Reading Notebook #18: There’s More Bad Writing Than Ever

From an interview with Clay Shirky over at the Barnes and Noble Review:

I’ve always adopted the Bill Burroughs mantra, which is, “If a thing is worth doing, it’s worth doing badly.” Which is to say that if there is any intrinsic value in writing or expressing yourself or taking a photo, it’s worth doing even if the results are mediocre. Whenever the production maw has opened more widely, whether it’s cheap photography or it’s weblogs, the average quality falls. The average quality of a piece of writing is now lower because the denominator has exploded. The question becomes how do you find the good stuff in this much larger group. I am not somebody who believes everyone is equally talented; talent remains unequally distributed. What’s interesting now is that the old gatekeepers for identifying, anointing, and promoting talent are different in this generation than they were previously.

Read the full interview.

Share on:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

2 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jcorn1

I don't think writing is taken as seriously because we now have so many ways to get information out there and editors aren't always as reverent (for want of a better word) about going through each writer's sentences. There is a push to get information onto the internet quickly and magazines are under tremendous financial pressure and many are going under.

Because information may have to get posted hastily, here is a recent sentence from the Christian Science Monitor, a newspaper that I don't always read or like but which I thought tried to produce sentences with correct grammar: “”Others note that because this technique is so new, not much regulation exists, and therefore there is likely to be many court challenges.”

Maybe I'm totally off base but none of my teachers would have called that sentence grammatically correct. You can see the original article as noted below.

2nd page, second or third page from the bottom. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0708/

My theory is that in the haste to publish the latest info, no editor looked closely at this one.

Jane Friedman

Your comment reminds me of a blog post I *just* read on an IBM study showing that well-edited material can boost response by 30%. I believe it.

More here:
http://writingfordigital.com/2010/07/04/a-fourt