Writing with the Company in Mind

As I am writing this, I have just learned, coincidently, that my column on "Anti-Bullying," does not meet the legal standards of the company because of the way I use the word 'murder'. Of course, I was dumbfounded by this revelation being that laws and regulations in journalism were not taught to me in college. Then, I read Writing in an Emerging Organization by Stephen Doheny-Farina. In it, Farina points out a statement found in a Scribener and Cole report: "Most of our notions of what writing is about, the skills it entails and generates, are mostly tied up with school based writing...(go figure)." This is definitely the case for me. I have come to realize that the way I was taught to write, is so much different from my job's requirements. This seems to come as no surprise, considering what Farina has to say about it. According to him, recent surveys have revealed that writing on the job is not an easy task being that workers are required to address diverse audiences for diverse purposes. While his research focuses mainly on technology-based businesses, I can see how it might apply to the journalism field. In such case, the company I work for is a nonacademic organization, and does follow a business plan, where completed texts are followed. In addition, they are careful to consider who has access to the written text, who reads it and who doesn't, and how it influences subsequent texts. These questions, which are included in Farina's research, are the very same ones that my boss encouraged me to consider when writing my column. I think Farin's idea for professors to teach students interpersonal skills is a good one, for that is another issue I struggle with. Certain tasks at work call for collaboration, and the fact that I struggle with maintaining an effective dialogue to get the assignment underway, becomes a hindrance. So I agree with Farin when he mentions the importance for teachers to be concerned with the social process that their students take on to achieve their writing tasks.

For Writers Who Hate Group Hugs...

In Carolyn Rude's The Report for Decision Making: Genre and Inquiry, she mentions the importance of debating a topic, in which one can discover, articulate and resolve conflicting values, before writing about it. I realize that this is very much the case in writing a Master's Thesis. In such case, the process of a thesis entails forming a committee, just like a some companies call for a collaborative group. In forming your thesis, you as an individual hold the power in deciding what direction you will go, while the committee guides you with constructive criticism and advice along the way. In contrast, a collaborative group shares the power and tasks. According to Nancy Allen (and all the other contributors) in What Experienced Collaborators Say About Collaborative Writing, "individuals must share power in making decisions that can be accepted by the group as a whole." Basically, nothing can be written unless everyone in the group agrees with the content. This is where the purpose and the effectiveness of decision making comes to play, especially where technical writing is concerned. Although it is a much required component on writing collaboratively, I assume, confidently, that it is a difficult task. If you read the the newspaper daily, you'll find that certain articles have more than one, sometimes more than two, writers. This is very much the case in a story that many journalists in the the newsroom can contribute something two. For example, we did a lengthy story covering the inauguration. Everyone had a story to tell, but the editor only wanted one in the paper. So instead of having each person write a story, she called for a collaborative article where everyone contribute something. This, of course, caused a conflict. You know how egotistical writers can be... everyone wanted to be a leader! Allen states that "leadership structure is not essential," but I beg to differ. Without an authoritative figure in the midst, the group could not get the project underway. Eventually, our editor got involved and a couple of people (the rowdy ones) were dismissed from the project. That just goes to show that working collaboratively takes careful consideration in not just arranging ideas, but arranging a group of people as well...particularly those who have an appetite for humble pie!