A friend of mine recently pointed me at the newspaper-associated blog of a “recent Appalachian State University graduate and now a freelance reporter for The Charlotte Observer”.
Ms Penland seems like a nice person – but her writing is not at all what I would expect for a blog associated with a newspaper – it is far more like a personal journal of a teenager than a professional blog of a reporter.
I’m all for personal voice showing-up in folks’ writing (it certainly does on all of the blogs I follow – and on the ones I write ;)) – but when you’re writing reviews for a newspaper, it would seem like you’d try to be a bit more … professional in your writing.
Besides the myriad grammar errors (I know – we all have them, but certainly some proofreading should be done to catch things like “was is“), it seems she has a routine dislike for “chains” – and yet visits many. She also refers to her boyfriend in many of her reviews: a perfectly fine thing to do in passing, but she ends up making some of them more about him than about the place they went.
As a “recent graduate”, I wouldn’t necessarily expect Brittany’s writing to be on par with, say, Malcolm Gladwell, but I would expect it to be at the level of, well, a college graduate. (I have seen some collegiate writing that appalled me when I was in school – writing submitted by 4th year English Majors that looked like it was pulled from a 6th grade student’s portfolio: but those folks don’t [typically] get hired by newspapers… do they?)
I hope Ms Penland’s writing improves dramatically through her “freelance” association with the Observer, but I also hope that the Observer doesn’t have too many folks like her writing in association with them: it reflects poorly on their editorial staff and hiring practices if they do.
The comment I tried to leave on one of Ms Penland’s posts (http://clt30bars30days.blogspot.com/2011/07/flying-saucer-beer-selection-best-for.html):
I have to take some umbrage with this post – while I am a member of the UFO club (and have my plate hanging in Raleigh), the write-up of not only this location, but the chain in general is horrid. You mention this is a chain (and rightfully so), but neglect to provide information as to the rest of the company (http://beerknurd.com) and its 14 locations (including the other one in NC and the one in nearby SC).Â
Aside from the grammar issues (eg ‘the decor was is unique to other bars I’ve visited’ – do you ever proofread your posts?), which I have noticed in almost all of your reviews so far, you haven’t really told us anything about the place beyond that it has pennies for a back splash. The wall behind the bar is not a “back splash” – it’s a wall. A backsplash is to protect against splashed liquids (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/backsplash). Based on the height of the penny panels, they’re either expecting a heluva mess, or it’s just there for decoration (like it is in Raleigh and Fort Worth).
You can’t offer “vast beers” unless the beer itself is “vast”. You might have a vast ‘array’ or ‘selection’, but the beer is not “vast”.
How many times can you use the word “I” when writing a review? Yes, it’s a personal experience, but as a “recent Appalachian State University graduate”, you are not showcasing a quality of writing that should be expected from someone having completed a collegiate degree program.
When other than “during the school year” would you expect a place to pack “a college crowd”? Certainly not when school is not in session!
The UFO Club is a blast – but you left out a couple important points: not only do you get a beer knurd t-shirt, but in order for the 200 beers to count, you cannot have more than 3 per night – which means that it will take at least 67 visits to complete your platter.
With regards to the Saucer’s schedule, Tuesday is trivia night every week (with a few exceptions), and is not “Belgian beer trivia”; every Wednesday is glass night.Lastly, do you have something against using the full name of the establishment? It is “The Flying Saucer”, not “Flying Saucer” (http://www.beerknurd.com/stores/charlotte/).
I sincerely hope your writing on this blog is not indicative of the rest of The Charlotte Observer’s writing staff, because if it is, I can only laud those who elect to not read the paper any more.
…and what I sent to the staff of the Charlotte Observer:
Good morning. I am not 100% sure to whom this should be addressed, so apologies in advance if this should not be directed to some of the recipients.
I recently had one of your “freelance reporter” blogs shown to me by a long-time friend who lives in Charlotte – ’30 Bars in 30 Days’ (http://clt30bars30days.blogspot.com/).
Brittany Penland’s writing style is very informal and unprofessional – not at all what I would expect for someone writing for a professional publication like The Observer. Specifically I am writing with regards to her “review” of The Flying Saucer located at 9605 N Tryon St (http://clt30bars30days.blogspot.com/2011/07/flying-saucer-beer-selection-best-for.html). Informality could be understood as this is a “personal” blog, but since she claims to be associated with the paper (indeed, there is a Charlotte Observer header at the top of the blog), Ms Penland’s writing shouldn’t be so blase.
I like to hear personal voice and style come out in a writer’s work – but her overuse of “I”, simple sentence structure, and constant references to her boyfriend shouldn’t have such prominent place in reviews associated with the paper. Most of her posts appear to have undergone 0 proofreading (see my call-out of one such example among many below).
I hope something can be done to address this in such a way as to improve Ms Penland’s writing, and not to bring her career harm.