A Round up of the Papers. . . .
Has anyone read a Nigerian newspaper recently? I have and there really is no other way to say this than to declare that it’s terribly appalling. From the empty, meaningless reporting to the austere lexis and the puerile reasoning, it all just leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
I remember how that as a child I would read Vanguard, Punch, Daily Times or Concord depending on what was available. Apart from the ethereal benefit of feeling grown up I got the tangible reward of improving my vocabulary by identifying new words and seeking out their meanings from either the dictionary or my better educated seniors. I highly revered newspaper Editors – admirable Crichton’s that they were – because of their profundity and always marveled at how a person could be such an all-rounder. The force of their logic and the brilliance of their submissions – it was really edifying. Sadly those days are well and truly behind us. Save a very precious few, practically the entire industry is now nothing but a mass of mediocrity. I deeply despair.
I’ve always been bitter about the standard of journalism and all but the particular bout that inspired this article was brought on by something I read on the sports page of Thisday Newspaper of 20/3/09 on the teams that were still in the Champions League competition at the time. By way of being fair, I’ll reproduce it here so you can decide for yourself whether or not I’m over reacting. Having already mentioned the 8 teams in question, our man goes ahead to say:
“By the arrangement of the draws for the next round of the competition Barca can be paired with any of the 7 teams remaining. That means Blaugrana can face Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Villareal, Porto or Bayern Munich. But then the coach is said to be aware that for his team to become champions of Europe in June they must be ready to take on and beat any of these 7 remaining in the series”.
Ok, the coach is “said to be aware”? You don’t say! Hopefully he didn’t hurt himself working that one out. And really, we need an explanation of the meaning of being “paired with any of the remaining 7 teams” ehn? Please is anyone else disgusted or am I unreasonable after-all? If your article is too short and you have nothing to add, include pictures or something! Don’t these guys read The Economist, Newsweek and Sports Illustrated et al? Or is it that the idea of learning from those who know better than you is so repulsive that they would rather remain mediocre?
But I’ve only talked about the level of reasoning thus far. It’s when you start considering typos, grammatical expressions, figures of speech etc that the fun really kicks in. (This isn’t good for my blood pressure I tell you.) There are more typos per sentence than fishing nets have holes; the clichés are more over-used than politician’s campaign speech promises and the grammatical expressions . . . . . . (My poor heart can’t take anymore of this).
Perhaps the journalists are not entirely at fault. The bland articles, the colorless language and the “reported speech” type news rendering that adds no value, throws no further light on the issues; aren’t these just a reflection of the kind of education the journalists get? And aren’t we the ones who relish stories about who bought what toy, starlets being ravaged for movie roles, society big gals fighting over lecherous nincompoops and the like, no matter how badly written the articles are?
If you’re a journalist or writer of some sort reading this, I ask you, don’t you want to improve yourself professionally? You would benefit yourself so what greater incentive can you possibly want? Please somebody help me continue, I’m tired.
I remember how that as a child I would read Vanguard, Punch, Daily Times or Concord depending on what was available. Apart from the ethereal benefit of feeling grown up I got the tangible reward of improving my vocabulary by identifying new words and seeking out their meanings from either the dictionary or my better educated seniors. I highly revered newspaper Editors – admirable Crichton’s that they were – because of their profundity and always marveled at how a person could be such an all-rounder. The force of their logic and the brilliance of their submissions – it was really edifying. Sadly those days are well and truly behind us. Save a very precious few, practically the entire industry is now nothing but a mass of mediocrity. I deeply despair.
I’ve always been bitter about the standard of journalism and all but the particular bout that inspired this article was brought on by something I read on the sports page of Thisday Newspaper of 20/3/09 on the teams that were still in the Champions League competition at the time. By way of being fair, I’ll reproduce it here so you can decide for yourself whether or not I’m over reacting. Having already mentioned the 8 teams in question, our man goes ahead to say:
“By the arrangement of the draws for the next round of the competition Barca can be paired with any of the 7 teams remaining. That means Blaugrana can face Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Villareal, Porto or Bayern Munich. But then the coach is said to be aware that for his team to become champions of Europe in June they must be ready to take on and beat any of these 7 remaining in the series”.
Ok, the coach is “said to be aware”? You don’t say! Hopefully he didn’t hurt himself working that one out. And really, we need an explanation of the meaning of being “paired with any of the remaining 7 teams” ehn? Please is anyone else disgusted or am I unreasonable after-all? If your article is too short and you have nothing to add, include pictures or something! Don’t these guys read The Economist, Newsweek and Sports Illustrated et al? Or is it that the idea of learning from those who know better than you is so repulsive that they would rather remain mediocre?
But I’ve only talked about the level of reasoning thus far. It’s when you start considering typos, grammatical expressions, figures of speech etc that the fun really kicks in. (This isn’t good for my blood pressure I tell you.) There are more typos per sentence than fishing nets have holes; the clichés are more over-used than politician’s campaign speech promises and the grammatical expressions . . . . . . (My poor heart can’t take anymore of this).
Perhaps the journalists are not entirely at fault. The bland articles, the colorless language and the “reported speech” type news rendering that adds no value, throws no further light on the issues; aren’t these just a reflection of the kind of education the journalists get? And aren’t we the ones who relish stories about who bought what toy, starlets being ravaged for movie roles, society big gals fighting over lecherous nincompoops and the like, no matter how badly written the articles are?
If you’re a journalist or writer of some sort reading this, I ask you, don’t you want to improve yourself professionally? You would benefit yourself so what greater incentive can you possibly want? Please somebody help me continue, I’m tired.
Comments
Post a Comment