Out of curiosity, I searched for poorly written articles to see if I could pick out why they have been deemed with such a negative connotation. I read one in particular that made me cringe. ABC News produced an article on January 29th of 2012 addressing the investigation of a woman's death by strangulation and named the husband as a person of interest. Immediately, the unclear antecedents in the first sentence made it seem as if the murdered woman was the main suspect in her death. The article lacked proper transitions and did not flow. Instead, choppy, garbled sentences made it rather unenjoyable to read and even worse to listen to.
Let's view an example. "Police investigators from Detroit, where Jane Bashara's body was found, and Grosse Point Park, where she and her husband lived, are collaborating on the investigation and searched the family's home Friday night, seizing computer hard drives, taking photographs and leading search dogs through to sniff for evidence." The sentence is riddled with poorly placed facts and almost leaves a sour taste in one's mouth as it is read. It is in dire need of being broken up to form a sensible, comprehendible sentence. For instance, it could have read, "Police investigators from Detroit and Grosse Pointe Park collaborated on the investigation and searched the family's home Friday night to further their insight on the matter. They seized computer hard drives, took keen photographs, and lead search dogs through to sniff for evidence." This gives it a more active voice as opposed to the passive voice prior to the edit. The information on the crime scene sight and where the couple's home did not belong in the sentence and belonged in another separate sentence in a preliminary paragraph. The following sentences are no better as the syntax is awkward, and facts that have no relation to each other are jumbled into one sentence. An example would include the very frustrating sentence about the husband having an SUV license plate that reads "Big Bobb" and a "logical" leap to how he is involved in charities. Overall, the article has no sense of sequential order, no necessary transitions into separate topics, and no consistency whatsoever. There were many other errors as well, but the article was so terrible that editing and critiquing it proved difficult. Never have I read something more redundant, sporadic, or befuddling as this article. I believe it is safe to say that it is the equivalent writing level of a sophomore in high school, and that is generous. Several other people took to the comments to reveal their opinions on the piece and how egrigious some of the errors were, such as the misspelled city of Grosse Pointe Park.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMy name is Shayla, and I am a senior in high school. I enjoy traveling, sports, and writing. Archives
May 2017
Categories |