How bad is this Boston Globe lede?

I don't know how easy people go on the Writer's Workshop. I can't imagine from the limited time I've been there it's super, super easy.

 

Well maybe easy/hard wasn't the best way to get my point across. The expectations would be different for the j-schooler and a major metro beat writer. I don't know that this thread is that out of line. We have multiple threads going daily ripping the SI, ESPN, major columnist du jour. This isn't someone covering their first big game. I think this thread has been harsh, but I don't think the writer is out of bounds.

 

My question on the writethru: Since when would anyone cite Peaches and Herb in a metaphor about lyrics? Tom Waits? Bob Dylan? Joni Mitchell? Sure. But Peaches and Herb? Alicia Bridges is pissed.

 

Obviously the writer has talent, or they wouldn't be writing for the Boston Globe. And if you're working for the Globe, covering the Celtics, you're going to be held up to a higher standard.

My guess is it's a younger writer who was pressing a bit, trying to turn in something fabulous, but couldn't pull it off.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the writer took a risk that didn't work - and what we're looking at here is the product of a copy editor trying to reign it in on deadline.

It's happened to all of us. Some of my worst stories happened when I was trying to make them my best. When you get a little older you realize that, on deadline, sometimes it just is what it is and write it simple.

That's my theory and I'm sticking to it - up until someone comes on here and tells me the beat writer is in his 50s.

 

Not a huge fan of the lede, but completely, 100 percent disagree with the final score ALWAYS being the first score.

There are times that call for an important play in the second quarter to lead off, especially in football or baseball (inning, but yeah).

No such thing as NEVER or ALWAYS in sportswriting

 

Who has a job many of them would cut their left arm off for.

Maybe we should look at the other 81 game stories.

 

Maybe it wasn't his best work, but this reporter is excellent.

Just curious, though: Why is it copyrighted 2007?

 

People probably already have the final score by the time they read the story. What they want to know is how the win came about.
It might be unfair to judge the story without seeing how it was packaged with other elements. Maybe the paper had a picture with the score already dominant on the page? That said, I tend not to read gamers.

 

I've been told to write gamers as if no one knows the score or what happened. Then again, I've had gigs where my editor has asked me to write more analysis and less play-by-play.

I've sometimes broken the no-score-before-final-score rule, but since I'm now aware of it, I try to avoid breaking it now. You can show how a play develops and how it factors into the final score without printing a score before the final.

 

Since this got moved, I’ll chip in on it for what it’s worth.

There’s a huge difference between submitting your work willingly to criticism – as in a workshop setting, even online - and having it gratuitously taken up for ridicule or anonymous condemnation. That’s why I discourage the posting of secondhand work here, i.e., “Hey, look how rotten this gamer from some guy in Dubuque turned out,” no matter how illustrative of a common problem it might be. Especially so if the work is bylined, or even easily Googled. It’s not fair to the guy in Dubuque, certainly, and any problems the work has are going to be common enough that they’ll come along eventually, and much less hurtfully, when brought in by someone actually seeking a critique.

The answer to the other question here – why is it then permissible to savage the bigs like messrs. Mariotti, Lupica, Albom, et al.? - is that at bottom it isn’t. Especially when ripping their work is just a feint to rip on their personal appearance, or their behavior in the press box or to wax vengeful out of simple envy.

But that kind of thing is also inevitable. When you’re a star, it’s part of having your name on the marquee. Your work is distributed nationally, you’re on teevee, you’re earning six figures – be prepared to be dissed. Part of the job description at that altitude is taking your public lumps.

I think the piece in question on this thread falls somewhere in between. Is it a weak lede? Sure. Are we gathered here to talk about how to fix it or make it better - about how to avoid making the same mistake? I don’t know, are we? Is this writer of sufficient stature to merit – and then bear - our critical attention? Perhaps.

As much as can be learned from our failures – and believe me, our successes teach us almost nothing – I know I never feel better about myself or my work simply by seeing someone else fail.

 

Skin thinner than condoms, we have in this profession.

Lot of insecurity.

Why?

Ricky Gervais had a wonderful screed in the Extras finale of not being smart enough to be a lawyer or surgeon and having to settle being an actor.

Lot of that may resonate.