A Few Clichés and Another Annoyances I’d LIke To See Die

Because this is such an important issue, far more important than say, the historic toppling of Middle East dictators, the earthquake in Christchurch NZ, impending snow-pocalypse in San Francisco, and so on, I thought I’d just jot down something I’ve been thinking about lately – how some clichés need to DIE NOW.
First off? The use of “more on that later” in a written article, essay, blog post, whatever. Too often, lazy writers will write something, introduce some New Idea, then say “More on that later.” It is an example of lazy writing, and it’s getting more and more common. It also doesn’t make any sense. If the writer wants to elaborate on something later in in the piece, then just frakking DO IT, we don’t need a “more on that later” to tell us that. Or, organize your thoughts better.
Next, we have the lazy TV writer’s chestnut: starting a TV show with some wild and crazy scene, stopping, then having a caption come up saying “36 hours previously” or some similar nonsense. Almost every mediocre tv show does this now, and it’s starting to become common (Along with cutesy ways to reference scenes during the show). News flash: This isn’t good drama, it’s just stupid. It doesn’t make the story any better, and it needs to stop. Now.
Finally, now that it’s Election Season, journalists seem to be infatuated with using the cliché “pull papers” to describe someone who plans a run for office. Not only is it not entirely accurate, it’s an annoying, cutesy term that over-dramatizes something that doesn’t merit the drama. Again, journalists, knock it off, and be a bit more original, if you can.
I’m not sure how important any of this is, but at least I didn’t tease you with the end of this post, then go backwards.

Leave a Reply