One of these days I'm going to learn to write short ... Well, probably not. I do try to chop at least 20 percent once I've finished. Sometimes I post an article ... and then keep chopping away. I once read a biography of Clint Eastwood. The author said Eastwood would get a script and then immediately start drawing lines through 70 percent of the narrative and speaking parts. So Clint got it. It seems to have worked for him in his career.
BTW, when you roll your eyes after reading one of my lengthy articles, just consider that the version you read IS the edited and condensed version!
The phrase "awful lot of things" is an informal expression used to indicate a large or significant quantity of items or ideas. The word "awful" in this context does not imply a negative or unpleasant meaning but rather emphasizes the extent or magnitude of the quantity. It is similar to saying "a whole lot of things" or "a great number of things."
For example, if someone says, "I have an awful lot of things to do today," they are emphasizing that they have a substantial number of tasks or responsibilities to handle. It conveys a sense of being overwhelmed or having a significant amount of work ahead.
In general, the phrase is used to emphasize the quantity or extent of something without necessarily indicating a negative connotation.
Thanks. Then ‘informal’ means ignoring the connotation of a root word thus allowing for its use outside of its rightful meaning. Evidently our education system stopped providing root word analysis for the last 60 year. Ergo anxious (nervous) means eager; incredible (inconceivable) means astonishing. Our obliging dictionaries go with the flow - changing meanings to ‘catch-up’ with society’s misuse. At least they do not do it in the reverse, that is, eager means anxious; astonishing means incredible.
"Here is a partial list of attributions: Mark Twain, George Bernard Shaw, Voltaire, Blaise Pascal, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Winston Churchill, Pliny the Younger, Cato, Cicero, Bill Clinton, and Benjamin Franklin.
"The first known instance in the English language was a sentence translated from a text written by the French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal. ... [It] appeared in a letter in a collection called “Lettres Provinciales” in the year 1657."
At the end of the day (to use a hack's cliche), it doesn't really matter who is credited, especially when the candidates are long dead, save for "Bubba" Bill, which is a real reach. It's the value of the aphorism that counts.
I write legal briefs, often too wordy, for the court's consideration. ("Brief" being the wrong word, but that is what they are called.) One day, a judge rolled up my 15 page brief into a "telescope", put it up to his right eye and said, "Well, Mr. [Attorney}, I have looked through your brief...."
I was an undercover (Anti-Crime) cop in da Bronx in the 80's. An arrest oriented slot. I was in court A L O T: Grand Jury, judge trial, jury trial whatever.
This was during the era when Wolfe was serializing Bonfire Of The Vanities in Rolling Stone. (Yeah, be a cop who reads RS...and The Voice...lol...got lots of heat in the squad room back then!)
In his novel, he had a character of a hard ass Bronx Supreme Court judge (in the movie it was Morgan Freeman) . I saw a SHITLOAD of guys like him.
Equal opportunity ragers: didn't matter if it was the prosecutor or the defense, they mocked em all when they were unprepared or droney.
"You DID go to Law School, right, counselor?" was one of the best. Sorry, but it's 40 years ago and there's been a lot of water under the bridge, I can't remember more of that exchange.
Most judges are good writers and editors, at least back in the day when writing (rather than politics) was a key determinant of whether one advanced to the bench.
As one in the sunset of a 40+ year career as a writer/editor/publisher, my favorite rule has always been: "Challenge Every Word." The hope is that by doing so, you may not have to cut 20% in subsequent passes. Note this is easier to do with the type of business writing I've done the past 20+ years, and harder to do when writing news copy, as Matt usually does.
"Challenge Every Word" doesn't refer just to word count, but also (and maybe even more so) to accuracy, and I used to tell my writers to challenge every word because you can be certain that I'll be doing that behind you... and that readers will be doing it behind both of us.
I would further submit that most of us, including Matt, are here because we Challenge Every Word. Matt (and Walter, and Bari, etc.) ultimately fled formerly respectable news organizations because those organizations replaced accuracy challenges with political litmus challenges, and we subscribe to Matt & Bari & the like for the same reason.
I once asked a judge if it made him nervous putting away a notorious drug dealer. He replied, rather nonchalantly, “When he gets out, he’ll have to stomp on my grave”
Thanks Matt I tried the short stuff once on the advice of a Pulitzer prize winner. (yes that blew my mind) ITS freaking hard. This practical advice will be followed at Dixieland, going forward. Cheers
Strong verbs. Re-write sentences starting with "There are ..." Be more specific with your pronouns. It took me a couple of decades, but I think I finally learned the difference between active and passive voice (and that the former is the prettier voice) .... I wish I had a dollar for every article that included five paragraphs of flowery introductory text where I later said, "I don't need any of that ... Just start here."
I'll share this pro-tip. When I delete paragraphs, I put them at the bottom of the document under a header I call "deleted text." If I really like some of my deleted text, I later add that text into the Reader Comments. This also makes it look like I got more Reader Comments.
That’s great stuff. The 5 paragraph intro is so true. Easily my biggest issue, whether it’s writing or producing -- and this is another thing Steve once said to me: “You don’t need to start with the goddamned Big Bang and then work from there.”
And "don't bury the lede." Highlight the importance of your best or most important point.
Many journalists I disagree with sometimes include information far down the story that refutes the central premise of the article.
I once produced some real investigative journalism about a new school system that went "all in" on (my opinion) radical education "reforms." I also presented evidence the superintendent who gave our town this type educational system was a brazen bully.
I had to find some little-known monthly conservative commentary newspaper that would publish my series of articles. I kept asking for help from the big daily newspaper (The Montgomery Advertiser), but this newspaper wasn't interested in this story. In fact, after my articles were published and created a major stir, The Advertiser belatedly decided to address the points I made. Basically, the newspaper's journalist said, "There's nothing here. We trust this superintendent. That guy writing for the obscure newspaper was clueless and unfair, etc."
The "rebuttal" piece was very long. About 20 paragraphs down, the author included one telling quote from a teacher who said that the first months of being a teacher in this new school system "were like a medieval plague had hit us."
See? Nothing to see here. All that happened was a medieval plague swept through this school system.
So pay attention to the buried quote that's actually important. I use the same thought process when combing through Reader Comments. The person who goes against the grain of the posting board and his comment doesn't generate hardly any "likes" is ... probably onto something important.
The NYT is the master at headline, followed by ten paragraphs of setup and opinion hoping no one reads the 11th paragraph that says the ultra-expensive drapes at issue were already in the office suite when Nikki Haley got there [or whoever it was slamming at the time].
Thank you for this John. I actually remember him giving that interview. It was my first year at Films. You’d hear his voice down the hall and he sounded exactly like he did on NFL Films Presents.
He was one of the few men I’ve ever known who wanted the most talented people around him and didn’t try to exploit them. Almost every coach I played for was the same way, and I can think of a fair number of commanding officers, but I can’t think of any other executive producers. Not one.
Leaving Films was like leaving the Garden of Eden.
Does any Substack author actually have an editor to read his or her copy before we hit the "send" button? I blame my Substack partner Annie (a corgi-terrier mix) for missing all my typos and grammatically incorrect sentences.
When I disclosed that Annie was my writing partner, I called her a "corkie-terrier mix." Annie missed this mistake. The damn dog/editor didn't even know what type of dog she is.
And then they all jump out at you. And not just one. I correct them as fast as I can, but then I realized everyone who got my original email doesn't see the edits.
Still, it's easier than when I was a print journalist, pre Internet. Once you made those mistakes, they were there forever. Eventually, I learned to follow this rule (to protect my sanity): Never read your own stories once they've been published.
My rule #1 is “Everyone needs an editor.” If none is available then realize that at least a third of what we write is out of fear of embarrassment or not being understood. I start with cutting adjectives, adverbs, and articles. I’m always amazed at the clarity that results.
Totally agree. Plus, it is really hard to edit ones own work because you read what you wanted to say, not necessarily whaat is on the paper (or screen).
“this whole brevity thing” was initially what drew me to twitter b/c the character-limit forces you to cut/edit/re-phrase until you have a distilled thought that’s ready to share.
and the corollary to this is that you never really know what you think until you’ve written through it.
Personally, I preferred Facebook because you could develop a thesis with your posts. Some of these topics are on the complex side and key points can't be summarized or debunked in a couple of sentences. But Facebook's "content moderators" or AI made sure I couldn't even make any 500-word posts.
I think censorship at Facebook is far more important than most people realize. True, it's key demographic is mothers and grandmothers or just "every-day, town square types." But this is actually the group that we have to reach to change or challenge some false or dubious narratives. Plenty of posters on Facebook were/are smart and had something worthwhile to say about trends in society. Absent censorship, any of their posts could have "gone viral" and been widely shared. But this didn't happen because of the brazen censorship and algorithms. The remaining Facebook users also learned to "self censor." That is, they quickly learned the topics to avoid. Basically, no one could challenge "The Current Thing" ... or if you did challenge it, you were effectively done on Facebook.
And Facebook has probably billions of followers. I always thought you should "fish where the fish are" ... so I kept posting on Facebook .... because that's where the people I thought I might be able to influence were hanging out. But "dissident" voices like my own were soon silenced.
There's a postscript to this sob story. My "work-around" to Facebook censorship was to start my own Substack Newsletter. Today, in just seven months, I have almost 4,000 subscribers and my articles have been read by more than 600,000 people. I've been a journalist for decades and I've never reached more people ... So thank you, Mr. Zuckerberg.
Facebook seems to be shooting itself in the foot as well as leaning out. Here we are facing potential nuclear engagement and I want to see….cat videos.
That's why people are afraid of getting sideways with Facebook. If they say what they really think about Covid mandates or "Russia! Russia! Russia!" ... they'll lose their privileges to post those cute cat and dog videos.
I used to write on WordPress. I found that I'd write the draft on MSWord then transfer it over. I felt it was cumbersome. When I began on Substack in January of last year, I decided to write what I wanted to write about and at the length that I wanted. So, I found myself at first writing between 1500 and 3000. Then some of the post became longer. What also happened was more people were reading because they found it easier to find me. As a result, I ended up producing over 200,000 words last year. It paved the way for me to begin a podcast which is posted there too. I find the writing platform perfect because it doesn't allow for too much flourishing of the design.
That was what writing scripts was like. There’s a nine second hole. You need to say this, this, this, and this, and also transition the line into the next shot. Brevity matters. It can be done; and in another lifetime I earned five Emmy Awards doing it; but I struggle with “regular writing” now. I worry that I’m not writing enough.
Radio detective shows took 30 minutes, TV 60-90 minutes, Movies 90-180 minutes. Same basic plot. Script writing, journalism, essay, etc are constrained by their medium.
One observation regarding what passes for a lot of writing today is hardly anyone proofreads. The mistakes I see daily in my local paper are sometimes amusing, but also distressing. I guess it’s just another indication of societal decline. Quality is becoming a rare commodity.
Yes, write about something that interests you. As Jim Rome says 20 times every day in his talk show, try to have an ORIGINAL take.
One reason Substack is taking off is because so many topics are off limits in "professional" newsrooms. This means it's easy to come up with original or neglected stories.
In reading pre sections of a pending book online last year about the Great Reset, each section by well-known literary greats, one comment was a lack of great novels like Magic Mountain (which was referenced on the website). Ah, I read that book. Pulled it from the shelf and found my book marker at page 37. Hmmm – skimmed a few pages and remember. I had yet to determine who the main was, why he and two newly found ‘friends’ were even in the sanitarium to start with and I could not pronounce any of the many-syllabled, no vowel, last names. Good read - NOT.
Can this post be shortened? And please don't say just delete it.
I remember Stephen King talking about this very issue years ago in both interviews, and his book on the writing process. I'm always embarrassed when I go back after a day or two away, and find that much of what I've written, and thought was good, was utter dribble and full of self-aggrandizing pulp. That's when I bring in the hatchet...
Didn’t Stephen King recommend : Just sit down and keep writing the first draft saying whatever comes to mind as much as you want the first go round. Walk away. Let it sit. When you come back start to edit, then again .... another draft and another and so on?
Yes, but I was referring to his earlier work being rejected by editors for being too wordy when he was first starting out. And yes, the idea is to write, let it sit, then revise—rinse and repeat.
E.B. White's Cornell English prof originally wrote it for his students and White edited it for general publication. It's outstanding, and reducing word count is rule #1 there as well. Our 10th Grade English class used it and I still remember the painful sessions where we had to reduce word count by 50%. Ouch!
As an editor for 30 years (for newspapers and nonfiction books), I strongly agree with this first rule. Good editors (and there are plenty of bad ones, especially in journalism) know that being concise in language makes it more persuasive. I like to call it "letting the air out of the text."
Hilariously TRUE! It parallels some advice I got from a dissertation advisor...he told me first drafts are always like a bad pitch, "too much wind up and not enough delivery."
Great advice. As Voltaire put it, "I would have made it shorter, but I didn't have the time."
One of these days I'm going to learn to write short ... Well, probably not. I do try to chop at least 20 percent once I've finished. Sometimes I post an article ... and then keep chopping away. I once read a biography of Clint Eastwood. The author said Eastwood would get a script and then immediately start drawing lines through 70 percent of the narrative and speaking parts. So Clint got it. It seems to have worked for him in his career.
BTW, when you roll your eyes after reading one of my lengthy articles, just consider that the version you read IS the edited and condensed version!
"One of these days I'm going to learn to write short."
______
I will tighten my writing.
I tried it once and it was hard. Like very hard. But I was and still are new to writing. Matts advice is on point.https://open.substack.com/pub/dixieland/p/the-rolling-stones-and-the-end-of?r=7qecb&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Here's my latest piece (On Desantis's presidential bid). It came in at 1,464 words. Probably too many, but the first draft was 2,100!
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/powerful-people-and-organizations
Thank God for word processing and the "edit comment" function.
"Voltaire" seems to have said an awful lot of things.
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/28/shorter-letter/
As Lord Muck just found out after quoting a spurious "Voltaire" quote actually made by a pedophile neo-Nazi.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/05/27/elon-musk-shares-fake-voltaire-quote-actually-from-neo-nazi/?sh=54d831035ea7
Regardless, iconic dead people have a habit of plagiarizing each other.
What is meant by "awful" lot of things? Does it many bad things or to many things? Just curious...
I asked chat your question
The phrase "awful lot of things" is an informal expression used to indicate a large or significant quantity of items or ideas. The word "awful" in this context does not imply a negative or unpleasant meaning but rather emphasizes the extent or magnitude of the quantity. It is similar to saying "a whole lot of things" or "a great number of things."
For example, if someone says, "I have an awful lot of things to do today," they are emphasizing that they have a substantial number of tasks or responsibilities to handle. It conveys a sense of being overwhelmed or having a significant amount of work ahead.
In general, the phrase is used to emphasize the quantity or extent of something without necessarily indicating a negative connotation.
Awfully good comment there.
Thanks. Then ‘informal’ means ignoring the connotation of a root word thus allowing for its use outside of its rightful meaning. Evidently our education system stopped providing root word analysis for the last 60 year. Ergo anxious (nervous) means eager; incredible (inconceivable) means astonishing. Our obliging dictionaries go with the flow - changing meanings to ‘catch-up’ with society’s misuse. At least they do not do it in the reverse, that is, eager means anxious; astonishing means incredible.
That's how English works. Thanks!
I think Bill’s saying a lot of things are attributed to Voltaire whether or not he was the one that said it, but I could be mistaken.
You got it. Thanks.
Something to be in awe of
🤷🏻♀️
Always thought it was Blaise Pascal who penned this one, but many others have used the phrase.
Just in case anyone is wondering I did say that. :-)
It was Pascal . . .
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/04/28/shorter-letter/
From Quote Investigator:
"Here is a partial list of attributions: Mark Twain, George Bernard Shaw, Voltaire, Blaise Pascal, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Winston Churchill, Pliny the Younger, Cato, Cicero, Bill Clinton, and Benjamin Franklin.
"The first known instance in the English language was a sentence translated from a text written by the French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal. ... [It] appeared in a letter in a collection called “Lettres Provinciales” in the year 1657."
At the end of the day (to use a hack's cliche), it doesn't really matter who is credited, especially when the candidates are long dead, save for "Bubba" Bill, which is a real reach. It's the value of the aphorism that counts.
I've edited my reply:
It's the aphorism that counts, not who said it.
Final cut:
The aphorism counts, not its author.
Exactly!
All true! Thanks!
Agreed! It’s much harder to say it short than it is to expound.
I thought Abe Lincoln wrote that?
Great quote!!
Great quote!
That's a classic! :-)
I’d really like to write a great reply. I actually did. Then I axed it.
Man, how do you keep it real and still laugh? You’re on some serious government bullseyes now. Power to you.
I write legal briefs, often too wordy, for the court's consideration. ("Brief" being the wrong word, but that is what they are called.) One day, a judge rolled up my 15 page brief into a "telescope", put it up to his right eye and said, "Well, Mr. [Attorney}, I have looked through your brief...."
That is an awesome story. Absolutely love that. Am I wrong, or are the judges who aren’t runaway egomaniacs often very funny?
AB-SO-FREAKIN' LOOTLEY.
I was an undercover (Anti-Crime) cop in da Bronx in the 80's. An arrest oriented slot. I was in court A L O T: Grand Jury, judge trial, jury trial whatever.
This was during the era when Wolfe was serializing Bonfire Of The Vanities in Rolling Stone. (Yeah, be a cop who reads RS...and The Voice...lol...got lots of heat in the squad room back then!)
In his novel, he had a character of a hard ass Bronx Supreme Court judge (in the movie it was Morgan Freeman) . I saw a SHITLOAD of guys like him.
Equal opportunity ragers: didn't matter if it was the prosecutor or the defense, they mocked em all when they were unprepared or droney.
"You DID go to Law School, right, counselor?" was one of the best. Sorry, but it's 40 years ago and there's been a lot of water under the bridge, I can't remember more of that exchange.
Most judges are good writers and editors, at least back in the day when writing (rather than politics) was a key determinant of whether one advanced to the bench.
As one in the sunset of a 40+ year career as a writer/editor/publisher, my favorite rule has always been: "Challenge Every Word." The hope is that by doing so, you may not have to cut 20% in subsequent passes. Note this is easier to do with the type of business writing I've done the past 20+ years, and harder to do when writing news copy, as Matt usually does.
"Challenge Every Word" doesn't refer just to word count, but also (and maybe even more so) to accuracy, and I used to tell my writers to challenge every word because you can be certain that I'll be doing that behind you... and that readers will be doing it behind both of us.
I would further submit that most of us, including Matt, are here because we Challenge Every Word. Matt (and Walter, and Bari, etc.) ultimately fled formerly respectable news organizations because those organizations replaced accuracy challenges with political litmus challenges, and we subscribe to Matt & Bari & the like for the same reason.
I once asked a judge if it made him nervous putting away a notorious drug dealer. He replied, rather nonchalantly, “When he gets out, he’ll have to stomp on my grave”
Thanks Matt I tried the short stuff once on the advice of a Pulitzer prize winner. (yes that blew my mind) ITS freaking hard. This practical advice will be followed at Dixieland, going forward. Cheers
I miss Harry too...
"I started all over again on page 1, circling the 262 pages like a vulture looking for live flesh to scavenge." ~ John Gregory Dunne
I am in need of this advice. No. I am needing this advice. No. I need this advice. No. Good advice.
Steve Sabol once told me the key is to take out every modifier word. The reader or listener will put them all back in by themselves.
Strong verbs. Re-write sentences starting with "There are ..." Be more specific with your pronouns. It took me a couple of decades, but I think I finally learned the difference between active and passive voice (and that the former is the prettier voice) .... I wish I had a dollar for every article that included five paragraphs of flowery introductory text where I later said, "I don't need any of that ... Just start here."
I'll share this pro-tip. When I delete paragraphs, I put them at the bottom of the document under a header I call "deleted text." If I really like some of my deleted text, I later add that text into the Reader Comments. This also makes it look like I got more Reader Comments.
That’s great stuff. The 5 paragraph intro is so true. Easily my biggest issue, whether it’s writing or producing -- and this is another thing Steve once said to me: “You don’t need to start with the goddamned Big Bang and then work from there.”
And "don't bury the lede." Highlight the importance of your best or most important point.
Many journalists I disagree with sometimes include information far down the story that refutes the central premise of the article.
I once produced some real investigative journalism about a new school system that went "all in" on (my opinion) radical education "reforms." I also presented evidence the superintendent who gave our town this type educational system was a brazen bully.
I had to find some little-known monthly conservative commentary newspaper that would publish my series of articles. I kept asking for help from the big daily newspaper (The Montgomery Advertiser), but this newspaper wasn't interested in this story. In fact, after my articles were published and created a major stir, The Advertiser belatedly decided to address the points I made. Basically, the newspaper's journalist said, "There's nothing here. We trust this superintendent. That guy writing for the obscure newspaper was clueless and unfair, etc."
The "rebuttal" piece was very long. About 20 paragraphs down, the author included one telling quote from a teacher who said that the first months of being a teacher in this new school system "were like a medieval plague had hit us."
See? Nothing to see here. All that happened was a medieval plague swept through this school system.
So pay attention to the buried quote that's actually important. I use the same thought process when combing through Reader Comments. The person who goes against the grain of the posting board and his comment doesn't generate hardly any "likes" is ... probably onto something important.
Good Point -- I never thought about it like that.
Do you feel that if it starts out with an appeal to authority, it’s an indicator that they’re already in trouble?
That's a good point. Probably so. If some article starts off with "These guys/experts are our saviors" ... stop reading the story right there.
The NYT is the master at headline, followed by ten paragraphs of setup and opinion hoping no one reads the 11th paragraph that says the ultra-expensive drapes at issue were already in the office suite when Nikki Haley got there [or whoever it was slamming at the time].
Sudden Death Steve Sabol?
Sudden death?
Steve passed away due to brain cancer about 11 years ago.
Sabol had a great sense of humor. He created Sudden Death Sabol along with several other nicknames as a college player. I remember a story in SI about it in 1965. You may find this article of interest: https://gazette.com/cheyenneedition/from-the-sidelines-sudden-death-sabol/article_ac58f6b4-caa8-11e9-93ee-dbf0bf0f6be9.html
Thank you for this John. I actually remember him giving that interview. It was my first year at Films. You’d hear his voice down the hall and he sounded exactly like he did on NFL Films Presents.
He was one of the few men I’ve ever known who wanted the most talented people around him and didn’t try to exploit them. Almost every coach I played for was the same way, and I can think of a fair number of commanding officers, but I can’t think of any other executive producers. Not one.
Leaving Films was like leaving the Garden of Eden.
It was the second biggest mistake I ever made.
Thank You for this 🙏
Writing is rewriting. - Ernie Hemingway
I think some people can write beautfifully with their first draft. I have to work my ass off to reach my goal: "Okay, this is maybe passable."
Does any Substack author actually have an editor to read his or her copy before we hit the "send" button? I blame my Substack partner Annie (a corgi-terrier mix) for missing all my typos and grammatically incorrect sentences.
When I disclosed that Annie was my writing partner, I called her a "corkie-terrier mix." Annie missed this mistake. The damn dog/editor didn't even know what type of dog she is.
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/meet-the-co-author-of-my-newsletter?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
BTW, that article was a “two-minute read.” See? I can do it!
The struggle is real, because you'll never catch that last typo until you hit "Publish."
And then they all jump out at you. And not just one. I correct them as fast as I can, but then I realized everyone who got my original email doesn't see the edits.
Still, it's easier than when I was a print journalist, pre Internet. Once you made those mistakes, they were there forever. Eventually, I learned to follow this rule (to protect my sanity): Never read your own stories once they've been published.
My rule #1 is “Everyone needs an editor.” If none is available then realize that at least a third of what we write is out of fear of embarrassment or not being understood. I start with cutting adjectives, adverbs, and articles. I’m always amazed at the clarity that results.
Totally agree. Plus, it is really hard to edit ones own work because you read what you wanted to say, not necessarily whaat is on the paper (or screen).
Yes, totally. And I’m always leaving out connecting words like “of” and “to.” That is where Grammarly really helps.
Roger that.
Thanks for pointing out two reasons why many sophisticated writers let their writing get flabby.
(Beginners simply don’t know better or just start writing before having a clear idea of what they are going to say and how they plan to say it.)
facts
“this whole brevity thing” was initially what drew me to twitter b/c the character-limit forces you to cut/edit/re-phrase until you have a distilled thought that’s ready to share.
and the corollary to this is that you never really know what you think until you’ve written through it.
Personally, I preferred Facebook because you could develop a thesis with your posts. Some of these topics are on the complex side and key points can't be summarized or debunked in a couple of sentences. But Facebook's "content moderators" or AI made sure I couldn't even make any 500-word posts.
and for me FB isn’t a good venue b/c friends i’ve known in real life [and professional contacts] are absolutely the wrong audience for my writing.
I think censorship at Facebook is far more important than most people realize. True, it's key demographic is mothers and grandmothers or just "every-day, town square types." But this is actually the group that we have to reach to change or challenge some false or dubious narratives. Plenty of posters on Facebook were/are smart and had something worthwhile to say about trends in society. Absent censorship, any of their posts could have "gone viral" and been widely shared. But this didn't happen because of the brazen censorship and algorithms. The remaining Facebook users also learned to "self censor." That is, they quickly learned the topics to avoid. Basically, no one could challenge "The Current Thing" ... or if you did challenge it, you were effectively done on Facebook.
And Facebook has probably billions of followers. I always thought you should "fish where the fish are" ... so I kept posting on Facebook .... because that's where the people I thought I might be able to influence were hanging out. But "dissident" voices like my own were soon silenced.
There's a postscript to this sob story. My "work-around" to Facebook censorship was to start my own Substack Newsletter. Today, in just seven months, I have almost 4,000 subscribers and my articles have been read by more than 600,000 people. I've been a journalist for decades and I've never reached more people ... So thank you, Mr. Zuckerberg.
Facebook seems to be shooting itself in the foot as well as leaning out. Here we are facing potential nuclear engagement and I want to see….cat videos.
That's why people are afraid of getting sideways with Facebook. If they say what they really think about Covid mandates or "Russia! Russia! Russia!" ... they'll lose their privileges to post those cute cat and dog videos.
Some of the dogs can sing/howl to music. And someone hollowed out a 70s TV to make a cat shelter! Hard to compete with this type of information.
If they only knew : )
I used to write on WordPress. I found that I'd write the draft on MSWord then transfer it over. I felt it was cumbersome. When I began on Substack in January of last year, I decided to write what I wanted to write about and at the length that I wanted. So, I found myself at first writing between 1500 and 3000. Then some of the post became longer. What also happened was more people were reading because they found it easier to find me. As a result, I ended up producing over 200,000 words last year. It paved the way for me to begin a podcast which is posted there too. I find the writing platform perfect because it doesn't allow for too much flourishing of the design.
That was what writing scripts was like. There’s a nine second hole. You need to say this, this, this, and this, and also transition the line into the next shot. Brevity matters. It can be done; and in another lifetime I earned five Emmy Awards doing it; but I struggle with “regular writing” now. I worry that I’m not writing enough.
Radio detective shows took 30 minutes, TV 60-90 minutes, Movies 90-180 minutes. Same basic plot. Script writing, journalism, essay, etc are constrained by their medium.
So true! Half-hour show = 22:30 & hour show was 44:00 if I remember correctly.
I am new to the bird, but having fun just because of that. Great comment!
One observation regarding what passes for a lot of writing today is hardly anyone proofreads. The mistakes I see daily in my local paper are sometimes amusing, but also distressing. I guess it’s just another indication of societal decline. Quality is becoming a rare commodity.
Thank you Matt for the quality of your writing.
Two rules I impose on my writing students:
- Prune branches, not leaves.
- Kill your darlings (attributed, probably incorrectly, to Faulkner).
The art is to be able to do so while retaining your voice and keeping your writing interesting.
Not sure about the source of "kill your darlings," but Dr. Johnson said:
"Read over your compositions, and when you meet a passage which you think is particularly fine, strike it out."
Fantastic Matt, giving us a peek behind the curtain, and writing about something that inspires you, you deserve a break from the daily horrors!
Yes, write about something that interests you. As Jim Rome says 20 times every day in his talk show, try to have an ORIGINAL take.
One reason Substack is taking off is because so many topics are off limits in "professional" newsrooms. This means it's easy to come up with original or neglected stories.
Shoot. Now I gotta make it shorter... "Fantastic, a peek behind the curtain, something that inspires you, a break from the daily horrors!"
That better? Or ""Fantastic, a peek behind, something that, a break from!"
Or "a, that, from". There, that's it, I think
Just a little more cutting and you might have a shot at being the next Hemingway.
In reading pre sections of a pending book online last year about the Great Reset, each section by well-known literary greats, one comment was a lack of great novels like Magic Mountain (which was referenced on the website). Ah, I read that book. Pulled it from the shelf and found my book marker at page 37. Hmmm – skimmed a few pages and remember. I had yet to determine who the main was, why he and two newly found ‘friends’ were even in the sanitarium to start with and I could not pronounce any of the many-syllabled, no vowel, last names. Good read - NOT.
Can this post be shortened? And please don't say just delete it.
FWIW, I found your post readable, without being terse.
(You did leave out the word “character “ from “main character “, but I knew what you meant.)
Great comment!
I admire your brief, concise, terse, and pithy wordsmithing.
Lol! As Twain put it, “Eschew surplusage.”
I don’t even know what that means lol
:) Thanks!
Reminds of a writing assignment I had where we had to write five coherent pages (any topic) using only one-syllable words.
It's tough. "Toss trash"?
Did Twain invent that word?!?!
I remember Stephen King talking about this very issue years ago in both interviews, and his book on the writing process. I'm always embarrassed when I go back after a day or two away, and find that much of what I've written, and thought was good, was utter dribble and full of self-aggrandizing pulp. That's when I bring in the hatchet...
Didn’t Stephen King recommend : Just sit down and keep writing the first draft saying whatever comes to mind as much as you want the first go round. Walk away. Let it sit. When you come back start to edit, then again .... another draft and another and so on?
Yes, but I was referring to his earlier work being rejected by editors for being too wordy when he was first starting out. And yes, the idea is to write, let it sit, then revise—rinse and repeat.
Yes, King recommended letting one’s work marinate, so to speak. Good advice for a novel, not so much for a current events substack!
Good point!
Lol
It's Stephen, Christian spelling
Did you ever read, "The Elements of Style?"
E.B. White's Cornell English prof originally wrote it for his students and White edited it for general publication. It's outstanding, and reducing word count is rule #1 there as well. Our 10th Grade English class used it and I still remember the painful sessions where we had to reduce word count by 50%. Ouch!
Yes— the way they put it has stuck with me: “make every word tell”
"Omit needless words."
That one's always stuck with me, too.
Strunk Jr, White’s professor in 1919 and later the companion book by Margaret Shertzer The Elements of Grammar
As an editor for 30 years (for newspapers and nonfiction books), I strongly agree with this first rule. Good editors (and there are plenty of bad ones, especially in journalism) know that being concise in language makes it more persuasive. I like to call it "letting the air out of the text."
Looking forward to other rules, Matt!
Good writers find impactful metaphors (“letting the…”).
That’s probably more an art than something we can assign as a Rule.
But too many metaphors: See Rule #1.
Hilariously TRUE! It parallels some advice I got from a dissertation advisor...he told me first drafts are always like a bad pitch, "too much wind up and not enough delivery."