downsmail.co.uk The quiet art of punctuation


THE recent death of the much-admired journalist Garry Barker, aged 61, inspired his former colleague at the Kent Messenger, Ian Carter, to write an entertaining piece about some of Garry's email rants.


As a sub-editor, it was Garry's job to take reporters' articles and lay them out on a page, write headlines, generally tidy up the words and spot legal pitfalls. In theory, reporters should be good writers, spellers and grammarians but, under pressure, they can make mistakes and often do.


Garry had been a news reporter for 13


years, so knew the gig from both sides. He rose to be the KM’s group production editor, a role with a huge workload, unrelenting pressure and certainly not for a shrinking violet.


Ian collected dozens of these frustrated outpourings by Garry – all deadly serious but hilarious in their own way. One Barker email to staffers read: "STOP the ;;;;ing semi-colons. I can honestly say I never saw a semi-colon in newspaper copy until maybe four months ago; they are ugly little blighters even when used correctly, which is rare; please put a (full) stop to them..." And this: “Loads of pages still to plan, hundreds of stories to sub, deadlines looming, and here I am worrying about commas. But it’s doing my head in!" As someone who had known the man for a quarter of a century, it was hard to reconcile the style of these messages with the easy-going, gentle, kind and funny character who sat in our kitchen, legs crossed, glass of red in hand and smoking anorexic roll-ups. Many years ago, a grouchy news editor once told this observer semi-colons are 'illegal' and use of the word 'that' in an introductory paragraph is ‘deeply, deeply poor'. No one ever dared answer back or


Missing wider picture


A NUMBER of concerned local residents are researching both the practicality and viability of Bearsted Parish Council’s tennis courts proposal, and their concerns will be raised with the parish council during the consultation period. Bearsted Parish Council may have failed to appreciate the wider implications of their scheme. Bland statements such as “we need a bigger car park” without producing substantiating evidence are unacceptable. In addition, comments made by some councillors during the public sessions, which took place on the meadow to the east of Church Landway, that a larger car park would not result in more traffic on Church Lane is highly questionable. Their incorrect assumption was based on the notion that many car users


SimonSays SIMON FINLAY Editor simon.nlay@downsmail.co.uk Twitter @Simonnlay6500


argue the toss. He was right and the lesson was learnt. There seems to be a difficulty among the young to understand the importance of simple punctuation or even acknowledge the existence of an apostrophe, for instance, much less how to use one.


But it's not their fault.


If intelligent and erudite graduates are leaving our nest seats of learning without even a basic grasp of grammar or punctuation, it is probably not the universities' fault. Or even secondary schools’ fault, for that matter.


Clearly, the basics need to be drummed into children in primary school. Not knowing the difference between "it's" or "its" is not the end of the world – but it could have been the end of a budding career in British journalism before it even started, if the luckless applicant happened to write to Garry Barker for a job.


Perception is key


THIS IS an age when everyone has the ability to send messages to the outside world, whether the outside world wants to receive them or not.


But modern and more traditional, direct communication methods are essential tools to convey information, particularly from public bodies who spend public money. There has never been so many of them. In recent weeks, there has been much


currently travel to the existing car park only to nd it full up. This view is not evidence-based and fails to take account of the law of induced traffic where, if you provide larger capacity that will automatically attract more users. Church Lane is little more than a by-


way where passing can be difficult, and the scheme would certainly result in an increase in traffic, to the detriment of residents and road users alike. From publicly-available council and tennis club minutes, it is apparent that the requirements of the tennis club were taken into account when preparing the drawing that was on view at the public sessions, yet the parish council only saw t to inform the allotment holders immediately prior to making their public announcement.


Clearly the casualties of this scheme would be the allotment holders and the


upset caused by the land acquisition by Bearsted Parish Council (BPC), particularly from the allotment holders, who are concerned they could be moved to another part of the new site and possibly with smaller plots. However, the tennis club could gain a couple of extra courts and the car park extended. On the face of it, the donation should be a cause for quiet celebration, securing a piece of land for public use and eradicating any risk of yet more unwanted development.


Whilst it appears the tennis club was


aware of the donation, the allotment holders were not.


Why not simply put the tennis courts on the donated land? The club gets the courts and the plot holders stay where they are.


But, it should be pointed out, proposals by the parish council are not a foregone conclusion and views are still being sought from everyone. What has aggrieved the allotment plot holders – who have spent many years tending the soil and establishing a vibrant, happy community – is that they feel as though they were excluded from the process. They perceive much of what has been suggested could already be as good as decided. Perception is key – and that stems from communication, or lack of it, they say. The deal, perhaps understandably, was conducted largely in secret with just a handful of people allowed in. Many of the parish councillors knew little of the detail.


BPC still has time to rectify this imbalance or risk its reputation being tarnished. No one doubts the council decision-makers felt they were doing the right thing, but it does seem to have backred on them rather spectacularly.


residents of Church Lane, with no meaningful offsetting gains. Although the parish council have indicated that they will seek additional funding, this may not be forthcoming and their allocation of £100,000 of parish funds is woefully short of the total cost of a project of this magnitude. When questioned during the public sessions, representatives of the council were unaware of, or unwilling to disclose, how this gure had been arrived at. In addition, the parish council may not yet be aware of the considerable costs and complexities associated with submitting a planning application of the sort required, which they would be obliged to do. The impact of the proposal on the local ecology and the environment would be disastrous, as it would require the removal of more than a third of an acre of trees, despite some of them being subject


45


Comment


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48