Comparison of what's good writing and not.

Friday, July 15, 2005

Let's compare 2 articles that were written for basically the same reason. A promotion of an upcoming show with Dierks Bentley. These articles were published 1 day apart. The shows were also one day apart. So, it is a very fair comparison.

Read this:
http://www.delmarvanow.com/debeachcomber/stories/20050708/2178105.html

I read this article and I found myself looking for a second page or something that said it was just a part of the article. That was it though. That was the whole thing. All it told me basically was that Bentley lives on his bus and in a hotel. Great, thanks. Most of all, there is a transcript! I can't stand reading an article with a transcript. To me, that shows just pure laziness and lack of being able to create thoughts.

Now, this one:
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031783687605

This is how it should be. This is an example of a good article. It talks about the music, yes, a little bit about living on the road, it talks some about what to expect at the show, and full of great information. No transcript in this article, no way. Quotes, most definitely. A quote does so much for an article. It gives creditability to the article and enhances the impact of the thoughts that are shared in the writing.

Just like anything, there good ones and bad ones.