According to a person ...

Coach ejaculated, too!

But that's a different story. For the Metro desk.

 

The word I've heard most often in this context is "claimed" -- it's code for "we don't really believe him but that's what he said." I always avoided "claimed" for that reason.

 

When would it?

 

"John Doe said he was feeling well enough to play, according to multiple players on the team."

 

That's a good one.

Also probably easier to say "according to ..." than "... wrote in an email" or "... wrote in a text message" or whatever way, other than actually saying it, he might have delivered the information.

 

Not to put too fine a point on it, but: "Multiple players said John Doe told them he felt well enough to play."

That said, yes, there certainly are times when it's possible to use "according to ..." without potential misinterpretation.

 

When you are quoting Fred Hoyle.

 

It's because you didn't actually see the person, just heard the voice, which inserts the small possibility that it wasn't really the person you thought it was.

Sort of like that e-mail or tweet or whatever could have been written by anyone.

 

reformedhack wrote this first.

 

Unless it's a blind call, and you aren't certain at the outset who you're going to be quoting, then using the words, "said in a phone interview," are unnecessary. In most situations, you're going to know who you're talking to and will recognize their voice.

If you're quoting an e-mail, on the other hand, it is always advisable to add the qualifier, because you didn't actually speak to the person you're supposedly quoting.

 

Although if you never use any other verbs, you wind up with "said" 50 times in a story, which gets sort of bland.
[/quote]

The content of your story is supposed to be interesting. If your story is boring unless you use exclaimed, pronounced, stated, believed or whatever else, then your story is boring.
[/quote]

I was always taught you should use nothing but said in between quotes. Or "wrote in an email." I had the same thing as Mark a couple years ago. The sports editor insisted we put "in a phone interview" if we weren't there live.

 

I'm all for using active tense verbs whenever possible. But, particularly in longer stories, I don't see any harm in using
"Smith responded", "Smith asserted", "Smith quipped", "Smith replied" or whatever verbs are appropriate when necessary.

What drove me nuts as a copy editor was "said Smith" instead of "Smith said" UNLESS you were leading into a dependent clause. "I was seeing the ball well tonight," said Smith, who had two doubles and drove in five runs in the victory.