Blogging Tips

Years ago, when everyone smoked in the newsroom and coughing and clacking typewriters were everywhere, people were not as enlightened as they are now. In fact there was a fair amount of sexism around but thankfully we’ve taken the right steps so that the playing field is more level in today’s world. Working against sexism was a big first step and back then journalism fumbled along, bravely forging they way for the kind of writing we see in today’s blogs.

Here are some of the directives that I found in an old Canadian Press Stylebook.

The first one sounds like everyone had the right idea but not all the tools when they started out:

Treat the sexes equally and without stereotyping.

Granted it’s a good starting point but of course there’s a need to go further and the rest of the list brings up some interesting points. For example, mention is made of the fact that a woman’s marital status is only relevant for her profile or to round out a personal reference. The test here, according to Canadian Press back in the 1980s, was to ask if the same information would be used if the subject were a man.

The Stylebook warns off what it calls gratuitous words like attractive, leggy or bosomy. Still the blurb after does say that there are instances in entertainment news where some of these adjectives are appropriate. I think they might have missed the point here. If you’re trying to describe anything accurately ( as journalists are supposed to ) using modifiers like leggy and bosomy is just bad writing, never mind sexist.

There is another directive that states reporters should not be surprised that a woman has talent. Actually, I cringed when I read that one and suddenly thought for a moment about Lou Grant. Anyone remember that guy from the old Mary Tyler Moore show? Maybe they modeled some of these changes after him. Lou Grant meet Christiane Amanpour.

Here’s the example that’s used to illustrate the point:

You would never guess from Mary Brown’s appearance but she is a brain surgeon and a highly regarded one.

Sure that’s just the example they used, but there was a time when they felt they needed to illustrate their points this way. There’s more. Consider the way that journalists back then were cautioned about stereotyping job and careers.

Housewives was axed but Shoppers was still allowed. It’s still a trajectory where we’re all learning, isn’t it? The improvement attempted with Shoppers still implied to me that woman stayed at home and did all the shopping. It all took time. I remember how unnatural and rude it seemed not to hold the door open for a woman. Now I hope it’s just seen as a common courtesy and nothing with a sexist motive. The old stylebook did hit the nail on the head in a few areas however when the book suggested replacing policemen with police officers and firemen with firefighters.