Meeting: You Don't Need "That!"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice? 

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.

Meeting: You Don't Need "That!"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision on Tuesday to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided Tuesday to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.

Controversial: Don't Be Redundant

Do you need to say unanimous 9-0 vote?

No. 9-0 is unanimous. Saying both is simply repeating the obvious. You can just call it a 9-0 vote.

Be concise. Don't be wordy. And don't repeat the same thing in a different way.

First Ledes: Get To The News!

The news isn't that something took place; it's what ended up happening. It's about ultimate outcome. This lede takes some time to get to the latter:

The Centers for Disease Control conducted elaborate studies on American marriages, with staggering truths about divorce rates revealed.  The CDC concludes women’s wealth, religion, and education play drastic roles in the break-up rate.

What holds us up here is the mention of staggering truths. It tells us that there are truths, but it doesn't say what those truths are. It's kind of a waste of time and space. In English composition we prize wordiness, but in journalistic writing we strive for the exact opposite. We went to be precise and efficient in word use.

What I recommend is getting straight to the point by cutting out that middle section of, conducted elaborate studies on American marriages, with staggering truths about divorce rates revealed. The CDC ... that hints at -- but fails to specify -- the findings.

Then I'd merge what was left, leaving us with this:

The Centers for Disease Control concludes women’s wealth, religion, and education play drastic roles in the marriage break-up rate.

Now, we're emphasizing  the end result and ultimate outcome, without the clutter that doesn't really say much.

First Ledes: Two Sentences Are NOT Better Than One

In writing for journalism, we need to look for spots where we can reduce wordiness and be efficient in word use.

I see an opportunity with this lede:

Teachers in East Lansing will be provided with financial relief, thanks to a new program. The program will offer mortgages with below-market interest rates to teachers and administrators in public schools. 

First, we should always be on the lookout for opportunities to reduce a two-sentence lede to just one sentence. A good indication of whether you can possibly do that is if you refer to something twice.

Like, when you refer to the "program" at the end of the first sentence, and the start of the second sentence. Why not merge those references -- and sentences -- like this:

Teachers in East Lansing will be provided with financial relief, thanks to a new program offering mortgages with below-market interest rates to teachers and administrators in public schools.

See what I did there? We've cut out excessive wordiness and redundancy.

Meeting: You Don't Need "That!"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.

Meeting: You Don't Need "That!"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision on Tuesday to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided Tuesday to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.

Controversial: Don't Be Redundant

Do you need to say unanimous 9-0 vote?

No. 9-0 is unanimous. Saying both is simply repeating the obvious. You can just call it a 9-0 vote.

Be concise. Don't be wordy. And don't repeat the same thing in a different way.

First Ledes: Get To The News!

The news isn't that something took place; it's what ended up happening. It's about ultimate outcome. This lede takes some time to get to the latter:

The Centers for Disease Control conducted elaborate studies on American marriages, with staggering truths about divorce rates revealed.  The CDC concludes women’s wealth, religion, and education play drastic roles in the break-up rate.

What holds us up here is the mention of staggering truths. It tells us that there are truths, but it doesn't say what those truths are. It's kind of a waste of time and space. In English composition we prize wordiness, but in journalistic writing we strive for the exact opposite. We went to be precise and efficient in word use.

What I recommend is getting straight to the point by cutting out that middle section of, conducted elaborate studies on American marriages, with staggering truths about divorce rates revealed. The CDC ... that hints at -- but fails to specify -- the findings.

Then I'd merge what was left, leaving us with this:

The Centers for Disease Control concludes women’s wealth, religion, and education play drastic roles in the marriage break-up rate.

Now, we're emphasizing  the end result and ultimate outcome, without the clutter that doesn't really say much.

First Ledes: Two Sentences Are NOT Better Than One

In writing for journalism, we need to look for spots where we can reduce wordiness and be efficient in word use.

I see an opportunity with this lede:

Teachers in East Lansing will be provided with financial relief, thanks to a new program. The program will offer mortgages with below-market interest rates to teachers and administrators in public schools. 

First, we should always be on the lookout for opportunities to reduce a two-sentence lede to just one sentence. A good indication of whether you can possibly do that is if you refer to something twice.

Like, when you refer to the "program" at the end of the first sentence, and the start of the second sentence. Why not merge those references -- and sentences -- like this:

Teachers in East Lansing will be provided with financial relief, thanks to a new program offering mortgages with below-market interest rates to teachers and administrators in public schools.

See what I did there? We've cut out excessive wordiness and redundancy.

Meeting: You Don't Need "That"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.

Meeting: You Don't Need "That"

That is one of the most unneeded words ever. How so? Let's look at this sentence:

The board said that in its decision that parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training that they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, let's get rid of the three references to that. This is what's left:

The board said in its decision parents should talk to their children about the issue and provide their home with the religious training they feel to be most appropriate.

Now, what's different? Besides the loss of an unnecessary word?

Most of the time, you don't need that.

Controversial: Be Efficient With Word Use

It's important that you look for unnecessary words and strip those out of your work. Like in this lede:

The East Lansing School Board has made a decision to implement a ban to no longer allow boys from competing in girls' sports.

It's a good lede, but wordy. First, do you need to say has made a decision to when just saying decided would suffice?

Second, isn't saying implement a ban and no longer allow the same thing? I'd get rid of one of those, or even both. After all, doesn't ban say all that in just one word? What we have left is this:

The East Lansing School Board decided to ban boys from competing in girls' sports.

Is there any difference in meaning or context or detail than the first lede? I'd say not. It's just a lot shorter and less wordy.