Hello andersp-ga:
You asked:
"Are there any articles or studies comparing journalistic style in
British and American popular magazines (esp. sports magazines)?
Specifically, are American popular magazines less demanding of the
reader than British magazines as regards vocabulary, sentence length,
article length etc.?"
While British writing tends to be more formal than American English,
the real differences come down to content and attitude: British
journalists are expected to be opinionated and feisty (or opinionated
and caustic), whereas American journalists are trained to be
objective, which can make for (arguably) tepid reading.
I couldn't find any data or studies regarding article or sentence
length, or vocabulary, but there are American magazines that still
employ long features and profile pieces, and that feature writing
styles and vocabularies clearly aimed at college graduates: THE NEW
YORKER, HARPER'S, and VANITY FAIR, spring to mind.
Here are some articles and other resources I found for you:
A September 24, 2003 BBC Radio 4 interview with Simon Elmes,
co-producer of "The Routes of English":
"Q: Looking through American magazines, American English appears to
have a smaller vocabulary than British English. How has this happened?
Elmes: Who says? I think that American English has a vocabulary every
bit as large as ours. Most of it is shared. There are very few
differences, actually. In fact, as Professor Steven Pinker, of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology points out in the last programme
of the Routes of English series, you can go pretty much anywhere in
the English speaking world and make yourself understood. Perhaps the
magazines you read restrict their vocabulary to cater for a particular
audience."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/routesofenglish/youtellus/transcript.shtml
"Differences Between American and British English" by Kenneth Beare,
site guide at About.com's "English As A Second Language" Site:
http://esl.about.com/library/weekly/aa110698.htm
Under that article, see several links, including "an exhaustive study
by the University of Tampere on the differences between American and
British English and the geo-political reasons behind these
differences."
That study, "American Vs. British English: Basic Differences and
Influences of Change," can be viewed at:
http://esl.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.uta.fi/FAST/US1/REF/usgbintr.html
(You may have to wait a minute while a full-screen pop-up ad does its
thing before this page loads.)
The above page has several links at the top that will lead you through
various sub-topics, such as "Ethnic Influences," "Vocabulary," and
"Obscenities" (and be aware, these really are the major league
obscenities):
http://www.suite101.com/print_article.cfm/5381/32971
The July 14, 2003 edition of NEW YORK magazine featured this column by
Michael Wolff, "En Guardian!":
http://www.newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/columns/medialife/n_8938/
The Guardian, a leading, liberal British newspaper, is now planning to
launch an American edition.
From Wolff's piece: ". . . [editor] Rusbridger took me across the
street to his office and showed me the prototype for the new American
Guardian. Its tentative form is as a weekly magazine, quite unlike any
other weekly magazine that has been started in the U.S. in the past
generation. Not only is it about politics . . . the magazine—meant to
be 60 percent derived from the Guardian itself, with the rest to come
from American contributors—has a great deal of text unbroken by design
elements. This is almost an extreme notion. Quite the antithesis of
what virtually every publishing professional would tell you is the key
to popular and profitable publishing—having less to read, not more.
Even with the Guardian’s signature sans-serif face, it looks like an
old-fashioned magazine. Polemical. Written. Excessive. Contentious.
Even long-winded. . . . Unlike American packaging genius, which is
about packaging down (resulting in the deterioration of taste), the
Guardian’s Alan Rusbridger packages up."
The NY Review Of Magazines has a fascinating article, "The
Britishisation of American Magazines," by Katie Prout, at:
http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/nymagreview/features/brits.html
Prout's article examines the influence of Christopher Hitchens and
other "opinionated" British journalists: "'In the U.S., there was a
desire in magazines and some newspapers to be rejuvenated. They were
tired and wanted to become fresh,' explains Disney. 'They looked to
England and saw a feisty group struggling to do something different
and put its head above the crowd.' The feistiness and humor of much
British writing is what seems to attract so many Americans. . . .
Hitchens . . . has his own theories as to why we sought out Brits.
'Part of it has to do with what Australians call the ‘cultural
cringe’: a deference to what is imagined as a superior sense of wit
and history. Part of it is because the magazine idea is originally
British-modeled and part of a London tradition' . . . . [Helen]
Benedict says of British journalism and politics, 'Journalism in
Britain is openly aligned with one party or another. You’re allowed to
be opinionated. The newspapers are argumentative, and the magazines
are often funny, malicious and full of gossip. . . .American editors
like opinionated writing, but not the readers. They are too earnest.'"
From Photonet.com:
"British Photo Mag converts to American Standards":
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0004HU
"Just when we thought it was safe to trust British photo magazines for
honest reviews of photo gear -- We spent lots of time last summer
praising British photo magazines and trashing American ones because we
said that British photo magazines gave honest reviews of photo gear
and that American photo magazines catered to advertizers [sic] and
never found a piece of gear that wasn't just wonderful. Now, the
latest issue of PHOTO TECHNIQUE . . . shows our confidence in the
Brits was not well placed."
TEACHER MAGAZINE asked students to weigh in with opinions about
whether a new magazine should be written in American English or
British English. This student's response earned high scores for
persuasively arguing why American English should be the preferred
style for the proposed new magazine:
http://www.nysut.org/newyorkteacher/backissues/1998-1999/990519regents01.html
According to Buzz.Weblogs' February 27, 2003 edition, some Americans
turned to British media for news about the impending Iraq war. See:
"Americans Turn to Brits for News. Brits???"
http://buzz.weblogs.com/2003/02/27
According to the above article, the reasons had to do with content,
not style: "The threat of war in Iraq is driving increasing numbers of
Americans to British and international news web sites in search of the
broader picture. According to the internet audience management and
analysis company, Nielsen NetRatings, traffic to the UK's biggest news
sites, BBC News Online and Guardian Unlimited, has increased
dramatically over the past year. Many of these new users are from the
US. Jon Dennis, deputy news editor of the Guardian Unlimited web site
said: 'We have noticed an upsurge in traffic from America, primarily
because we are receiving more emails from US visitors thanking us for
reporting on worldwide news in a way that is unavailable in the US
media.'"
See this lively discussion between American and British technical
writers regarding "American" technical writing style, at TECHWRITER-L:
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/archives/0110/techwhirl-0110-00438.html
(Under first reply: "Speaking as an American: Off the top of my head,
when I see British style I assume the document will be more thorough
and higher-level than its American counterpart--not simplified for the
presumed simple reader, that is. I also expect somewhat stilted and
polite language, which I (we) find funny but not obnoxious. This is
less noticeable in technical documents, more so in assembly
instructions and the
like."
http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:VMNq96JRvgsJ:www.emcp.com/electronic_resource_centers/resourcefile.php%3FID%3D4623++British+American+magazines+standards&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
The only thing I found regarding American vs. British sports magazines
was this comparison of British and American mountain biking magazines
at nsmb.eMagazine:
http://www.nsmb.com/gear/magazines_04_01.php
Search terms:
"American British magazine writing styles"
"Compare American British magazine writing styles"
"variations American British writing styles"
"differences British American writing"
"British vs. American writing style"
"length British vs. American magazines"
"study British American magazines"
"comparison British American sport magazines"
I hope my research helps you. Before rating my answer, please post a
request for clarification, if you have any questions.
Regards,
nancylynn-ga |
Clarification of Answer by
nancylynn-ga
on
24 Sep 2003 11:50 PDT
I apologize. I made an error in my answer by leaving in a link:
http://www.suite101.com/print_article.cfm/5381/32971
that I'd mean to delete. It leads to an article that came up when I
was researching your question, but the article is about teaching
English to
"non-natives" -- not exactly in line with information you're seeking!
I also found a few more resources for you:
The article "The American Press" by Roland Kunzweiler:
http://www.kochlich.de/american_press.htm
has a sub-topic "Comparison of British and American press":
"Apart from some minor differences serious newspapers basically offer
the
same topics. Journalists cover international events on the front pages
or
back pages, columnists write about fashion, motoring or financial
topics,
special features on topics like education and gardening, sports
reporters
inform the readers on the special events, cartoonists amuse them with
comic
strips and cartoons and critics write reviews of the latest plays,
books
etc."
The British magazine, THE ECONOMIST, published a style guide The
Economist
Style Guide: A Concise Guide for All Your Business Communications (New
York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1998):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471248398/102-2540387-0798550?v=glance&vi=reviews
"'Do not be stuffy.... Do not be hectoring or arrogant.... Do not be
too
pleased with yourself.... Do not be too chatty.... Do not be too
didactic.... [And] do not be sloppy . . . . Use the language of
everyday
speech; 'Long paragraphs, like long sentences, confuse the reader';
'Don't
overdo the use of don't, isn't, can't, won't, etc.')"
At Media Bistro (http://www.mediabistro.com), which requires
registration, see this December 10, 2000 interview with fashion
reporter Michael Gross:
http://www.mediabistro.com/content/archives/02/12/10/
"Q: In your extensive travels through Europe, what differences have
you
noticed between European and American journalism?
Gross: Paris Match and the British newspapers have a maverick attitude
that
no longer prevails in America. We tend to go along to get along.
Having said
that, American production values are really high in comparison to
countries
like France and Italy, and the brevity so often characteristic of
American
journalism contrasts very nicely to the long-windedness of the
European
press."
REPRESENTATION magazine examines "A Comparison between Bridal
Magazines
from the United States and Great Britain," at:
http://www.eng.umu.se/vw/Representation/Magazines/Ulla.htm
I hope these additional resources help you.
Regards,
nancylynn-ga
|
