Pro-union, or Con?

Here's a headline from an online version of a major newspaper:

"Democrats Drop Key Part of Bill to Assist Unions"


See the problem? A reasonable question might be: Did they drop it in order to assist unions, or was it just that the bill itself was intended to help unions? In other words, does "to assist unions" modify "drop" or "bill"? I honestly couldn't tell, on first reading anyway.

Our purpose here is not to poke fun at the dumb headline writers—almost anyone (including competent professionals) could have written that headline. The point is that we all have to check and double-check our drafts if we want to avoid (or realistically, minimize) such problems. We have to remember that old rule that it isn't enough to write so that you can be understood; you must also write so that you can not be misunderstood.

How would you have revised the headline? Maybe "Democrats Drop Key Part of Union-Assistance Bill." Or "Democrats Agree to Water Down Bill Aimed at Helping Unions."

And we have to keep a careful eye on our prepositional phrases. Make sure you don't use too many, and that the ones you do use are working for you, not against you.


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.