'Everything Is a Story' Inside Wyrmwood Gaming's Narcissistic Funhouse

[Umbran]

I don't think anyone was the good guy here including the journalist writing prose instead of just reporting the facts.

What, you expected it as a sonnet, or something? I don't know if "prose" is the word you want here, so I am not sure what you're accusing her of.

 

[Tun Kai Poh]

Completely agree. I've been a story and line editor in my time (for fiction, journalism, and academic articles) and this piece reads wonderfully. Unless something can be pointed out specifically, the complaint sounds more like someone soapboxing a defensive gripe than offering legitimate criticism.

I wish I had a writer like Linda when I was a magazine editor back in the 2000s!

 

[Teo Twawki]

you just make it harder for skeptics to take you seriously.

This statement is self-reflective of its commenter.

 

[Teo Twawki]

I wish I had a writer like Linda when I was a magazine editor back in the 2000s!

A majority of time as an editor, I merely hoped to encounter a writer who didn't make me dive into a pail of gin.

 

[Emberashh]

What, you expected it as a sonnet, or something? I don't know if "prose" is the word you want here, so I am not sure what you're accusing her of.

I used prose in the sense of it being more than just dry reporting of facts.

Put another way, I don't appreciate journalism that tries too hard and too obviously to convince me of something instead of trusting the facts to do the talking.

You and others might find how this was written to be innocuous; I don't, and as mentioned this isn't just some deflection on Wyrmwoods part, I don't really care about those people. This is a problem I have with journalism in general and this article triggered that issue pretty severely, prompting me to even comment on this.

 

[billd91]

I used prose in the sense of it being more than just dry reporting of facts.

Put another way, I don't appreciate journalism that tries too hard and too obviously to convince me of something instead of trusting the facts to do the talking.

You and others might find how this was written to be innocuous; I don't, and as mentioned this isn't just some deflection on Wyrmwoods part, I don't really care about those people. This is a problem I have with journalism in general and this article triggered that issue pretty severely, prompting me to even comment on this.

Maybe your own statement is showing us why they write the way they do.
Dry reporting of facts. Dry. Try looking it up and you get this:

"(of information, writing, etc.) dealing primarily with facts and presented in a dull, uninteresting way"

You can write an article, cover the facts, keep them reasonably unbiased, and still have it be interesting rather than dry.

 

[Emberashh]

Maybe your own statement is showing us why they do write the way they do.

They write the way they do because they rely on clicks and engagement.

You can write an article, cover the facts, keep them reasonably unbiased, and still have it be interesting rather than dry.

Emphasis mine, and frankly I think one can understand why I Id have such a huge problem with what you said, so I'll skip the rant for the moment.

 

[billd91]

They write the way they do because they rely on clicks and engagement.

Generally, it's better for readers to engage with the text rather than be bored by it and have their eyes glaze over and dry out.

Emphasis mine, and frankly I think one can understand why I Id have such a huge problem with what you said, so I'll skip the rant for the moment.

Reasonably unbiased is literally the best a journalist, even a dry one, can get. The fact that they chose to consider something newsworthy (or not) already injects bias.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

I used prose in the sense of it being more than just dry reporting of facts.

Unless the only reporting you've ever read was in newspapers, you're astonishingly out of your depth there. Read any magazine feature written in the past 100 years.

 

[Emberashh]

Generally, it's better for readers to engage with the text rather than be bored by it and have their eyes glaze over and dry out.

In a time of misinformation, no, it isn't better, and I don't find laziness to be an excuse.

Reasonably unbiased is literally the best a journalist, even a dry one, can get. The fact that they chose to consider something newsworthy (or not) already injects bias.

And there's a clear difference between bias that results from something being reported and bias from said report being written to convince rather than to just report.

Unless the only reporting you've ever read was in newspapers, you're astonishingly out of your depth there. Read any magazine feature written in the past 100 years.

I've said explicitly this is a criticism I levy at all journalism, so I don't know what you expect this statement to reveal.