Viewport width =
May 24, 2015 | by  | in Editorial |
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

In Review: This Editorial

Sam McChesney is well known as a lazy editor, someone who—when he bothers to write his editorial at all—tosses it off at the last minute with very little thought, care or attention. He also tends to use swear words as a substitute for wit, the cunt. Needless to say, I wasn’t expecting much from his latest offering.

The editorial got off to an inauspicious start, with the use of unnecessarily complex words like “inauspicious”. With the pretentious verbiage and overbearing meta tone, McChesney seemed intent on alienating his readers from the outset.

After a lengthy and somewhat pointless introduction, McChesney seemed set to launch into one of his trademark thousand-word rants about student politics. But even that minimal level of substance was beyond him on this occasion. As the editorial wound aimlessly on, the sheer creative and intellectual bankruptcy on display became all too obvious. Here, dear readers, is a manchild who has run out of ideas.

I asked my colleagues to each give me three words to describe a typical McChesney editorial. The most common reply was “don’t know, never read them”, with “I don’t want to offend you so I’ll keep quiet” a close second. McChesney’s failure to capture or even vaguely grasp the zeitgeist was painfully apparent. His woeful ignorance of all things Drake probably doesn’t help.

The middle section of the editorial looked set to introduce some much-needed and bracing self-criticism, but before long this withered away into a kind of lame, overly self-aware smugness. The meta humour was by this point wearing thin, and McChesney was clearly struggling to fill a whole page with his empty, high-concept ramblings. He was 276 words in, and there wasn’t really anywhere new to go.

The editorial soon—very soon—led to a narratively and intellectually unsatisfying conclusion. The best thing that could be said of this particular piece was that it was short.

Verdict: ★½ The article could aptly be described as “the editor’s new clothes”.

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

About the Author ()

Comments are closed.

Recent posts

  1. An (im)possible dream: Living Wage for Vic Books
  2. Salient and VUW tussle over Official Information Act requests
  3. One Ocean
  4. Orphanage voluntourism a harmful exercise
  5. Interview with Grayson Gilmour
  6. Political Round Up
  7. A Town Like Alice — Nevil Shute
  8. Presidential Address
  9. Do You Ever Feel Like a Plastic Bag?
  10. Sport
1

Editor's Pick

In Which a Boy Leaves

: - SPONSORED - I’ve always been a fairly lucky kid. I essentially lucked out at birth, being born white, male, heterosexual, to a well off family. My life was never going to be particularly hard. And so my tale begins, with another stroke of sheer luck. After my girlfriend sugge