1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Quotes are sacred

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by inthesuburbs, Dec 3, 2008.

  1. DirtyDeeds

    DirtyDeeds Guest

    That's a good example, and I'm with you on that. Not sure it's an idiotic premise, though. I think the overall original post is true, but it's not always that cut-and-dried. Parenthetical additions are overdone, but sometimes it is necessary/preferable.
     
  2. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    Let me clarify -- I don't think the premise that "quotes are sacred" is idiotic I think the application of it by IntheSuburbs is because in using brackets or whatever, you are not changing the meaning of the quote or putting words into someone's mouth.
     
  3. spikechiquet

    spikechiquet Well-Known Member

    I've had this agrument before and I see both ways. But I always clean up quotes of local prepsters. When it comes to D-I, I try to stick to the quote.
    Reason being? I don't want to make the local kid sound dumb if they say something not correct, but if it's a college coach...well, he's being paid to sound smart, so word-for-word works for me.
    As for using (), I don't see a problem if it helps the story flow.
     
  4. TheMethod

    TheMethod Member

    I agree. And to do things like this, you'd be adding words to your story most of the time. I don't see the problem with the parenthetical stuff. The reader knows what it means.
     
  5. mike311gd

    mike311gd Active Member

    Be concise, not wordy.
     
  6. MGoBlue

    MGoBlue Member

    Quotes are sacred.
    Except for 'I think.'
    That comes out immediately.
     
  7. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    I have one word for this thread:
    Hallelujah.
     
  8. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    Parentheses are used for two reasons, and two reasons only:
    1) The writer is being too lazy to set up the quote properly or to paraphrase effectively.
    2) The desk assumes the reader is a moron and, for instance, doesn't know that Bobby Bonds is Barry Bonds' father, or can't make basic assumptions of context.
    In the case of the Avery story, if the paper, for reasons of taste, declines to use the phrase he actually spoke, the way to handle this is not to use parentheses but to instead say:
    Avery was suspended by the NHL for using a crude term for former girlfriend in addressing the media prior to the Stars' game against Calgary. Etc.
     
  9. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    What's wrong with just this:

    Frank said Smith "hit him hard."

    Why do you need the parentheses?

    Parentheses have become the crutch of modern journalism. When I started in this business, just slightly after spnited and Red Smith, you'd see them about 5 percent as often as you do now.
     
  10. Some Guy

    Some Guy Active Member

    I agree they are vastly overused.
    I agree they are sometimes neccessary.
    I agree with everyone! Kum-bay-yah.
     
  11. inthesuburbs

    inthesuburbs Member

    That's a perfect example.

    Do this:

    Smith "hit him hard," Frank said.


    Or this:

    He said Smith "hit him hard."


    Or because the words in the quote are not remarkable:

    He said Smith hit him hard.


    Not this:

    "[Smith] hit him hard," said Frank.


    Why?

    a. Frank didn't say that. If you're not saying what he said, it's not a quote.

    b. The reader has no idea what Frank actually said. "My mother could have hit him hard." "That asshat hit him hard." "It would have been better if he had hit him hard." Etc. Seriously, are you changing it because Frank can't talk, or because Frank got the name wrong. The reader will wonder. Why? Because it's not a quote.

    c. It's ugly. There is no universe in which good clean prose is full of brackets. If you try to set up the quote, or follow the quote, and more often to truncate the quote, you never need them.

    d. Oh, and "said Frank" is silly. Only children's authors and sportswriters write this way. It's "Frank said."

    All of this, of course, leaves open the question: Why do reporters focus so hard on getting a quote, any quote, even a lame quote, when getting clear information is really what the reader craves.

    If you've ever been interviewed, you know that the good reporters seek to understand what happened, and enough detail to explain it to the reader. The rest are just waiting to write down a quote.
     
  12. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Ouch. In the suburbs with a haymaker in the first round.

    I'd say something snotty to the newbie if he didn't happen to be 100 percent correct. Plus, he said asshat.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page