The Wayward Day of the Week: Cut It Out

A group of these state officials, representing the broader coalition, is expected to unveil the investigation at a Monday news conference in Washington, according to three people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss a law enforcement proceeding on the record, cautioning the plans could change.*

—The Washington Post, page A20, 9/4 in a story about a forthcoming investigation of Google.

Ismail Ajjawi, a 17-year-old who lived in a refugee camp in Lebanon and earned a scholarship to Harvard, was allowed Monday to enter the United States, his attorney Albert Mokhiber said.

—The Washington Post, page A2, 9/4 in a story about the decision to revoke the refugee’s visa and send him back to Lebanon.
—
In my 60 years in the business, I’ve gnashed my teeth over journalism’s tendency to put the day of the week in awkward places for no good reason.

I think it stems from a rule, dating back to the stop-the-presses days of breathless newswriting. The feeling then was that a sentence’s most important fact had to be up front. I guess the assumption was that the reader otherwise would get bored.

How clearer to put the day of the week where logic says it belongs:

— “… is expected to unveil the investigation at a news conference on Monday.”

__“On Monday, Ismail Ajjawi, a 17-year-old who lived in a refugee camp in Lebanon and earned a scholarship to Harvard, was allowed to enter the United States, his attorney, Albert Mokhiber said.**

The only other explanation  for the clumsy “was allowed Monday” structure was the practice of hiding when something happened lest the reader think he was reading old news.

Neither custom makes sense. Both make for awkward writing and puzzling reading. They don’t save space. Sooner or later the writer is going to have to confess he’s writing about something that happened—horrors!—yesterday. That space is going to be taken wherever the day of the week is put.

My theory is that journalists do it because journalists did it. I wish they’d stop.

—Mike Feinsilber, finicky editor

* That non-attribution attribution serves a good purpose, but it sure is graceless.

** That comma before the lawyer’s name, missing in the Post, is essential. Grammar demands it.
—
Mike Feinsilber spent a quarter century with UPI in Pittsburgh, Columbus, Harrisburg, Newark, New York, Saigon and Washington and a quarter century with AP in Washington, with a spell as assistant bureau chief and a stint as writing coach. He was a deskman, reporter, and editor and he covered Congress and 18 political conventions.