Question about "first ever"

Not so fast.

I was told long ago by veteran editors to take out qualifiers such as " . . . of the season".

So if someone hits his first home run in the major leagues (a big deal), there had better be some qualifier, lest it be interpreted as his first HR of the season (not a big deal).

"First ever" and things of that nature are USUALLY not needed . . . but those who stubbornly edit them out 100% of the time are likely adding a degree of impreciseness to some stories.

 

Agreed!

 

Ever is rarely if ever necessary.

Though I screwed it up myself tonight while editing baseball copy.
The lede is basically my re-write and that 'ever' does not need to be there.

¶ ANAHEIM, Calif. (AP) _ According to Torii Hunter, it was the second-best catch he's ever made.
¶ The Angels' Gold Glove center fielder made a wall-climbing, homer-stealing catch in the ninth inning to help Los Angeles hold off the Kansas City Royals 4-3 on Sunday.

 

Maybe it's just me, but without "ever," that sentence just sounds awful in my head when I read it.

 

Which is probably why I left it in. The ear test. It sounds right.

But I think we've been conditioned to think the 'ever' is necessary because it's such a broadcaster's crutch. Like true freshman, which makes my eyes bleed everytime I read it.

 

First is first is first is first.

Ever? NEVER!

As to first major league home run or first of the season First major league home run (NOT first ever major league home run). If I just read "first home run," it means this season.


First-ever should never be used....and I do edited out 100% of the time, BT.

 

A former journalism professor related this story from one of his former supervisors:

"The next time I read the word UPCOMING, I will be downcoming and some writer will be outgoing. Just COMING will suffice."

 

I'm with the side that says "first" will suffice in the overwhelming majority of instances. But it ticks me off when these kind of time references seem to lack substance. I can't remember where I saw it, but I distinctly remember recently reading something to the effect of, "The Cardinals are off to their best start since 2006 . . . "

Wow, that's an entire 2-year gap.

And in the above example, it would benefit the reader to give them some idea how long the St. Mary's history is. Are we talking five years or 50?

 

I hate tin-eared rules.

 

BTExpress points out that just saying "first" doesn't properly convey the feat when a home run is the first of a player's multiple-season career. But you still shouldn't say "first ever" in that case, but rather "first career home run."

I also hate "this is State's first-ever playoff berth." Just say that it is the first State playoff berth in school history.

 

about "ever"

It is an adverb.

Avoid adverbs as often as possible. Generally, they are redundant words that add little, if anything, to your story.

If you feel like you need to use an adverb, chances are, you need more detail about the information you're writing in that phrase.

 

I was always told that "first-ever" was a TV term used by people who couldn't figure out "first" ALWAYS suffices.

I hate that term almost as much as "first annual," which turns up in our copy more than it should.