It’s not the “cool, exciting, and accessible” that makes “carefulness” a challenge. It’s possible to be all three of those things and produce quality work.
It’s the latter part of your sentence that reveals the issues.
I don’t think they have to be. The original “technology culture” comprised primarily computer programmers, so it was much more concerned with precision, accuracy, and clarity almost by definition.
I think part of the challenge is that “technology culture” in the sense that we’re discussing is basically “technology punditry”, and so while the lack of precision, accuracy, and clarity isn’t necessarily intrinsic to the tech sector, it’s effectively systemic in the pundit class.
At some point in history the news business switched on the corporate balance sheets from “public service” to “profit center”. I would argue that what we’re seeing now is the (I would say inevitable) downstream effect of that decision, as people run the min/max calculations on action/reward and discover that means “low quality, low effort articles to generate as many clicks as possible”.
To quote H.L. Mencken:
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
All good points and well stated. I like the Mencken quote. While I disagree with the presuppositions of his worldview, I have always liked this statement concerning the news: “truth is a commodity that the masses of undifferentiated men cannot be induced to buy.” Sounds a lot like contemporary culture!
To technology culture, yes. But this is journalism culture, which is a horse of a very different colour.
Look at reporting on Coronavirus - if there’s a culture in which precision, accuracy and clarity are paramount, it’s medical research. But when mass-market journalism gets onto it, we get careless statistics, wild inaccuracies and totally opacity (minority of careful reporters excepted)
Yes, but it takes more time and costs more - and there’s little or no penalty for not bothering.
To be fair to these guys, they’re not doing anything that more substantial operations aren’t. There are plenty of mainstream news outfits that simply copy & paste other people’s work under the guise of “reporting”
Actually, I’d argue that it’s not whether there’s not a penalty for not being careful, but rather it’s being careful itself that incurs the penalty.
The less a reporter sticks to actual truth, and the more they play to the public’s fears / anxieties / previously-held beliefs, the more attention they’ll get - whether or not it’s true.
The recent article about the old smart keyboard not fitting the new iPad is a good example. No truth to it whatsoever, but it’s been mentioned in the news on multiple sites and multiple podcasts.
Reporting that Apple released some good products that will be decent options for home users, but that power users probably would do well to wait until the new iMacs / Mac Pro come out to replace the still-for-sale Intel models? That doesn’t sell clicks, even though it’s a pretty accurate summary.
Reporting that Apple released a new 24" iMac that’s functionally worthless and the company is therefore doomed? That gets clicks, regardless of whether it has any basis in reality.
True in the short term, but IMO less true over a longer term. The careful ones get to be around for a long time; many of the carless ones are her today gone tomorrow. The cost of entry and the quality bar are so low that their audience is constantly distracted by the new thing. Audiences for the careful ones are more inclined to stick with proven sources. Very wide generalisation, I know.
I’m sure that marketing department won’t allow for headphones with “silent” in the name
Because, the pro/non-pro matrix at apple is the marketing version of high end/low end, since they cannot sell something “lower end”.
Professional means related to a profession, which is something someone make to earn a living. I’m pretty sure that Tim Cook can earn his living out of a base line MacBook Air
That’s a fair bet. He was quoted as saying he does 80% of his work on an iPad. In the time before Covid he traveled with just a 12.9 and his iPhone.
I provided tech support for a senior Fortune 100 executive for a number of years. He made phone calls, read reports, and occasionally handled his own email. His main job was to make decsions.
When I started practicing law, attorneys—at least the partners—did not have computers on their desks. Yellowpads and dictaphones were their sole composition tools. By the way, that wasn’t that long ago.
I respect the desire to keep names out of it. Here’s my dilemma: I am an university student who needs to get better at writing/editing, but have no formal writing courses left in my majors.
What technology writers should I pay attention to and learn from?
What technology writers should I treat as if they are speaking to me? (Ignore their use of grammar.)
In the realm of Apple-related online media, I think the two best writers you’ll find are Adam Engst of TidBITS and Jason Snell of Six Colors. It’s not coincidental that they are also among the most experienced in this realm. They are superior writers (and speakers) not because of any particular talent for turning a phrase, but because they are knowledgeable and thoughtful.
Writing is concretized thinking. The key is knowing when it’s time to stop writing and let that concrete set. Less experienced writers tend to stop too soon. (In my 30 years of editing experience, I’ve done a lot of jackhammering.)
If you want to witness a really good tech writer’s “writing brain” in action, listen to Andy Ihnatko on MacBreak Weekly. More so than any writer I’ve encountered, he externalizes his internal editor. Listen to him give his thoughts on a topic and notice how often he “rewrites” himself as he’s speaking. For example, he’ll start making an analogy and then realize before he’s finished the first sentence that it’s not the best analogy he could have chosen. Rather than just settling for that analogy and plowing ahead, he does the work of starting over and trying another one.
More writers should do that kind of work. For any amount of time you’ve taken to write something, most of that time should have been spent rewriting your own work.
I’m glad y’all are bringing the “pro” branding into the discussion. For many Apple products (particularly, non-Macs), this means premium. But even for Macs, a lot of folks can get away with spending less money for a non-pro Mac and get a lot of work done (and make an impact on the world).
Take the new M1 iMacs — a lot of folks don’t care for the new colors or the chin, or believe they should be thicker and include more I/O. Yes, Apple should (and will) make an iMac with different trade-offs. But many people can use an M1 iMac with 2-4 ports to get real work done, even if that’s just typing words and making calls (of course, the M1 can do much more). Saying the M1 iMac is just for “consumers” and isn’t for professional work puts down these workflows.
I think some of this “pro” branding is just Apple’s way of getting people to spend more money to feel like they’re getting something “professional”. But what am I saying — all Apple products are expensive!
Writers first learn by awakening taste.
Read widely in your field, and see what opinions come to be true, who is being of good heart and nature, and especially whose voice speaks to you.
Then see what in those qualities exactly speak to you, and seek to emulate these qualities, not by mimicking what these people do, but by conveying these deep qualities through the unique lens of your personality. (That’s what TS Eliot - if memory serves - means by “good writers borrow, great writers steal”).
What? Like Obsidian? Every time I listen MPU and Focus podcasts, I pray that they won’t talk too much about Obsidian, instead I’d prefer to keep solutions general so users can pick their own app. It doesn’t hurt to mention a few apps that might be useful for implementing a KMS, as long as there is more than one.
I do give podcasts a pass on plugging sponsors in their ad-spots. They have to make money, after all. I skip past those parts and get on with the content.
There are good 3rd party apps out there, but the definition “good” depends on how well it meets your needs. Some of my favorites are Keyboard Maestro, Unclutter, Todoist, and Visual Studio Code.
This is the problem I have. Everyone wants to get a MacBookPro (or “ProMac”), and when I ask what they need it for, it’s the usual stuff that, honestly, could be handled by an iPad Air. No one writing email and reading websites needs something as powerful as an M1-equipped device. But if I try to guide them in that direction (even when it’s at much less cost), they think I”m trying to hoodwink them into something.
I had a teacher who was replacing a MBP, and wanted to use it for editing her student’s videos at home. For what the tricked-out MBP sold for, I recommended an iPad and an iMac. The iMac has a much larger screen, power to actually render those videos quickly, and then she can only take the iPad to school daily. Her kids (middle schoolers) could use whichever machine she was not using, which appealed to them and her. She pondered it for days, came back and bought the two units. I have seen her several times over the few years since, and she always thanks me for listening to what she needed, rather than what she said she wanted.
Every time I listen MPU and Focus podcasts, I pray that they won’t talk too much about Obsidian, instead I’d prefer to keep solutions general so users can pick their own app. It doesn’t hurt to mention a few apps that might be useful for implementing a KMS, as long as there is more than one.