It’s not a good article. If a writer can’t get to the point in the first three paragraphs all he/she is doing is padding it in order to get the requisite lines of column.
The article is a rant to galvanize action. Marquess of Queensbury Rules are for prigs.
“””It’s not a good article. If a writer can’t get to the point in the first three paragraphs all he/she is doing is padding it in order to get the requisite lines of column. “””
Lol. Just lol. All op eds should be three paragraphs?
He did get to the point in first few paragraphs. The rest was damn good reading.
I have long been annoyed by articles that start off with anecdotes, similes or out of the blue comparisons like this one did with the Tet Offensive. There are infinite possible parallels one can draw so why choose any?
Of course so many writers use these devices that I have learned if I start to read one I skip ahead a half dozen paragraphs to get to the meat. The author has some good points. Why he (and so many others) choose to bury those points beneath 500 words about something totally irrelevant escapes me.