The Journal

Issue date: 3/9/06 Section: Opinion/Editorial

Tom Parr

As a budding, aspiring sports journalist here at this prestigious university, I've developed a voracious hunger for knowledge about my sweet, sweet future craft. As a result, I am fed a steady diet of what works in journalism and what doesn't. In order to better my skills (and subsequently the planet) I (somewhat) diligently attempt to apply these teachings and readings to my duties as sports editor here with The Journal.

Now, I'll be one of the many to admit that my professors know their proverbial shit and, until recently, I felt the same about the textbooks.

But my friends, I have come to a crossroads. I am butting heads with an entire chapter of a textbook and apparently a journalism ethos as well. I am also struggling with the answers given to me by "those who edit all."

The problem at hand refers to the use of the dreaded cliche. I am being told to avoid cliches as if they were the plague and simply report what happened. Now, I understand the importance of accuracy and impartiality and I'm by no means calling for some radical transformation therein, but perhaps, instead, some minor modernization.

My reasoning stems from an alarming trend I've been noticing - newspaper readership by my peers is becoming pitifully scarce. Very rarely are those in my demographic going to newspapers on a regular basis for their news. The Internet, cable television and even satellite radio are rapidly overtaking an entire generation of potential readers, and if we/they go, how long until the advertisers follow? If that happens, neither accuracy nor impartiality or all of the other great things imparted on me every day here will matter as I, as well as countless other young journalists, won't have a paper for which to write.

Now, obviously the cliche is not the panacea for print journalism's future problems, but the fact that I am forbidden from using them, even though our culture spits them out with great fervor, does provide some insight as to why print is being left behind.

Perhaps some examples of sports cliches that one of my textbooks lists, in hopes of thwarting their future usage may help illustrate my point. A few of the more inane hoped to hinder future sportswriters from referring to homeruns as "the long-ball" or "shots" and even "homers!" Throwing a ball (any ball) well and on target shouldn't be called a "laser" or "on a rope" or "with authority" but instead - apparently, just thrown well and on target (but not just "on target" because this too is frowned upon).

The list goes on to cover other well-known phrases such as "buzzer-beater," "putting on a clinic" and "pitchers duel."

Not only do these restrictions handcuff future sportswriters from relating to their readers, they become a slap in the face to those readers as well. I feel the best way to inform my readers is to write as if I was sitting in a bar, locker room or bus stop alongside them - not pretentiously spitting obviousness at them from atop some cliché-less mount.

A few dictionary definitions of cliches define them as words or phrases that are overused and have become boring by repetition. I understand all that and would hate to see an entire article full of clichés (with the obvious exception of this one, of course), but I think the opposite of those definitions is worse?

Isn't a mass of prospective sportswriters pumping out anti-cliches cliches even scarier? Instead of saying "homer," I am pressured to follow the textbook rules and simply write "homerun," while every student like myself, in numerous colleges around the world, is learning to do the same. What happens when we all get into the industry and use the word homerun - not "solo-jack" or "upper-deck shot", but homerun? Tell me that's not boring.

Doesn't this also lead to my book's precious word "homerun" ultimately becoming a cliche? It would be overused and certainly no longer read two weeks into the season. If so, then maybe there should be a sub-chapter in my text dictating the statue of limitations on these things.

I guess the answer to staying creative, but not using cliches, is to take the approach of ESPN's college basketball analyst Dick Vitale - just make up stuff or put "baby" at the end of every sentence. Everyone likes Dicky V's catch phrases, so maybe I should be learning how to do that.

Cliche writing 2120 might be interesting because, it's not your father's college journalism course, after all.



Tom Parr, a junior journalism major, is the sports editor for The Journal.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools