Link: http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?ps=1016&rip_id=%3CD9778TFO0%40news.ap.org%3E&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCLM_UNEWS
I don't know if it's just me but I found the use of, shall we say "creative," adjectives in this article very distracting to the overall story. The use of these adjectives was likely an attempt to connect with the audience but personally I spent so long trying to work out what the author meant by "glop" that I'd pretty much forgotten what the sentence was about and had to go back and reword it. This article was very short but it took me twice as long to read as it should have just because these adjectives were so disrupting to the flow of the story. Yes, I agree it is nice to be creative and connect with the core audience, but seriously, enough is enough. Even the header frusterates me, I mean what is "slimey" supposed to mean in this context? Does it have some connection to the Kid's Choice Awards? I'm presuming the answer is yes, but it would have been nice if this was made clear somewhere in the article.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just read this article, and I agree with you that the author, Lang, could have used better and more descriptive words to describe the event. The only reason I understood 'slime' and 'glob' was because I was an avid watcher of Nickelodeon and Kids Choice Awards for years when I was younger. However, the average person, typically an adult, reading an article on charter.com, would have no idea what this author was talking about. This is a good example of journalists who need to better describe the news they're trying to get across.
I also agree with Emily. I loved the Choice Awards, and i understand the language word from word. But lets get serious what 7-10 year old reads the New York Times? Not likely, for parents of young children who want to know about these awards there kids are constantly talking about would have no idea what the show is about.
Post a Comment