This past Friday's edition of the Life section of USA Today had a multitude of errors and it was just plain bad!
Front Page:
Sidebar: The first sidebar tidbit is about baby Prince George & nanny, have been followed by a stranger, and how the family is taking legal action. The writer has "quotations" in the middle of a paraphrased sentence from someone of the royal family, i.e. Kate, William, Harry, the Queen? We do not know who said them. The quotations should be properly separated and not mixed in with paraphrased sentences and should be properly attributed.
Sidebar: The second tidbit is about Ellen Pompeo welcoming a baby girl via surrogate. The first sentence is too wordy, it should be edited so the reader doesn't have to re-read it to understand it. For example: Ellen Pompeo, of Grey's Anatomy, and husband, Chris Ivery, welcomed a baby daughter... etc.
Sidebar: The final tidbit is about Nicole Kidman's outfit at an event. First, the event title is treated as if everyone knows what it is, when in fact we don't. There should be an explanation of the award. Second, who cares what she wore? Did she win anything? Why was she attending anyways? It has something about a "Butterfly" launch, upon research it was a launch of a new jewelry/watch piece. Again, why do I care about what she wore? Why was she there anyways?
Main Story: The main story has many flaws with it. The lede is poorly written, suggesting that the film, Men, Women, & Children, is going to hit people. This is a no no, especially to Professor Morris. Also, the lede lists the actual children of the performers in the film and their ages and are listed in parenthesis. It seems awkward and confusing, the children listing should be moved elsewhere in the story. The writer also inputs opinion in the story, which interviews the film's performers about the film and about their say on today's digitized lifestyle. The quotes are not properly attributed. And as with the sidebars, the writer has "quotations" in the middle of a paraphrased sentence from the cast. It is confusing to read. I actually had to read the story a few more times to understand what it was about and who said what. The story is a good starting point, but needs more emphasis and quotes from the cast.
Secondary story: Netflix stream gets deeper as Sandler signs. Boy, what a headline! REWRITE! Sheesh, if a headline is going to be caddy, cliche, etc. it should at least say that Sandler dives in, etc. This story was not bad overall, just the quotations, again, being mixed into paraphrased sentences and are not properly attributed, and they have "says" instead of "said." The last few quotations of the story have no attribution whatsoever, so the reader has no idea who has said them.
The layout of the front page is normal for the USA Today, however they're is a bit more of white space, especially on the lower half of the page. The fonts of the headline on the lower half should be bigger, or the subhead should read across right under the main headline, and the photo of Sandler and Netflix logo should be moved all the way to the last column and not separate the story up.
The Rest of the Paper:
Pretty basic and usual, just like all the previous editions critiqued on the blog. Quotes are the biggest issue, they are choppy, not properly attributed, and some should have not been used at all. The film reviews are normal as well, filled with cliches and some spoilers. If you're doing a review, try not to list spoilers or the film scene by scene. Give an overall understanding/review for the reader, and let them decide to go see it and judge for themselves. The Travel, two-page spread, is typical. It is very descriptive and cliches are listed throughout the thing, however, this was probably the most interesting piece to read and had few errors. The last two pages have television tidbits and previews, which like the Travel spread, was one of the more interesting pieces to read and had few errors.
The critiques are getting easier to do, and are getting harsher. Be prepared for next weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment