Chapter 12: Opinion Writing

You're going to finally get a chance to say what you think! Yes, now that we've gotten to the end of the semester, you will be given the chance to combine your reporting skills with your analytical skills in order to write an opinion piece or review.

"Comment is free but facts are sacred." --C.P. Scott

This quotation is the key to understanding the difference between responsible and irresponsible opinion writing.  You will never have more of a chance to hurt people and cause trouble than you will have when you write opinion pieces.  Too often, students believe that "anything goes" in an opinion piece, since it is "just" opinion.

You will be writing opinion columns rather than editorials. 

What is the difference?

Editorials speak with an impersonal voice and represent the collective view of an editorial board; opinion columns can have a personal viewpoint and personal voice. Editorials are generally unsigned; opinion columns have a byline.

You can present any opinion you want; whether your opinion article gets a good grade does not depend on the nature of your opinion, however.  It depends on the way you support and develop your opinion.

Important considerations:

1.  You must do your background research, and you must seek the other side of the story.  You are most likely to embarrass yourself when you write an impassioned opinion about a subject only to discover that you completely misunderstood the facts of the case.  

2. Recognize that you just might be wrong in your opinion, and anticipate the objections.

3. Always support all critical comments.  The most common weakness in opinion writing is the lack of illustrative examples.   An opinion is hollow and worthless without support. You are still a reporter; you have a responsibility to be objective in your analysis of the subject, though your response (your opinion) will be your own.

4. Keep the focus on commentary; have a unified, focused organization and use compelling, stylistically consistent language. The more concrete your language, the better the article. Avoid cliché. Avoid cheese. 

5. Not all opinion pieces have to attack something.  Opinions can be positive as well as negative.  But even positive opinions have to be supported.

6. Don't ramble. Organize and focus your opinion.  Keep it relatively short--500 words. Remember, an opinion piece is essentially an analytical essay, and it should have the unity that we expect of an analytical essay.

7. Understand that the worst thing you can do is overstate your case.  You have a lot of power in editorials, but if you abuse that power you are responsible in front of a large readership (1200+ people for The Georgetonian, tens of thousands if you take the option of writing for the Lexington Herald Leader).

8. Recognize that this is your opportunity to develop your personal voice in this class. So much of our writing has emphasized the need for objective, standard style; this is the assignment in which you can let your own style shine.  Of course, you still have to be grammatical, and you have to remember that your object is to involve your audience, not indulge yourself. You still have to follow the principles of good style.

9. If you are doing an arts review, be sure that the critical opinions are INFORMED opinions.  Review an art form in which you have some expertise.  Know the standards of the art form you are reviewing. The work or performance should be compared with similar works.  Don't just say you liked or didn't like something;  support and defend the opinion with specifics. In book and movie reviews, don't summarize plot, though you might have to give context for a person to understand your criticisms (positive or negative).  In food reviews, be very specific about your experience and avoid vague adjectives. Reviews are actually very hard to do well; don't assume this is an "easy" story. (See the footnote on reviews.)

Good arts reviews are incisive and witty.  Perhaps my favorite witty bit of criticism was one by Samuel Johnson, who said, "[The work] is both good and original; but the part that is good was not original, and the part that is original was not good."  Talk about skewering someone! And remember, nothing is more boring than a good review of something that just natters on about how great and awesome and moving something was. If you do a review, do some sort of incisive, analytical review.

10. If you've got a gift for satire or humor, consider using it. I'll allow you to write a humor piece to satisfy this assignment, and I can't really give you many rules on how to write satire or humor.  I'll have to grade you on the basis of whether I think what you've done is effective (and whether it makes me laugh).

Assignment: I'm asking you to write an opinion, review or humor column, approximately 500 words in length. You may direct this article to one of two audiences: the Georgetonian audience, or the audience of the Lexington Herald-Leader (through their "Open Mike" column). Story Pitch must be ready by Thursday, Nov. 12. Due date for completed story: December 2.

For an example of the Herald-Leader's "Open Mike" series ("a forum for writers under 30"), click the links below:

http://www.robinsonforest.org/media/archive/021201.htm 

 

A Footnote on Reviews:  Reviews need to be well-informed, and they also need to be witty.  The best opportunity for wit comes in the review of genuinely bad and pretentious works.  Consider, for instance, these reviews of the Ben Affleck/Jennifer Lopez movie Gigli.  Here are some links to those reviews, with some lines from them as teasers:

 "There's virtually no story, no conflict, no tension and no suspense, just the endless droning of the worst dialogue written in recent memory."
 
"A rigli, rigli bad movie."
"It is an exquisitely bad movie: One to be savoured, marvelled over, shared with friends and generally appreciated in a state of awestruck wonder. Gourmet fromage."
 
"Once you get past the staggering question of who gave this thing the green light, Gigli actually turns into a uniquely bad movie that yields real (albeit unintentional) laughter."
 
"I had a brief thought that the mundane inanity might be some Samuel Beckett-style commentary on the existential void. Then I realized that watching the movie put me closer to the existential void than they ever were."
"The movie is pretty much as bad as you've heard, a tangle of badness so thick it's hard to hack your way through and find the good idea that made writer/director Martin Brest think this was a story worth telling."
"This is a movie that manages to keep finding new ways of being stupid."
 
"Such an utter wreck of a movie you expect to see it lying on its side somewhere in rural Pennsylvania, with a small gang of engineers circling and a wisp of smoke rising from the caboose."