Sign in or 
Share this
James Dodson Exercise 1
I found the style of writing on Slate to be—for the most part—ramped. My life is the same way, so I like this fast-paced style. People use the Internet to find information quickly, and I was able to quickly find an article on Slate that interests me and read it. The main argument I have with the site is the way it is organized on the homepage—the writers are listed on the left and broad categories are at the top. This is fine if I knew which writers I enjoyed most, but if the site had more defined categories, it would be easier to peruse the articles.
The first article I read was “Premature Orszagism” by Mickey Kaus. (Yes, I picked it because of the clever title.) Despite keeping a political blog that seems to be right-winged, Kaus organizes his articles so as not to intimidate his readers. His opening sentence reads, “Virginia Postrel calls the Obama administration's bluff on health care costs. A White House Council of Economic Advisers report recently asserted that…” and then leaves a few lines blank. He has space around important lines for emphasis. Having all that space in the beginning is attractive for readers because it is less work. Further down in the article he neglects this style, and the article becomes more exhausting to read. But he still includes bold lettering for better organization: “a) To make it 'paid for,' Orszag is relying in large part on Medicare and Medicaid savings that are 'scoreable'.”
The bold letters make for a well organized segment, but more white space would make a less intimidating paragraph. This segment, with the above excerpt, is one massive black of text. If only Kaus included a space before each section (marked by a, b, and c) maybe I would have read the entire paragraph. Halfway through, I gave up on him…sorry Kaus. Reading through other articles, I found the online style to be very free. Why have we spent so much time learning to write in a particular way if writing for the web neglects form?
The first article I read was “Premature Orszagism” by Mickey Kaus. (Yes, I picked it because of the clever title.) Despite keeping a political blog that seems to be right-winged, Kaus organizes his articles so as not to intimidate his readers. His opening sentence reads, “Virginia Postrel calls the Obama administration's bluff on health care costs. A White House Council of Economic Advisers report recently asserted that…” and then leaves a few lines blank. He has space around important lines for emphasis. Having all that space in the beginning is attractive for readers because it is less work. Further down in the article he neglects this style, and the article becomes more exhausting to read. But he still includes bold lettering for better organization: “a) To make it 'paid for,' Orszag is relying in large part on Medicare and Medicaid savings that are 'scoreable'.”
The bold letters make for a well organized segment, but more white space would make a less intimidating paragraph. This segment, with the above excerpt, is one massive black of text. If only Kaus included a space before each section (marked by a, b, and c) maybe I would have read the entire paragraph. Halfway through, I gave up on him…sorry Kaus. Reading through other articles, I found the online style to be very free. Why have we spent so much time learning to write in a particular way if writing for the web neglects form?
|
Jedodson |
Latest page update: made by Jedodson
, Jun 9 2009, 12:02 AM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by Jedodson
view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
Slate
More Info: links to this page
|
There are no threads for this page.
Be the first to start a new thread.
