Pages

Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

monday mayhem: Even I Worry About Harry


Okay, looks like India is ACTUALLY winning a Test match under Rahul Dravid. Not that it would subtract any bit from my irritation for men who are christened rahul, or surnamed dravid, or dubbed The Wall by fanatic fans, or all of them put together.
And now that I have made my link with Team India (that phrase calls for a toast from the galleria of cricket reporters) clear, I would better push towards newer territories. For, his 70-odd at Nottingham notwithstanding, I still feel Sourav Ganguly has lost the jigar and jasba for a fighting knock. Mistah, pls refer to earlier blog).
Newer territory of course means Harry Potter. No, I haven't become an overnight expert on Harry, or Potter, or JK, or Rowling. So here's a forward from a blog that landed on mailbox sometime late Sunday night; a time Subject was acutely busy getting peekay tight: “I read an article about this couple that will be leaving their wedding reception and going straight to the bookstore to get their copy of Harry Potter. Now, I'm no expert or anything, but I'm pretty sure that this is not what you're supposed to be doing on your wedding night."
Confession time: Saw this woman the other day. Could have fallen in love. Almost did. Right away. Then I saw a thick fat copy of Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows in (under?) her arm. And suddenly, her armpits began smelling, and she seemed a bit too loony to be walking around free for the safety of loonier creatures, and completely dys-political Me began colour-coding: Was she an underground, below-the-belt, illicit communist, tom-tomming a manifesto for the masses?
And just as suddenly I lost interest. So, miss in pink salwar suit carrying Potter copy tight under arms, if you happen to ever travel through and across this station on blogosphere, you know how Harry helps: It (He?) saved you, honey.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

In praise of the Lord in a lost ring


It's sad. But it looks truer with every passing inning: Sourav Ganguly's days as a top-flight cricketer are over. From a man who loves the big occasion and the spotlight on every move he makes, Sourav is playing more like a belly dancer attempting jazz or kathak. Result: little foot movement. And even little jazz in the way he wields the willow. Bowled for 36 in first outing. Caught doing nothing with his front leg in the second, on 40.
The big-natch, big-occasion, big-century player fighting for fifties.
And don't give me the claptrap about pressure or tension. Sourav is one man born to fight it. You only have to recall Lord's 1996. Or the recent South Africa series, his third comeback (sorry, no inclination to remember inane statistics). He was sure-footed, even cocky then. He is pussy-footing, even rocky now.
Strange how the likes of Gavaskar and co-commentators think he's playing well, even in a gritty sorta way. Really? Roobish, as Boycott would have said about any player other than his 'prince'. Chancy, streaky shots punctuated with some gems on the off-side. That's Ganguly for you. Circa 2007.
It's been a decade and a year more, Dada. And Lord's of those innings is looking more like the sepia-tinted image from the album of bell-bottomed youth that granddads look at. For the first time in a decade, I feel it is time...

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Break-in news: Tai is Prez. Break-out news: Amma, Didi, Auntie follow


They are going to count it today, eight or nine-odd lakh votes, and give us our next president. The question not bothering the TV channel panels is: Does the president represent only elected MPs and MLAs? Or is she (if projections about Pratibha-tai is to be taken on face value) President of the Republic of India?
Then why the people (note: I checked with Barkha Dutt about copyright for the phrase) have no role to play in electing her? Just because a coterie of Left/Congress/other netas thought tai is the best face for the Republic?
Without getting into positives, negatives and split infinitives of presidential elections, Subject here has a better suggestion: Make the office a yearly musical chair. Tai can stay for a year, and then make way for Sheila Dikshit, Mamata Banerjee, Jayalalithaa, and Jaya Bachchan.
Here's why:
1.We would be too bored with tai's inane/stupid/irritating/slanderous/libelous nonsenses in a year flat.
2. If we have a vice-president from the “minority community” there would be little need for tai, who got the nod, to believe Prakash Karat and comrades, primarily for her “secular credentials”.

3.There would be little novelty value attached to, or with, her pallu after a while.

SHEILA DIKSHIT
There's no possible way – either this-wordly or that-worldly – she can draw an ace and be the Delhi CM again. If not BJP, Congress's own Ram Babu Guptas, Jagdish Tytlers, Sajjan Kumars and Ajay Makens would trump her anyway.
* Delhiites, too, would get relief from Sheila brand of politics. As for the media, no need to write headlines on successive days: “Bluelines would be phased out”; “Bluelines are definitely going to be phased out”; “Bluelines have to go”. C'mon auntie, rephrasing till only a certain point can be labelled political chicanery. beyond that, there's a word for its: 24-carat nonsense. So shut up, and bore us with better ones: presidential speeches.

MAMATA BANERJEE
Ratan Tata apart, the comrades would give their vote for her. And given the complexity of UPA politics she would be, as The Telegraph ad slogan goes in Calcutta, “unputdownable”.
The Rashtrapati Bhavan would liven up after Pratibha tai and Sheila auntie. Antics, after all, have their own value in the boredom of politics (for the uninitiated: check with Kalam's hair stylist).

JAYALALITHAA
Everything will come closer home. Any debates over, say, Indo-US nuclear deals, Mission Mars, friendly ties with Papua New Guinea and Peru, and you can be sure who to blame: Karunanidhi. Ab Chennai dur nehin (now say that in Tamil.)
On second thoughts, she may re-christen Rashtrapati Bhavan the MGR Estate, which may not augur well for successors. In that case, I withdraw her from my list. Anyone else interested?

JAYA BACHCHAN
“Amit-ji” will be seen accompanying Mrs on foreign trips. What this means is simple: less Amitabh films (now say ya-hoo in a baritone).

And, I rest my case. Hello tai!

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

good journalism = bad business = worse discussion (IS EXPRESS LISTENING?)

okay, indian express has just released its list of award winners for "excellence" in journalism. I have no comments on the entries, winners or the award as such// Of course, we all wonder how come so many of them winners are express or loksatta staffers, but that's for another rainy day. (It's sultry nights, and sultrier morns, in Dilli at present, so we rest those questions for some other time).
But here's the joke of the 'ceremony' (all awards are ceremonies, right?): a panel discussion on “Is good journalism bad business”. Hello, haven't I heard that one before (and I am not talking about Express having run it, or something along similar lines, after last year's awards). The idea (if it can still be called one) is so cliched that I wish they had arranged cocktail alongside (hey, if they could organise the damn thing at the Taj they might as well have spent some money on things other than coffee). All for the poor patients (sorry journalists) who were unlucky enough to be present.
I mean, how can u listen to the likes of rajdeep sardesai, shekhar gupta, barkha dutt, n ram, and so forth hold forth on such inanities in life? Arent there better things to do in life? Aren't there better ways to kill time?
I suggest a special award be given to all those who survived the whole discussion.
Is good journalism bad business. Jeez, aren't good journalists supposed to say “shit” when they see human excreta coming out of anyplace other than the posterior any more?

Monday, June 25, 2007

design. just digest (if you can)

mario garcia. okay, the man may be a money 'mint'ing machine (guess you got the quote-unquote connection) but he still seems to make his point every time i read him. except, of course, in his by-now-predictable huge page one piece on a paper he has redesigned.
here's one that i must have read a hajaar times. but still appeals. reason: it tells you how our over-paid designers in print media (and trust me, most of them are HUGELY OVERPAID without knowing their first column from their grid line) take us journalists for a ride.
* write a good headline, rich ol' mario says, DO NOT care how they are placed.
* break, or do not break till eternity joins you for breakfast, yuour text flow
* move your necessary nonsense (quick takes and stuff) from first column to the last, or from top to the bottom of the page,without worrying about your ma-in-law (i don;t have one, but the old foggeys in the paper always come across as one)

anyway, here we go. a 10-year-old piece that still seems to hold good// from the poynter website, of course (it just landed from an old newspaper colleague on mailbox, so refreshened memories):


10 Universal Newspaper Design Myths, Debunked
By Mario Garcia, The Poynter Institute


My diary entries contain travelogues, agendas, and occasionally, the graffiti of design myths. I always write these myths in red, to make sure I do not forget them. I must have more than 150 that I have listed during 20 years of traveling, but there are 10 that have become the "Super Myths," those that transcend nationalities, ethnicity, or language. I offer them as a checklist to see how many of them are part of your own myth repertoire:
1. Don't run headlines next to each other.

"Bumping headlines" should be ranked as the No. 1 design myth, especially in the United States. I am certain that more time is spent in newsrooms everywhere designing pages that avoid headlines coming together than actually writing better headlines.

As a veteran of hundreds of focus groups that were shown pages with headlines that sometimes bumped, I have yet to hear a reader anywhere echo the complaint about "bumping headlines."

Of course, I am not an advocate of bumped headlines. However, I am suggesting that we should not spend unnecessary time and effort avoiding what seems to affect no one but the editor and his old journalism school professor.

2. Readers don't like reversed out type.

Well, many editors don't. And I am sure that readers would probably find it unusual and hard to read if an entire article were set in white type against a black or color background. However, a few lines of a quote or a highlight set against a dark background will not affect legibility as long as the type size is larger than normal and the interline spacing is adequate.

3. Color must be introduced slowly.

Life is in color. Attempts at a slow introduction of color in a newspaper that may have been entirely black and white for years are quite exaggerated. In this regard, one must respect the editors' knowledge of their own communities and their readers' ability to assimilate change.

However, my own experience has been that color is almost always extremely well received, and that readers in most communities no longer attach the label of "less serious" to newspapers that print in color. Specifically with 25- to 35-year-old readers, color is an expectation more than an abomination.

What is important, and this must be emphasized, is that color use be appropriate for the newspaper and its community.

4. Italics are difficult to read.

I have heard this more than 500 times, from South America to South Africa, and in Malaysia, too! Every editor seems to have a built-in catalog of anecdotes to illustrate why italics should never be used. They are supposed to be "feminine"; therefore, why use them in the macho sports section? They are "strange" to the reader and imply soft news, as opposed to hard news, so relegate them to the gardening page. And, last, italics slow down the reading, so avoid them in text.

The truth? Italics are unisex. A feature in sports can wear italics well, but so can that souffle story in the food section. The soft-versus-hard implication is an American phenomenon, I must admit. A banner headline in a strong italic font played large will be able to do the job as well as a Roman headline. Size and boldness and the distinction of the type used are more significant than whether the type is italic.

Contrast italics with Roman type, or bolder or lighter type nearby, and they make that souffle rise on the page. Add them as a secondary line under a classic Roman face, and there is music on the page. Give the name on the byline an italic touch, and somehow the visual rhythm of the text may be altered for the better.

5. Don't mix color and black-and-white photos or graphics on the same page.

Never once have I heard a reader complain about this special cocktail of mixed black-and-white and color images. The designer's task is to select the best possible images, regardless of color, and display them properly on the page following a hierarchy that indicates where the eye should go first, second, and third. The color versus black-and-white issue becomes quite secondary to the content of the images, their placement on the page, and the role of the images in the overall design.

6. Don't interrupt the flow of text.

Magazines have been using quotes, highlights, and other text breakers for years. However, place one of these devices in the text of many newspapers and you will find a chorus of editors repeating the same verse: Any interruption of text causes the reader to stop reading.

I have found no evidence of this in the many focus groups I have observed or in The Poynter Institute's own EYE-TRAC Research. (EYE-TRAC scientifically documented how color, text, graphics, and photos direct a reader's eyes around a newspaper page.) Of course, interruptions can become obstacle courses if:

- One places a 24-line quote across 12 picas, forcing the reader to jump over text; or

- One places the breaker in such a strategic position that the reader will not jump over it, but assumes instead that he should move across to the adjacent column.

So length of the interruption and its placement determine legibility factors. Any interruption that requires more than a 2-1/2 inch jump should be reconsidered.

7. Readers prefer justified type over ragged-right type.

The myth is that ragged-right type implies "soft" or feature material, while justified type represents serious hard news. This, too, is only in the minds of editors and some designers. There is no evidence of the truth to this perception. If newspapers had always set all their text ragged right, readers would have accepted that style.

Ragged-right type can change the rhythm on the page, even when used for short texts or for columnists. Its use incorporates white space, which is always needed, and allows for more appropriate letter spacing within and between words. Some research has confirmed that the presence of ragged right speeds up reading.

8. Story count counts.

One must have, says this myth, a minimum of five stories on the front page. Well, it is seven in some newspapers, and 11 in others. Story count is a state of mind; it should not be a formula. No two days in the news are alike for the editor putting together Page One. On certain days, one big story may equal four, or even seven, small ones. Sometimes a photo may carry the weight of 10 stories, and so on. Individual elements are what count, not a systematic formula that forces elements to satisfy a quota on the page.

What do we know about story count and Page One?

Well, the front page is still the face of the newspaper and must display not only the day's news but promote the best content inside. More is definitely better than less, and index items, promo boxes, and even standalone photos are all part of what makes the eye move. Readers in focus groups do not count stories.

Eye movement - activity on the canvas of the page - is what counts. How one makes the readers' eyes move can be determined by factors that are not necessarily associated with the mythical story counts that editors are subjected to.

9. Leave things in the same place every day.

For many editors, a Page One or a section front with static elements (promos at the top, left-hand column of briefs, etc.) provides a sort of teddy bear to embrace when they come to work every day. So, in typical fashion, editors always ask for the teddy bears.

There is no truth to the myth that readers want these elements exactly in the same places every day. I prefer to experiment with "teddy bears on roller skates" - let the promo boxes appear differently from day to day. Some days use one promo only, some days use three promos. Surprise the reader with promos that run vertically on Tuesday, but horizontally on Wednesday.

10. The lead story must always appear on the right-hand side of the page.

Editors seem sure of this, but nobody bothered to tell the readers. To them, the lead story is the one with the biggest and boldest headline, whether it is to the right or the left. Of course, hierarchy is important. No myth here. One definitive lead must appear on the page to guide the reader, but its appearance, as long as it is above the fold, becomes inconsequential.

Why the myths?

Well, what would newspapers be without them? Meetings would be shorter, and less argumentative, especially if there was no "italics" myth. Who creates the myths? Like the games children play, nobody knows where these myths start. Children teach each other games in the schoolyard; professors pass on myths to their innocent charges in journalism school. Then those myths gain momentum when the rookie journalist hears the same myth glorified by his veteran editor, and so on.

What can one do about myths? Select the ones you really want to do battle over, then wrestle the myth promoter to the ground.

Sometimes you win.

© 1996, The Poynter Institute for Media Studies. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished without express permission of The Poynter Institute.

Friday, June 22, 2007

Weatherman, get me a hot June with extra roasted skin, please


I like June. Especially June in Delhi. Not especially this year. No, hang on. I don't actually like it this year. Due largely to the reason that Delhiites primarily are falling in love with June all over again with new zest, vest or whatever-est. The on-again off-again rain. The sporadic pitter-pattering, and the shade of extra green the unusual weather has lent to roads and the sides.

I don't like it because in three decades of Delhi has been (had been?) different. Bring on the heat, mate. Forty-five or thereabouts (in Celsius). 25 out of 30 days. The other five can jump around the 47-mark or so. It's then, in those five days, that I would hate the middle month of the calendar. I would have a reason to hate it. And I would love that reason, howsoever hateable.

I would love to love it for the other 25 days. For hot is what June is supposed to be.

Is there any reason to associate rain or green with June? That's the tango best left for July and August. Perhaps.

I like heat because it's the best time for people-watching. Angry, hungry, thirsty, frustrated, tired, freaked-out, sweaty, sticky, smelly. Et cetera. Try imagining a face with even half as many expressions in any other season, and I'll quit smoking. Content, happy, smiling. Blah. They are all you get otherwise. Duh. Bring on the heat, any day.

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Brits chuck the tabs, Delhi awaits more


With Todays, Tomorrows and Yesterdays in queue to take on the Metros, Nows, Mirrors and Mid Days of this country, here's news from The Guardian's media site. Sure to give some, ahem, indigestion (stop burping now). I quote, obviously:
UK's daily red-top newspapers continued to see a steady year-on-year drop in sales in May, with circulation dropping by an average of 4%, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations.

The Sun has seen its circulation fall by 105,000 copies, or 3.36%, in the past 12 months to 3,043,351.

The paper's circulation has fallen 17% since May 2000, down from more than 3.5m. Month-on-month circulation fell 0.14% from 3,047,527 in April.

Daily Mirror also saw its circulation edge upwards from 1,537,143 in April to 1,554,610 last month, an increase of 1.14%. But the Mirror's latest monthly circulation figure is down 4.86% from 1,634,006 in May 2006.