Beyond Argument A Handbook For Opinion Writers And Editors
Maura Casey and Michael Zuzel, eds. Beyond Argument: A Handbook for Editorial Writers. Rockvillo, Md.: National Conference of Editorial Writers, pp. 128 Robert Jonsen (2001). Super Mario Text Download Programs. Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream.
New York: Peter Lang. 160 Just about the worst indictment an academician can make regarding another's writing style is to say that it is too 'journalistic.' A few yoars ago I had just boon introduced to a senior faculty member from outside the communication field when he disparaged two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Thomas Friedman's book on globalization, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, by calling it 'journalistic.' Correspondingly, just about the worst thing a journalist can say about another reporter's work is that the style is too 'academic.' That happened to me once when I showed a colleague an op-ed column I was working on that contained what I considered to be a fairly common three-syllable word. It's unfortunate that this divide exists, because both academics and journalists could benefit from greater understanding of each other's work. By writing columns or reviews for newspapers (or doing radio or, less commonly, television commentaries) those in the academy - not just in the communication field but in all departments - would become true public intellectuals.
Purdue OWL: Argument Papers. Summary: This resource outlines the generally accepted structure for introductions, body paragraphs, and conclusions in an academic. Anthropogenic Global Warming - Fact or Hoax? Middlebury Community Network. The Great Global Warming Hoax? Department of Applied Mathematics.
Faculty would be forced to make their research or theories relevant to ordinary citizens - whose taxes, after all, often pay their salaries. The public would benefit, too, by being exposed to a broader range of ideas than are usually found in the media. By writing for the mainstream media, faculty, who, like journalists, are trained observers, would become known as potential sources when journalists cover stories in their areas of expertise. This could reduce the now-common practice of Rolodex sourcing, in which the same people are quoted over and over. (Isn't it time for journalists to ask someone other than Michael Beschloss - now that Doris Kearns Goodwin is sidelined - about presidential history?) Reporters will more likely find new sources on the oped pages of their and other newspapers than in peer-reviewed scholarly journals. But few academics write regularly for the mainstream press.
Robert Jensen has taken the road less traveled. In Writing Dissent he explains not only why he became a public intellectual but also how he did it. As an associate professor of journalism with tenure at the University of Texas at Austin, Jensen points out that he has little incentive to publish in the mainstream media.
(Untenured faculty usually have even less.) Yet, his goal, as the book's subtitle says, is Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream. The first third of Jensen's little book, comprising three chapters, is an analysis and defense of 'radical' ideas, an explanation of current journalistic practices and a description of the editorial process. The final two thirds of the book (eight chapters and a brief conclusion) are reprints of columns Jensen has had published in newspapers around the country. He tells why he wrote them, how he got the newspapers to publish them, and he gives them other necessary context. The book would be an excellent addition to any class on editorial writing or for those academics ready to try their hands at journalism. As Jensen says, it's not as easy as it looks to hone a complex argument into 700 coherent words, the typical length of an op-ed article.
In Beyond Argument, ten authors write chapters on various aspects of editorial writing and other duties of editorial page editors.