Thursday, April 2, 2009

Headline of the day at the Kansas City Star


Jeez.

Hat tip (and photo credit): Bottom Line Communications
.
.
.

54 comments:

Anonymous said...

Eh, this woman never wrote anything of use anyway. The only time anyone ever read her crap was when she jumped on the required Sarah Palin bashing band wagon and that cost her any credibility that she had acquired though benefit of the doubt.

Anonymous said...

"Like it or no" is an accepted usage; it is not bad editing. Its etymology goes back to Scots English and is an alternative finite clause.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the second commenter; "like it or no" is acceptable.

Anonymous said...

So now it remains to be seen if the poster will admit that s/he was unaware of the phrase and give a public, "oops", or defensively bluster about.

Anonymous said...

Scots English? Scots English!? Are you series? This is hugh!

Why does the Kommunist City Star hate America? Don't they know that we speak AMERICAN in this country, and that's exactly why we threw their crappy tea into the harbor four score and seven years ago.

Like it OR NOT, an AMERICAN newspaper should speak AMERICAN.

Word verification: 'vultur,' which is how Real Muhrkins spell it.

Anonymous said...

I looked up ‘Like it or no,’ and the search came back “Did you mean like it or not?” Then I found one entry that said it is an ‘old phrase no longer used in modern writing.’ So if the writer is an old lady, it might be she isn’t up to the new media standards. Old dinosaurs clinging to old time phrases ARE NOT going to cut in the new media. Who wants to read old style writing by old time bag? NO ONE! I doubt she does have a clue what future readers will read, but I can tell you one thing it won’t be “Read it or no, eat it or no, like some writer had a brain freeze. Geeeez

Anonymous said...

Its etymology goes back to Scots English and is an alternative finite clause.
------------
Sure, I can live with that. Just as the definition of "liberal" is legitimately stated as: Morally unrestrained; licentious. Its etymology goes back to Middle English derived from Old French and more accurately describes the term that has been rewritten to appease the morally corrupted and parasitic nature of those that identify themselves by the term.

See how that works?

Anonymous said...

"Like it or no" is an accepted usage; it is not bad editing. Its etymology goes back to Scots English and is an alternative finite clause
--------
Believing shit like that is not going to keep you off the breadline. You should be saying no one is interested in junk writing like that these days. I’m sure our Hispanic population will jump right on that Scots English writing. Why, it’s reason enough to move here.

Anonymous said...

See how that works?


=============
Are you saying that when I split hairs, make sure they are not attached to my ass?

Anonymous said...

2:21, OMG! You are, like, SO right! We like should actually use words and phrases that we actually use every day. I H8 it when ppl use words that I don't know. I shouldn't have to learn about stuff from a long time ago. I know what I know and don't need to learn anything else.

Anonymous said...

2:32 PM Lame. Very lame.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and it looks as if I was correct. Defensive, bombastic and proud of ignorance.

Anonymous said...

"Its etymology goes back to Scots English and is an alternative finite clause."
------------
I have a phrase for you to decipher. ‘Stupid is as stupid do’
That is Ghetto English and is an alternative finite clause.
Pssssst! Pass that on to the old gal for her next column in any bankrupt press of your choice.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and it looks as if I was correct.





No, it looks more like you had your point shoved up your Hamster hole. Being a leftist, you're not expected to recognize it though.

Anonymous said...

I think it was an old lady's idea of cute, like when you see them do the twist at wedding dances. Wince, and look the other way.

Anonymous said...

Opps! More old English, Ain’t it just riveting reading?
***
Oft Scyld the Scefing from squadroned foes,
from many a tribe, the mead-bench tore,
awing the earls. Since erst he lay
friendless, a foundling, fate repaid him:
for he waxed under welkin, in wealth he throve...
----
Yip, this is the future folks, this is the future.

Bwhahahahahah

Anonymous said...

No, it looks more like you had your point shoved up your Hamster hole. Being a leftist, you're not expected to recognize it though.

----

This is what I meant. I was not rude nor belittling when I pointed out that it was not a misuse of the English language. Instead of saying, "oops, didn't know that", posters went on the attack because the phrase was either archaic, unknown to them or sounds ungrammatical. And even more oddly, you seem to think that being rude and sarcastic proves that you are right. My point is that no writer wants to cater to the least common denominator and limit their writing so that a third grader can understand it. Increasing ones vocabulary and learning something new should be welcomed, not ridiculed.

Anonymous said...

God, what a bunch of hateful and pathetic people posting on this "topic." For so many of you posting on a site about newspapers, you are woefully ignorant of how the business actually works, including the fact that columnists and reporters do not write headlines. That's a process that takes place far down the line of putting a newspaper out, and usually long after the columnist and/or reporter has left for the evening.

Rather, this example is indicative of what is going to happen more and more often as The Star and other newspapers decimate their editorial staffs, including headline writers and copy editors.

BTW, Diane Stafford is a hardworking, dedicated journalist who truly cares about what she does, which becomes more difficult with each passing day and she and others are left trying to do more and more with fewer and fewer resources. All of you hatemongers, look at yourself in the mirror - like what you see? If you do, that's sad and makes me worry about society at large. And yes, she is a friend and former colleague.

Anonymous said...

This is what I meant. I was not rude nor belittling when I pointed out that it was not a misuse of the English language.

-----------------------------------
Actually you came off as condescending, arrogant and trying to cover an obvious mistake as if it were somehow above the level of the reader to comprehend your enlightened status.

I doubt you ever could have seen it yourself, but that is how the casual reader would have taken it.

Anonymous said...

And yes, she is a friend and former colleague.



She can't give you your job back Les, but if you talk to her, ask her how much she would give to get her reputation back? Did she ever think that jumping on the attack wagon when shilling for Obama would come back to bite her like it has? Or is that why she is still employed?

Anonymous said...

April 2, 2009 4:15 PM:

Actually you came off as condescending, arrogant and trying to cover an obvious mistake as if it were somehow above the level of the reader to comprehend your enlightened status.

I doubt you ever could have seen it yourself, but that is how the casual reader would have taken it.

-------

That's a valid point and it was not my intention. I was just trying to be clear. I hope I get point though for being polite :)

Anonymous said...

4:50 PM- I'll certainly give you one. Too bad emotion and intent is impossible to convey in the written word.

Anonymous said...

“Diane Stafford is a hardworking, dedicated journalist”

She is a liberal biased old bag. What that makes you for not seeing it, is blind, or just as biased. Be off, no one is going to read your tripe much longer. Perhaps you noted that by yourself? We don’t have to agree with you, and disagreeing in our own writing style is our right. Why is it only liberals think they have the right to write as they wish? They are so offended if anyone dares to offer a different opinion. Old journalism will die with the old media. Get used to it, or get out of the way.

Anonymous said...

Agreed with others, once Stafford jumped on the 'hate Palin' bandwagon she lost all credibility. Just like the TV critic.

The Star has a ton of columnists who seem to be able to write pro-Obama columns that have nothing to do with their actual "expertise".

What a joke of a paper.

Anonymous said...

"What a joke of a paper."
That is putting it kindly. There is no hope as long as the 'back in the day' folks hang on. NONE!

Anonymous said...

“no writer wants to cater to the least common denominator and limit their writing so that a third grader can understand it.”
---
Newspaper have been writing at the sixth grade level for years, and you know it, or, you are not a newspaper person at all.

Anonymous said...

If you have the choice of reading “Diane Stafford’s faux business columns, or watching paint dry, choose the paint drying. You’ll learn more, and yawn less. How old is she anyway?

Anonymous said...

3:46....welllll excuuuse us idiots. But we have jobs, thank you very much. Do you???????
You in the business never get it and never will.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
John Altevogt said...

Yes 7:58 you've certainly shown everyone what intelligence is with your witty repartee. Great command of the language. "Low-life, stupid shitbags.."

Now there's wit you just don't see too often anymore outside of a bowling alley. If Derek Donovan ever steps down, you'd be right in line to be The Star's "Reader's" Rep, you silver tongued devil, you.

Anonymous said...

7:58 Is that you Mike Hendricks? It sure sounds like you. Third grade temper tantrum with a big word thrown in at the end.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Wow. Many of you people are nuts. And I think 'Like it or no' has been around forever. Open your ears.

McClatchy Watch said...

9:53 comment deleted for violating the rules.

McClatchy Watch said...

7:58 comment also deleted for violating the rules. Hey, you are welcome to come here and defend the Star but follow the rules.

Anonymous said...

“Wow. Many of you people are nuts. And I think 'Like it or no' has been around forever. Open your ears.”
**
Open our ears?
No one I know talks shit like that. Only the over-the-hill-gang clings to old timey expressions that have been around forever. Maybe Plato said that. Your old timey readers don’t even want out of date news, using out of date words either. Get out of ‘the business,’ into your rockers, and leave the driving to us.

Les Weatherford said...

418, Yes, she is a friend and a former colleague, and I consider most of her columns to be interesting and informative. But I did not write the post to which you referred. I always sign my postings, which have been few lately because my wife's medical needs are taking up most of my time.

Have a nice day.

Les Weatherford

Pg1News said...

OK, one more time: That's what happens when all the copy editors are laid off. Look for more of the same. And just imagine what an all-digital product will be like with IT people doing all the posting??!!

Anonymous said...

Are you saying that it was Copy Editors all along that have been butchering and misleading people with their headlines PG?

Anonymous said...

"She can't give you your job back Les, but if you talk to her, ask her how much she would give to get her reputation back? Did she ever think that jumping on the attack wagon when shilling for Obama would come back to bite her like it has? Or is that why she is still employed?"

Ah, you're so clever, but alas, you're so wrong - it was not Les who posted about all of you hateful, and dare I say, ignorant-of-the-industry people. As for Diane and her views, as a columnist she has the right to write about her views. As for "Palin?" You're kidding - what's to like? Or respect? Or even consider seriously? She's a joke. I'm not a Republican (although I have voted for members of the party) but I know plenty of Republicans who cringe at her name. But of course, I'm a former member of the "liberal elite" media. BTW, even McCain won't come out and support her. I think that speaks volumes, but what do I know - I'm just a crazy liberal...

A sidebar and example of us crazy, wacky liberal media types: Interestingly, one of the last stories I wrote as a reporter was one involving the issue of gay marriage. I went to great lengths to make sure my views did not come through in any way, shape or form. And I was so successful - perhaps too much so - that a woman who professed to be a Christian (albeit, a very judgmental one at that - isn't that anti-Christian?) called and thanked me for being on her side against gays having the right to live their lives like "normal" people, you know those ones who have a 50 percent divorce rate!

And for the poster who wondered about Diane's age - I'm curious, what's your point in asking? Hmmm, you wouldn't be making a judgment that someone who graduated from one of the best schools in the U.S., who has years of institutional knowledge and experience has nothing relevant to say? Oh, I'm sure you must be correct, because what, you're 27 and oh so wise in all the ways of the world? Ah well, at least you were on Twitter bandwagon before all the oldies turned it into a "jump the shark" moment. How tweet!


But I'm off track - how did a posting about a headline - whether correct or no(t) (ha ha!) digress into such a hateful diatribe against Diane Stafford and daily newspapers in general. Typical of when people can post anonymously. And yes, I'm going to stay among the cowards and remain anonymous...

Ok, haters, hate away!!!

Anonymous said...

Diane Stafford is a leftist old hag. It always looks like she writes her Schmaltz after reading a couple of junk reports from her comrades. What she knows about business is what other leftists anti-business jerks write. I think she reads a couple of trash items from eggheads that have never held a real job, regurgitates the same old line, and goes to press. I have not read anything she writes for a long time, who does? She writes nothing from firsthand knowledge it seemed to me. She is just like the rest of the great pretenders, fill in the blank writing, no one will know the difference. Her column degrading another woman was disgusting, for all women, and journalists alike.

A bag full of gas might one day fly off into the air, or get fired, one can only hope.

Anonymous said...

"Diane Stafford is a leftist old hag. It always looks like she writes her Schmaltz after reading a couple of junk reports from her comrades. What she knows about business is what other leftists anti-business jerks write. I think she reads a couple of trash items from eggheads that have never held a real job, regurgitates the same old line, and goes to press. I have not read anything she writes for a long time, who does? She writes nothing from firsthand knowledge it seemed to me. She is just like the rest of the great pretenders, fill in the blank writing, no one will know the difference. Her column degrading another woman was disgusting, for all women, and journalists alike.

A bag full of gas might one day fly off into the air, or get fired, one can only hope."

Wait - you go on and on about Diane and her writing and the content of her columns, and then write you don't read her columns? Huh?

Or is that just that she hurt your little feelings about Palin? Talk about a gas bag!

Anonymous said...

Wait - you go on and on about Diane and her writing and the content of her columns, and then write you don't read her columns? Huh?
-----------
Her column was highlighted to illustrate how biased and in-the-tank the Red Scar had become. Most writers would not want that distinction, but when you are going down the drain, integrity means nothing. That is why she and others like her must go. She didn’t change for that one column, she was always that way. Sad person, way sad person, that she has become.

Anonymous said...

But of course, I'm a former member of the "liberal elite" media.





And this in the end is all that really matters Rhonda. Your rambling bleeds through where ever you go. Might I suggest an MRI?

Anonymous said...

So right, “Actually you came off as condescending, arrogant”

I don’t think the new media blogs are your thing. Popular blog comments I read are straightforward, posters swear, flame, and all manner of writing styles emerge, which readers seem to enjoy. Laying old words on us just makes YOU old and out-of-date. We don’t have the time, nor the inclination to go ‘back in the day’ with those of you that are fossilized already.

Anonymous said...

“And this in the end is all that really matters Rhonda. Your rambling bleeds through where ever you go. Might I suggest an MRI?”
--
Oh, oh, you brought the beast into the conversation. Who knows what that will start?
It’s like a nautical word, it sometimes opens up the comedy club.

Anonymous said...

Any party that elects Joe Biden to be Vice President probably ought not be chucking rocks at any other candidate from any other party.

Just sayin'. The Chia Pet vote is secure. Stand up Chuck.

Pg1News said...

9:27: Yes, copy editors, slots and copy chiefs are the ones who clean up copy, cut copy to fit, and write heds, decks and cutlines. But no, we are not the ones who actually write the stories. You're best line of attack is go for the assigning editors and their reporters.

Anonymous said...

I am not looking for a line of attack. It seems to me they have done more damage to themselves than I could ever imagine.

I was just curious who actually wrote the headlines because from my perspective, some of the greatest dishonesty in our daily paper seems to come directly from headlines that are contrary to the body of the text. Intentionally misleading the reader or more pointedly misleading someone who might only read the headline and the first sentence or two.

Pg1News said...

I see your point. Hedline writing is, indeed, an art form because we have to write to fit the specs. For example, if "environment" won't fit in the space, we use "climate" instead. It's more difficult than you think. But I know, for me, I always tried to write the hed to complement the story. If a slot or chief wanted to change one of my heds and I disagreed, I would state my case. But ultimately, it is the news editor's call on heds, decks and cutlines.

Anonymous said...

As a headline writer, here's my favorite part when someone goes around blasting your effort:

Look and see how many times the new alternative headline (if there even is one) fits the specs ... like almost never!

I had a reader criticize my headline once in a letter to the editor; the reader went on to suggest what it should have said. It was about as long as the lead of the story.

Anonymous said...

Look and see how many times the new alternative headline (if there even is one) fits the specs ... like almost never!

---------------------
Give me a break. It doesn't take a literary genius to at least make the headline reflect the story...like almost ALWAYS.

Case in point, yesterday....

Headline: Iowa Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage

False and intentionally misleading as the Iowa supreme court doe not have the authority to make law.

Is it easy to correct. Child's play, but that was not the intent was it. The intent was to mislead...period.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Diane, for writing columns that were inspiring and helpful to me when I did not have a job.

Anonymous said...

Only someone who has never had to write 30 to 50 headlines in a day would be ass enough to think headline writers sit around trying to deliberately mislead