantial overhaul to gillikinconsulting.com, including adding business-specific social-media connections (realtime IM, new Twitter, Facebook business fan page).
  • Updated my LinkedIn profile and joined a ton of affinity groups.
  • Became a (paid) contributer for Demand Studios.
  • Agreed to a (volunteer) edit job for the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Set up a PayPal account for accepting client payments, and applied for a DUNS number to facilitate commercial credit.
  • Accepted a personal client.
  • Did a thorough under-the-hood site update for Anthony M. Snyder and Associates.
  • Joined Guru and Elance, a pair of clearinghouse sites for freelance contractors.
  • Forwarded my resume and clips to the new editor of The Grand Rapids Press, for freelance writing assignments.

Things are looking good.  There’s just a handful of things left to finish.

End of an Institution

The Western Herald, the independent student-run newspaper at Western Michigan University (and the paper I used to edit), announced that this fall, it is moving from a Monday-to-Thursday publication week to a Monday and Thursday cycle, with an new emphasis on the paper’s Web portal.

This is a depressing turn of events.  The Herald had a twofold purpose — to provide daily news and commentary to the university committee (a task fulfilled by the ubiquituous and free press boxes scattered around campus and in many off-campus locations), and to serve as a learning lab for the hundreds of students who worked with and for the newspaper through the course of an academic year.

In my day, the Herald was independent, managed by a board of directors and free of university control.  Its funding was 100 percent derived from advertising revenue, and the editor in chief — always a student — enjoyed absolute editorial control over the newspaper.

Now, it appears that a university employee, the general manager, has a greater role over the editorial division.  As the pressure of producing daily papers wanes, so also does the discipline of print journalism.

Web portals are fine in their way, but the mindshare of the university community will inevitably move away from the Herald.  This is a shame, and a reason for sadness.

Full Steam Ahead

I was off work on Friday so I ended up making arrangements to meet with Tony for dinner.  I hadn’t seen him in perhaps six weeks or so, and in the meantime, he and Jen went to Las Vegas, so we had plenty to catch up on.

The fun thing about the evening — apart from a delicious Tex-Mex feast at Cantina that was followed by dessert at Barnes and Noble Cafe — was that we zeroed in on business development as the core subject of discussion.  His law practice has been underwhelmed with clients lately, mostly because he’s slacked a bit in recruiting new ones.  My own business has been slow, as well: I’ve got the infrastructure laid but haven’t had the fire in the belly to take off.

That changed Thursday afternoon, after a particularly unpleasant meeting at my day job.  It reinforced my desire to chart a new course, so I’ve done more in the last 72 hours to grow Gillikin Consulting Group than I had done in the prior 18 months combined:

  1. I opened a commercial checking account.
  2. I revised my toll-free voice mail greetings and sorted through my email server.
  3. I completely revised GCG’s Web site and added three additional (backdated) blog posts.
  4. I verified the status of my LLC paperwork with Michigan’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.
  5. Applied to be a (paid) guide for About.com and a volunteer editor for Red County.
  6. Sent a query email to do freelance writing for China Daily USA (the only decent freelancer assignment on journalismjobs.com).
  7. Developed a to-do list for what needs to happen next.

There is plenty to keep moving on.  My next goal, for today and tomorrow, is to sit down at Starbucks and completely revise my marketing materials, including my trifolds and my rate card.  I also want to start sending query letters using my trust copy of the 2009 Writer’s Market.

I haven’t been this motivated to get the job done since the March-to-May period last spring, after I had opened my Logan Street office.

Time to roll up my sleeves and get serious.

Still Standing

I am still here.  Haven’t done a lot of blogging lately, mostly becuase my attention is being paid to Ryan, and Jess, and doing a lot of offline writing.  Yes, I have started my memoirs.  Yes, I know what that sounds like.  I’m about 7,000 words into a planned 60,000, and I’m finding the writing to be a relaxing and easy experience so far.  Updates to follow.

Diction

More than once, I’ve been taken to task about my language.  It’s been suggested to me that my word choices leave people confused, or that my sentence structures — even in plain speech — are “too smart.”  That is, uniformly condescending to my listeners.

I just browsed some of my writing from my early undergrad days, and I was astonished at how plain it was.  Short sentences.  General-reference errors.  Common words.  What happened?

Two things, I think.  The first was in-depth training in a foreign language.  Having minored in Latin — including 10 hours at the graduate level — I was exposed to all aspects of formal grammar, even things that are obscure even to professional grammarians.  I was also required to write Latin using all three dominant historical styles of that language:  the simplicity of the early and middle Republic, the rich complexity of the early Imperial period, the inconsistency and orthographic chaos of the early medieval era.

Today, English speakers increasingly resort to relatively short sentences with a simple subject-verb-object grammatical structure.  More and more, even native speakers rely on a small, common vocabulary, drawing on auxiliary parts of speech (including prepositional phrases and appositives) to flesh out meaning.  It wasn’t always like this, of course; a reading of 18th-century prose, for example, will numb the mind with its serpentine sentences and obscure words and incredible density of ideas-per-column-inch that leaves contemporary readers perplexed.

Languages evolve over time, and my exposure to the varied dominant styles of Latin over 1,500 years of evolution undeniably impacted how I speak and write. 

The other influencer was newspaper writing.  For years, I had to churn out a fully reasoned and entirely self-contained editorial using a fixed number of column inches (usually, equivalent to about 600 words).  And at least once per week, I had to write an on-demand bylined opinion column of varying length to fit the space left at the last moment by less-than-reliable staff columnists.  Sounds easy … until you try it.

With blogging, there’s no word-count limit on post lengths.  There’s no requirement to use tight, concise prose.  No challenge to use the right word in the right context, even when the word selected isn’t especially common.  No points are awarded for an elegant turn of phrase or finely balanced complex construction.

Some habits die hard.  Circumstances forced my language patterns to change and my vocabulary to expand, and I’ve had to use thee new attributes to be successful.  When I use “big words” or speak in semicolons, it’s not to insult others or to appear smart.  It’s no more and no less than a function of experience, and I can’t not use the right word in the right setting than a bodybuilder can simply refuse to use 80 percent of his biceps when helping neighbors to move.

And I’m not sure that I’d want to.  There’s so much richness that comes from delving into the mechanics of language, from mining the vocabulary of meaning, that to simply stop would feel almost criminal.

Perizoma

Perizoma.  It is a Latin word with an origin in Greek; it means “loincloth.”  In classical times, the term was used sparingly; there are not too terribly many documented uses of it in the Patrologia Latina.  Yet the word has a fascinating history.

In Jerome’s Vulgate, perizoma is used twice: once to refer to the garment that Adam tied around his waist after he ate from the Tree of Knowledge, and once to refer to the garment worn by Christ upon the Cross.  Within the Christian tradition, and with great rhetorical beauty and sensitivity to the Christological implications of the Fall, Jerome created — by word choice alone — a strong and enduring link between the fall of Man and Man’s salvation.

Because of Jerome, perizoma acquired an almost exclusively theological connotation; in fact, there are perhaps only two attested uses of the word in a non-religious setting after the Vulgate was widely circulated. 

I thought about perizoma yesterday as I reflected on a conversation with Becca.  I had met her at a restaurant a week ago to review the presentation on Beaumarchais that she was to deliver at a conference last Saturday.  At one point, we had a sideline conversation about the degree to which the language and plot structures he used in The Marriage of Figaro reflected feminist themes.

What struck me about the whole idea of identifying proto-feminist thought in an 18th-century play wasn’t anything defective in Becca’s thesis, per se, but in the entirely natural assumption we all share, in using contemporary concepts applied without revision to past events.  Historiographers call this the historical fallacy, and with good reason:  Ideas evolve over time, and judging the past from the perspective of the present is unfair to the past and prejudicial in the present’s favor.

The historical fallacy is significant because, in linguistic terms, perizoma switched connotation so rapidly.  A word that meant one thing, a mere half-century later, really came to mean something else entirely.  Yet the radical language shift that occurred after Jerome may well be happening more frequently, before our very eyes.

One of my favorite anecdotes, pace George Will, is of a harried British commander working the evacuation at Dunkirk.  Pressed for time, he signaled just three simple words to the Admiralty:  “If be not.”  He knew that the message — which was a psalm reference — would be immediately and clearly understood, and would communicate more than a detailed situation report ever could.

Today, our pool of shared meaning seems to have something of an algae problem.  References to scriptural passages, to Shakespeare, even to art film or the classics, are likely to be understood by a rare minority.  Pop culture isn’t universally followed, either, so it’s entirely possible that two American citizens could have radically different understandings of the world, with almost no appreciable overlap in content.

Even our words have changed, and rapidly.  Neologisms aside, old standbys switch with breathtaking speed.  Niggardly is out; the first two syllables condemn that word to the ash-heap of usage.  Liberal is a swear word for many who once bore it proudly.  Queer went from being a term of disparagement to a technical term within the academy, to being embraced by the very people against whom it was considered an epithet.

Read any random newspaper issue from 1955.  Words like conservative are used as slurs, and negro is considered utterly neutral.  Today, neither understanding holds.

Words didn’t used to change connotation or even denotation, this quickly.  Perizoma is worthy of study precisely because it is something of an odd duck.  That the phenomenon of radical connotative shift is truckin’ along today is not insignificant, nor are the related and proliferating opportunities for historical fallacies.