Death knell for quality content?

[Beth Agnew]

I think it's very much a "you get what you pay for" situation. Better 
pay = better writing. As long as the market continues to accept poor 
quality writing, purveyors will provide it at the lowest possible cost. 
We're already victims of the sleeper effect -- you see enough bad 
writing, you unconsciously start to write that way yourself and your 
tolerance for what is "bad" lowers, unless you maintain constant 
vigilance. There are few gatekeepers anymore. Those print editors who 
tormented writers until the prose was perfect aren't around anymore. 
Publishers who refused to sacrifice quality for revenue have been 
eliminated by their corporate masters in favor of increased sales.

The gap between the truly literate, meaning those who have studied 
literature enough to know what good writing looks like, and the 
illiterate is widening. We're seeing this in our students whose text 
messaging style permeates their academic essays.

I choose to believe that good writing and good communication will always 
prevail, though fewer will be able to recognize it.
--Beth

Beth Agnew
Professor, Technical Communication
Seneca College of Applied Arts & Technology
Toronto, Canada

john at garisons.com wrote:

><snippet>
>The truth is, however, that the material doesn't always have to be all
>that good.
>