Letter From the Editor—020807

Those of you who have read my Letter From the Editor for the last three weeks (admirers, detractors, my father) will have noticed a pattern. I begin my template letter with an event—preferably concerning the media, preferably polemical, insightful even—tease the anecdote into a grandiloquent pronouncement, and then weave three or four of the week’s stories through it.

Some of you may already be appalled that I am using my own articles as an example of a media event.

Others will recognize that this meta-analysis could be applied to almost every other article in this magazine—or any other publication, for that matter.

Magazine writing is typically distinguished from newspaper writing for its personality, its charisma—its freewheeling individuality. That’s hardly the case. The newspaper story is characterized by its use of the lede, that zippy, stage-setting introduction, and the nutgraf, the no-nonsense thesis. Classroom setting with unruly ethnic children; inner city schools are in trouble: Bam!

The structure is called the inverted pyramid, which opens with a general introduction, presents the thesis, and unfolds with a climax, placing the most important information at the top and gradually getting to the gritty details.

Contrast this with the linear structure—where the event unfolds like a narrative to its conclusion—which is designed for suspense, and the omission structure—where the thesis is presented, the process unfolds, and then the problem is introduced. They are employed to achieve suspense and curiosity, respectively.

Short-form magazine articles, for all their pizzazz, are generally written in the inverted pyramid system. The articles are often longer, but rarely is the thesis farther than two paragraphs into the story. Complex, subsidiary claims are dealt with as microcosms of the larger story.

A 2004 study at UC Davis found that the inverted pyramid resulted in the least suspense and curiosity—that is to say, it was delivered with aspirations of detachment, objectivity, and intellectuality. It’s news.
Countless studies have attested to the way in which packaging affects shoppers’ choices, and likewise, the packaging of information within an article affects reader reception.
What does this mechanical article mean for me? Probably that I would be better off plugging information into a formula than writing it myself. The implications are even more dire for you: you probably spend a lot of time processing what you’re reading (editorial, trend reports) as fact (news).

How might we subvert the effects of this misunderstanding? By offering self-conscious analysis to confront truth within every article, I respond!

This week in The Eye, Jen Spyra examines the rumor—often presented as scurrilous fact—of Saint A’s secrecy. Laura Anderson takes on the American public’s naive faith in organic labels. Yet again, Matt Mireles brings a dispatch unlike anything you’ll see on network TV.

It’s not news: it’s meta-news.