Consistent Style

Restricts creativity- Having a consistent style can become boring after a while. A reader may lose interest. They may become unhappy and dissatisfied because with what they are reading. Having a consistent style can kill the creativity and cause predictability. With having one consistent style, you leave almost no room for creativity. If you changed things up from time to time, you would not be considered as having a consistent style. When talking about being a journalist for a newspaper or magazine, and you relatively write about the same way from week to week, people may begin to question whether you are able to expand on your thoughts and branch out to another style of writing.

Enhances creativity- As stated in the text, “Consistent style is the hallmark of a professional.” Having a consistent style makes it easier for the reader to recognize what they are about to read and keeps them focused into the material. Being able to have creativity in your writing to me is another way of showing that you are a professional. Not only does having creativity in your writing show that you are versatile, but it also keeps the reader asking for more. It will spark the interest of the reader and always keep them guessing exactly what your next piece may be about.

The feelings on both cases can somewhat contradict and clash with one another, but ultimately, it is based on your own personal opinion on the issue.

Blog #3

The author makes a strong case for knowing the rules of grammar, but some people do not think that this knowledge is very important. They believe that you can write well without knowing these rules. What do you think?



I am somewhat torn about my opinion. To be able to write with clarity and get the message across to the reader is the goal of a writer. As stated in the text, good grammar, precise word usage and correct spelling are all elements involved with writing with clarity. I believe to be a strong writer you need to know the rules of grammar and how to use them. Of course knowing the rules is just one part of writing. Another part in writing is getting the message your writing about across to the reader. I do believe that without being strong in the aspect of the rules of grammar, you are still able to get the message you want across.

“Writers need to have an interest in the language and how it is used. But that interest should be secondary to the more important goal of using language so that it will convey the information and ideas that a writer must convey.”(Chapter 2 of Writing for the Mass media by James Glen Stovall) I feel that being able to get the message across and be weaker when it comes to grammar is possible.

Some people thinking that knowledge is not very important is shocking to me. I do not understand how someone could feel that way. Without the wisdom of knowledge, how would you expand throughout your life? How would you gain opportunities and learn about yourself as a person. Knowledge connects you with the world just as journalists do. It all goes hand in hand.

Objectivity

The concept of objectivity is a controversial one in the field of journalism. Why do you think it causes so much controversy?

When using the word objectivity, one is usually referring to the element of fairness and balance within journalism. It is vital that journalists keep their personal opinions out of their work. The focus should only be on getting the information out to the readers. As stated in “Writing for the Mass Media” written by James Glen Stovall, many have an issue with the concept of objectivity because they feel it prevents the journalist from completely informing the readers about the issue at hand. It is often a difficult task to write as a neutral opinion while still trying to inform the views of both sides.

I believe it causes so much controversy because when dealing with the element of objectivity, it is assumed that there is no problem with the journalist being able to separate their views from their work. Sometimes it is not that easy. It is a very difficult to write with your own opinion about a matter, but never letting your ideals show on the paper. Referring to the information found in Stovall’s work, another issue I feel that makes this so controversial is the thought that objectivity limits the journalist from fully informing the readers about all the information at hand. If given a task that was the complete opposite on how you felt, I would imagine it would be very difficult to write fairly on the matter. A journalist would have more ideas and concepts regarding the side they leaned towards more than the opposite side. This is why many believe that when put in this difficult situation, objectivity is a very hard concept to work with.