Does WGN Stand for Word and Grammar Nazi?

Tribune CEO confronts WGN staff about leak of banned-words memo
vocalo.org

http://blogs.vocalo.org/feder/2010/03/memo-puts-wgn-news-staffers-at-a-loss-for-words/17374

WGN-AM talk radio's CEO Randy Michaels sets off media firestorm with his list of banned words and his heavyhanded treatment of Tribune Co. staff in Chicago.

Comments

[Dan Underhill]

I think it is well worth discussing as long as one isn't too heavy-handed about it. Ted.com provides a lecture:

(http://www.ted.com/talks/erin_mckean_redefines_the_dictionary.html)

That might serve as a gentle rebuttal and/or support for Mr. Michaels' perspective.

[Barry Parr]

WGN, of course, stands for World's Greatest Newspaper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WGN

I don't necessarily disagree with anything on the list. I believe that the complaint was that the CEO probably had bigger problems on his plate.

[Laurie Frater]

If we're adding, how about "There's [number greater than 1]..."

I might have thought that "are" is becoming obsolete -- until recently, when I heard "There are just one left" -- so maybe not!

And has anyone else noticed the sudden epidemic of "the person that..." rather than "the person who..."? It's getting all too much for this pedant!

[Dale Riehart]

Yes, Michaels should be concerned about the overall sound of his station and the choice of words his on-air people use. No one likes to hear an otherwise intelligent person speak poorly.

Posting a list of non-preferred words and phrases, that's okay, too. But simply telling them what not to use without offering preferred alternatives is simply setting up the newsroom staff for another set of words.

Worse, Michaels' directive to his staff to rat on one another is clearly not acceptable, not if he wants to build morale in the newsroom and WGN in general. One has to wonder if Michaels will offer rewards for ratting out a colleague.

Michaels would be far better served if he put some money in News Director Meyerson's budget for a copy editor or three who could ensure that the bad grammar, redundancies, and otherwise unacceptable words are replaced by intelligent phrases that make the reporters, the newsroom, and WGN sound good. They likely would also edit Michaels' list, given that a good number of entries seem more like personal nits than professional decisions.

Having worked in radio broadcasting for a number of years early in my career, I can appreciate Michaels' wanting to make WGN news sound as professional as possible, but intimidation and ridicule are not the way to win converts. Instead, what he's likely to get is a few choice words that he can add to his list.

[Steve Sinai]

Is it really necessary to attach the word "little" to the name of anyone under 10 years old? Add that to the list.

[Peter Hammar]

I'm surprised WGN news staffers are complaining that their literate and articulate CEO Randy Michaels wants his station's output to be as effective as possible. Since when is it inappropriate for a CEO to be concerned about the quality of his company's product? In the case of the quality of television "news," Michaels SHOULD be concerned about his reporters' word choice in a business known for its superficiality and use of meaningless buzzwords.

The WGN staffers making noise about this are the ones who need to review their job priorities, not CEO Michaels. Take a look at his list and then think of how many times we've been subjected to this kind of mindless "news" reporting.

As for Michaels' method of enforcing his request for linguistic accuracy, how else are often-clueless, blow-dry-"Ken-and-Barbie"-type, so-called "reporters" going to get the message, short of threatening to fire their intellectually lazy butts?