Short – cram the maximum amount of meaning into the minimum number of words. There’s no strict guide to ideal word length, but search engines only care about the first 64 characters. Make every word count.
Clear – good headline are unambiguous. They must be immediately understandable in any context. Not everyone reading your writing will be a native English speaker. Keep this in mind.
Straightforward – use mainly nouns and verbs. Remember your nouns will be keywords for people using search engines.
Use simple words – short, Anglo Saxon words are best. Everyone knows exactly what they mean and they help you cram more meaning into fewer characters.
Active – use the active voice.
Avoid – forms of the verb to be. Articles ‘a’, ‘an’ and ‘the’ are space wasters best left out of headlines. Use a comma rather than the word ‘and’. Try not to use pronouns.
Plain English – there’s a grab-bag of short clichéd headline words that people never use in real life – such as nix, slam, rap. It’s better to stick with everyday language.
Some experts will tell you lists, questions and commands work well in online headlines. All may be worth trying, it depends what you are aiming for. Either way, they’ll work better if you keep my earlier points in mind.
As old school journalists, we were taught to write mainly with nouns and verbs. Editors let us use adjectives only if they make the meaning more precise.
And even then, subeditors would remove them as they tightened copy.
In Daily Mirror Style Keith Waterhouse describes the old school journalist’s view. He says:
Adjectives should not be allowed in newspapers unless they have something to say.
Writers think adjectives add colour to their words. They do. But colourful writing isn’t always easier to understand.
In volume one of Editing and Writing, another newspaper journalist Harold Evans says they give writing a “superficial glitter”.
He goes on to say:
Every adjective should be examined to see: is it needed to define the subject or is it there for emphasis?
Evans says “over-emphasis destroys credibility”.
Take care when using adjectives for emphasis. For example, the word ‘very’ adds nothing to a phrase. Most of the time you can lose the word without changing any meaning.
The same usually applies to words like really, actually, rather and quite.
It also applies to the f-word. It may be fashionable to use it in today’s writing, but nine times out of ten all it does is function as a synonym for ‘very’.
Often there’s a better, more elegant way of expressing the same idea. “The train crawled into the station” is better than saying it was “very slow”.
In practice many adjectives have no substance. You can remove most from your sentences. You won’t lose much, but you will gain clarity.
On a personal note, publishers and others have paid me for years to write by the word. Loading my copy with lucrative filler words including adjectives makes economic sense. Over the years they have paid off my mortgage.
Yet my writing would certainly better without them.
A quick refresher:
Nouns are names of people, places, things and ideas.
Verbs are doing words. They tell you what is going on.
We say Adjectives modify nouns. They tell you what kind it is, how many there are and which one is being talked about.
Adverbs do the same job for verbs.
Posted a massive update to my Guide to writing on an iPad - billbennett.co.nz/ipad-pro-…
It covers most of the bases, but if you find something I’ve missed get in touch.
Exclamation marks, some people call them bangs, have almost no place in serious writing.
Tabloids use them in headlines. You may use exclamation marks in reported speech or where they form part of a name or title.
And that’s it.
It’s no accident many newspapers and publishing companies ban exclamation marks.
They don’t add drama.
They don’t improve poor writing.
Exclamation marks don’t tell readers a sentence was funny.
They may tell readers a sentence was supposed to be funny. That’s quite different.
In the newspaper business, the exclamation mark is sometimes known as a shriek or screamer. These names give a clue to why they best left on the shelf.
It is often used to add emphasis to sentences. It’s versatile, you’ll see it used to show surprise, anger or joy.
You’ll see it used far too often.
The exclamation mark is the punctuation equivalent of raising your voice – maybe hysterically. Hence the name ‘shriek’.
Here’s why you should avoid them:
As an editor, I told a young reporter working for me who used one in a story that was his year’s allocation gone.
I was only half-joking. If you must use exclamation marks, use them rarely. Once a year is too often.
The reporter got the message. I never saw another one in his copy.
Everyone who thinks at all has noticed that our language is practically useless for describing anything that goes on inside the brain.
– George Orwell
“Never use jargon words like reconceptualize, demassification, attitudinally, judgmentally. They are hallmarks of a pretentious ass.”
From a memo advertising man David Ogilvy sent to employees at his agency in 1982, titled: “How to Write”.
Earlier I wrote that most of the time you should use said when reporting someone’s words. Said is the best verb of attribution.
Said is a wise choice of word for journalists. It is neutral and judgement free. This makes it a safe and accurate choice.
A simple word like said is readily understood and unambiguous — that’s always a sign of good writing.
You might choose something else if you’re writing poetry, literature or fiction. Yet for everyday writing use the simplest option. Your readers will thank you.
Don’t let anyone tell you that sticking with said makes your writing boring. Nor should you listen to those who tell you the word is overused.
It is less boring than sitting through a defamation action because someone misinterpreted an alternative word.
It is less boring than expecting your reader to look up the meaning of an alternative word.
Readers can misunderstand almost every alternative to said.
The term ‘verb of attribution’ is correct. Yet, outside of academic discussions about language, it is not the best phrase to use in your writing.
‘Verb of attribution’ is the kind of formal, technical language that puts readers off, even when they know what it means.
Remember when list posts were all the rage?
There’s nothing wrong with writing lists – especially when publishing online – so long as you don’t overdo it.
When the list items are short, you can use bullet points. Or, if the order is important, choose numbered bullets.
Both options make text easy to scan and read quickly.
Another, more elegant, approach is to write out your list using a variation on the following theme:
First, something happened. Second, something else. Next, we used a little elegant variation to make things more interesting. Then, we did this. Last, we finished up.
Ideally a list written this way should have only a few points. Keep it to four or five at most. Six is pushing it. Seven is far too many.
When writing numbers this way you should spell out the words from first to ninth1 then write 10th, 15th, hundredth. You should never get as far as ninth.
Some people use firstly, secondly, thirdly and so on. While strictly speaking both approaches are grammatically correct, adding -ly is old-fashioned and unnecessarily fussy.
What’s more, you’ll end up looking silly if you want to deal with lots of items and reach eleventhly or even millionthly.
So, stick with the simpler format.
or perhaps tenth. This depends on your taste or if you have one, your house style guide, but remember to stay consistent. ↩︎
When reporting someone’s words, it’s best to use said in most cases.
Newspaper and other style guides disagree over whether to use past tense (said) or present tense (says).
It doesn’t matter which. Pick one and stick with it. At times you may need to write someone says this now, but said something different in the past.
While you can use said even with written words - if you are quoting what someone wrote in a mail or in tweet - it is better to make it clear the person wasn’t talking at the time.
Alternative verbs are mainly pompous or value-laden. I once worked with a journalist who sprinkled his copy with words like averred or commented because he thought said was too dull.
Neither word adds useful information. The pompous language may frighten off some readers. To me it read like something from Edwardian times.
##Not using said sows seeds of doubt
Your readers may interpret any alternative to said as suggesting the speaker is lying, misinformed or doesn’t know what they are talking about. Think of claimed or according to.
It is perfectly OK to used claimed or according to when you want readers to understand there may be some doubt.
One alternative I allow myself is the verb ask. This only works when someone is clearly asking a question.
##How about when writing fiction?
Fiction writer Elemore Leonard has another perspective on this. In his excellent Ten rules of writing he said:
Never use a verb other than “said” to carry dialogue.
The line of dialogue belongs to the character; the verb is the writer sticking his nose in. But said is far less intrusive than grumbled, gasped, cautioned, lied. I once noticed Mary McCarthy ending a line of dialogue with “she asseverated,” and had to stop reading to get the dictionary.
Leonard wrote fast-paced fiction with terrific dialogue, if sticking with the one word was good enough for him, it is good enough for the rest of us.
Sharp-eyed readers will have noticed I wrote: Elmore Leonard said not says. The writer died in 2013, that’s definitely past-tense.
I’m a journalist.
Writing for newspapers and magazines has been my main job for almost 40 years.
For most of the past decade, I’ve worked seven days a week, 50 weeks of the year. Earlier in my life I had regular jobs which had paid holiday and I didn’t always need to work through the weekend. But still long hours.
I estimate that over the long haul I’ve written an average of 5,000 words a week. That’s around 250,000 a year. Over 40 years it adds up to 10 million words give or take.