We've got HER Permission!

[apolla]

Check this baby out:

Rowling Backs Potter Fan Fiction

Although... have to ask... why does SQ get a mention AND a link? Isn't that a little partisan? Would it not have been rather more diplomatic and give FAP a mention? And FF.net? Way to make us all look like sub-literate moronic 9 year olds.

ETA: You know that 'should the trio be replaced' thing? Well, that's also on BBC News.... complete with a mention of Stockard Channing being 33 when she was Rizzo. Are the BBC checking out LJ these days?

Comments

[emony.livejournal.com]

Yeah. There's no way anyone can really make money off fic writing, unless they publish zines and charge extortionate amounts of money for them (and I know of someone who does that). That's wrong, but it's not the fic writing aspect that makes it wrong. I can see their POV about the "protecting the kiddies" aspect too, as much as I might mock it. Kids shouldn't be stumbling across explicit stuff, but they shouldn't be allowed to be wandering around the internet on their own anyway, so that's just linked in with a whole 'nother issue.

You've gotta take evidence where you can find it *g* How's your work going?

[apolla.livejournal.com]

Yes to all of that... but I don't think people should be made to STOP writing that stuff... and mostly I think it's relatively well labelled. Writing the characters as under-age and explicit is another story, I think, and one I'm not down with.

And work? Well, I have a document open, but it's empty thus far. I do have my review done, more or less. One thing of many.

[emony.livejournal.com]

No, I don't think it's fair to stop anyone writing, even the stuff that I personally really dislike. As long as things are appropriately labelled, it's up to us as adults (the adults who should be supervising the kids on the net, in the case of kids) to judge what we do and don't want to be reading.

I'm working on my critical evaluation, which is basically a big long explanation of how shite I am and how much my feature article sucks. I hope he marks my feature and review first, otherwise he's going to get to the end of this and go, "okay, you convinced me - 12%. Fail."

[apolla.livejournal.com]

I would imagine he'd mark them first, so that the evaluation makes, you know, sense.

[emony.livejournal.com]

With Ian and Iain, I've decided never to make assumptions that they'll do things in any kind of logical manner.

[apolla.livejournal.com]

True.

Oh, how do you do a standfirst?

[emony.livejournal.com]

From "Subediting for Journalists" by Hicks and Holmes:

The standfirst [that they have as an example] is the classic two-sentence version: the first sentence explains what the story's all about and says why you're reading it now; the second sentence, which incorporates the byline, gives more detail on the feature itself.

The standfirst can be extended if there is more space or more to say - but generally the two-setence version works better than longer ones. The second setence can be cut to a simple '[name] reports', or the standfirst can be cut to a single sentence: '[name] talks to [interviewee] about [issue, and why its now]'.

[apolla.livejournal.com]

So mine would be something like "Education might soon change forever as education experts set out plans for online exams. Clare Worley speaks to former headteacher Maurice Regan about the pros and cons."

And is it on a separate page of the copy? He didn't tell us (that I recall) how to set it out.

[emony.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's perfect. I've no idea how to set it out. I've no idea how to write a damned feature, so getting the standfirst layout right is the least of my worries really ;) I don't think it much matters, as long as you hand it in. I'd probably do it either at the top of your feature, maybe on a separate page first, like another intro.

[apolla.livejournal.com]

Right. Thanks honey!

[emony.livejournal.com]

You're welcome.