Here come the holidays — the year’s biggest blending of secular and sacred passions.
Such a melding of commercialism and spiritual reflection creates fascinating news — gorgeous expressions of the human heart and soul, dark reflections of life without the light of hope, and rich celebrations of traditions and beliefs.
Many organizations and individuals are part of it all and want to share their activity with the public, meaning that the newspaper is inundated with requests for coverage.
Given that the toughest part of editing is deciding what to leave out, how do we decide what to cover?
On the city desk, editors generally tend to look for fresh ideas and shy away from commercial events, according to three Star-Telegram newsroom city editors: Jean Marie Brown of Fort Worth, Theresa M. Humphrey of Arlington and Lee Williams of Northeast Tarrant County.
For example, Williams says, “a couple of years ago, we wrote a story about how Tongans celebrate New Year’s. We ran a Page One photo of 15 whole pigs being roasted over a pit.”
The entertainment staff of the features department faces a huge challenge. They’re contending with a flood of high-profile events from the performing arts, moviemakers, television and radio.
As always, reviews concentrate on professional performances, Arts Editor Doug Perry said, because even those events are too numerous for our coterie of reviewers to cover. Reviews are assigned for events that are deemed most important and relevant to readers.
Reviewers take on a daunting task — balancing their honest, educated opinion with a sense of how candid they can be in their critiques before readers whistle them out of bounds. One of the rules, Perry says, is to “review the show, not the message.”
This is not work for the faint of heart. Like pro wrestlers who have mastered bluster and athleticism, reviewers may wear their opinion openly, colorfully, sometimes outrageously while flexing their expertise.
They build followings of readers who hate them and love them. Part of the fun of reading reviews is reacting to a reviewer’s provocative bias.
Ultimately, Perry says, reviewers’ chief aim is to use their specific arts-related skills, background and knowledge to help readers gauge the quality and content of a show and decide whether it merits their money and time.
It’s worth noting that reviewers inherently invite controversy, sometimes accidentally. For instance, several hundred calls and e-mails came in from readers protesting a Nov. 16 review of the Radio City Christmas Spectacular.
Reviewer Mark Lowry noted that the production was a dazzling production of glittering glee. But toward the end, the show sharply focused on its Christian foundation, as it has since it began in the 1930s. The move struck Lowry as preachy and overbearing. As a critic, he said so.
Well, this was a Christmas show, readers countered.
Their chief complaint, however, centered on the article’s last paragraph, in which Lowry suggested that patrons leave early to avoid the dramatic Christian finale, the famed “Living Nativity” scene and the Bible-based account of the birth of Jesus.
Lowry stands by his review of the show but agrees in hindsight that the last paragraph reviewed the message, overshooting our bounds of criticism.
In that last paragraph, he said, he was trying to raise a note of caution for anyone who would feel uncomfortable in the midst of such “an overly evangelical religious finale.” In that regard, Lowry would have been doing his job as critic and scout for the public.
But the editing process faltered. No one challenged the review’s last paragraph as it moved through the system, resulting in unintended offense that’s regretted.
All writers need an editor who will at least ask, “Is this what you meant to say?”
If that question had been applied to that last paragraph, Lowry said, he probably would have deleted the paragraph or made sure, on final reading, that he was saying precisely what he intended to say.
Judging from the reaction, the decision to cover the Radio City show was right on the money.
Guesstimating such public interest is part of how editors decide holiday coverage.
Grinches will pop up. But they don’t have a chance against a good editor.
