5 ms·
Reading through this article, I was somewhat jarred by this sentence: "It seems likely that Manjoo isn’t lying, and that he really believes he had unplugged, a
by chias 9y ago
Reading through this article, I was somewhat jarred by this sentence:
"It seems likely that Manjoo isn’t lying, and that he really believes he had unplugged, and really believes that his weak-sauce explanations don’t belie the point of his column."
Up until that point, the article has been professional, well spoken, and precise. I know it's a small thing, but the inclusion of the term "weak-sauce" instantly dealt a blow to the image of maturity I had constructed of the author. The paragraph itself would be no less compelling (perhaps even more-so) had the term simply been omitted without replacement.
I spent the rest of the article wondering if this was thoughtful journalism or some college kid's essay.
- always_good 9y agoAgreed. It's like seeing "for the win" or, nowadays, "lit." Takes a juvenile turn without paying for itself in expressiveness. Same reason cussing is unprofessional.
- jclulow 9y agoThat's just, like, your opinion, man. I have only ever worked in places where people have sworn like the proverbial sailor, but where those same people have treated their work incredibly seriously, and their colleagues with respect and empathy. Professionalism is about so much more than wearing the right tie and avoiding particular words.
- shaki-dora 9y agoI think what’s far more important about that sentence is something commendable: they’re showing good faith in giving the author the benefit of the doubt. Your objection to the specific phrase is, I believe, an attachment to a somewhat superficial definition of “professionalism”. It reminds me of the US President’s caricature of the term “presidential”, where he seems to believe that “being presidential” would require him to speak in a fake British accent and never make a joke. His predecessor already appeared on comedy shows and threw footballs through the Oval Office, without ever (seriously) being considered “unpresidential”. Because the term is far more about content than style. See also Hunter S Thompson or Tom Wolfe for examples of respected journalists dispensing with unnessary decorum.
- chias 9y agoYou're not wrong. I do, however, strongly believe that his use of the phrase did not do him any favors.
- prepend 9y agoI don’t think it’s very useful to discount the article based on the author’s particular diction (or whatever you call internet slang). I think it’s more useful to discuss the content of the article. Otherwise you can spend all your time picking apart accents and what not that don’t really matter. I understood what the author meant when they said “weak sauce.” I don’t want to confuse the discussion by throwing shade “sure he’s right that Manjoo lied or misrepresented, but did you see what he was wearing?” And then devolve into fashion commentary.