WHY vs WHY™ Style Guide

Edition 2010.1 

IMPORTANT: Our style requirements won’t suit every writer, but they suit this series and the popular audience we’re targeting. We seek writers who are happy to comply with them. If our style is not for you, please don’t submit to us. It will only waste your time and ours.

 

This Style Guide forms part of our Submission Gudelines & Requrements for WHY vs WHY™

General style requirements

Earlier on our website, we spell out in some detail our intent in editing your work, so please familiarise yourself with that.

Our target readers are members of the public keen to make up their own minds, or to acquire the tools to help argue others around to their point of view. They will range from senior high-school students through adults of all ages, and will come from all walks of life.

None of our guidelines need rob your writing of its individuality; we want readers to enjoy the colour and vigour of your writing, and, where it doesn't weaken the argument, its humour and lightness of touch. Reading these books should be an informative delight, not a chore.

Specific style requirements

Please keep this list in mind to save us all time and effort.

What we will edit out:

Jargon, technical terms, foreign terms, uncommon or “big” words

Jargon is never acceptable. Find an everyday plain English equivalent, even if it takes more words.

If you need to use a technical term or a foreign phrase, use a clear, simple English equivalent.

Uncommon or “big” words might well convey your meaning but please find a more familiar substitute. Don’t use words like “nadir”, “apogee”, “miscegenation”, “Polyannas” or other terms which will cause many readers to roll their eyes. We don’t want our readers, even younger ones, to be reaching for their dictionaries.

Unnecessary words

If it is possible to cut out a word, please do it. If you don’t, we will.

Clichés

Metaphor and simile can be good ways to explain something, but please avoid any that have been overused.

Stuffiness

For this series, we like how The Economist puts it in its own Style Guide: “use the language of everyday speech, not that of spokesmen, lawyers or bureaucrats.”

Passives

Don’t use a passive where you can easily use an active. They are cumbersome and slow the reader. They also use up your word count. (For example, instead of “The government was convinced by the public clamour”, write: “The public clamour convinced the government”.)

Double negatives

Don’t use them. They are very confusing and slow the reader.

Insults, sneers, ridicule or swipes

Be civil to your opponent as well as to others in the opposing camp. Don’t sneer, ridicule or abuse to undermine your opposition’s credibility. Your writing shouldn’t be shrill, and it shouldn’t use insults, ridicule or loaded criticism.

We encourage energetic writing, but will reject abuse or rudeness, whether directed to your opponent or those in his or her camp generally.

We will edit out statements like “anti-[your side] advocates often use the stupid argument that…” or “it’s incomprehensible that sane people could hold this view…” or “advocates for [the opposing argument] often twist the facts…”

Bald assertions

Don't make assertions without citing evidence to support them.

If you write:

• “The majority of the public believes…”

• “An increasing number of people…”

• “Fifty-five per cent of all women…”

you must then cite the poll, census, study or other evidence that supports your assertion.

The details can be left to the relevant endnote which we will give to your opponent and will post on our website. If you don’t provide the evidence, we will ask for it, and if you don’t supply it, we will edit out the assertion.

Repetition

If you can write everything you need to in less than the word limit, please do so. Don’t repeat the same material in different ways to fill space. The word count is a limit, not a requirement. Contributions which exceed the limits will be edited back.

What we will insist on

Helpful and fair labels for people you refer to

Even if you think the people you’re quoting are well-known, please add a short description in the text that clearly shows why you’re quoting them, e.g. not just Fred Bloggs, but Harvard University economics professor, Fred Bloggs.

You need to do it in the text because, even if you provide a full description in your endnotes, they don’t appear in the printed book, only on the website.

Also, if the person you’re quoting is a known activist or advocate for your side of the debate as well as, say, a Harvard professor, you must say so, otherwise it may mislead readers into thinking the relevant expert is completely independent: e.g. not just Harvard law professor, Sarah Bloggs but anti-nuclear activist and Harvard law professor, Sarah Bloggs.

Fairly describe those you quote or refer to as experts supporting your side of the debate and avoid charged labels for people on the opposite side. Here are some examples of ‘ fair’ labels:

• Sydney University anthropologist and marriage equality advocate, Freda Bloggs…

• American lawyer and pro-life campaigner Fred Bloggs…

Play fair. If you label advocates for the other side – for example as “an environmental activist” – do the same when it comes to advocates supporting your own side – for example as “an oil industry spokesperson”.

We at Pantera Press are not experts in your field, and we will not fact- or source-check or subject your work to peer review except by exposing it to your opponent, so we may not know the affiliations of those you quote. However, your opponent will notice and you will only have yourself to blame if they make a feast in their rebuttal of your mislabelling or inadequate labelling.

What we accept, though sparingly

Contractions

We prefer to avoid them but where they help lighten up a heavy sentence, we will accept contractions such as “don’t”, “won’t”, “can’t” or “they’re”.

References to classical myths or movie and literary characters

Don’t assume readers will have your depth of knowledge or education; if you want to allude to a classic text or even someone from contemporary popular culture or anything in between, please explain it. 

Here’s an example. In our Nuclear Power book, one author used the term “Promethean”. It was a wonderfully apt term, but for the great many readers who wouldn’t know it, he helpfully added: ”Prometheus was the defiantly original and wily Greek god who stole fire from Zeus and gave it to mortals, thus improving their lives forever.”

Sometimes, this might mean spelling something out to an extent that seems unnecessary for a reasonably informed reader.  But keep in mind the reasonably uninformed reader – and sometimes, the unreasonably uninformed.

Other matters of house style

Abbreviations

Generally, we avoid abbreviations, at least the first time something is mentioned.

Spell out the names of nations. Not the "UK" but the "United Kingdom", at least the first time you use it, and similarly, not the "US" or the "USA" but the "United States". If that becomes too repetitive, slip in a "Britain" or (adjectivally) a "British”, or an "America" or an "American".

Dot points

Dot points (or bulleted points) are very welcome. They can help break up otherwise plain pages and make them more inviting. They are more reader-friendly than compressing a long list into a paragraph.  But don’t use them to excess.

Here’s an example from our book on Nuclear Power:

“The most popularly discussed alternatives to fossil fuels and nuclear power are:

• harnessing the energy in wind

• sunlight (directly via photovoltaic panels or indirectly using)

• water held behind large dams (hydropower)

• ocean waves and tides

• plants (biomass)

• geothermal energy, either from hot surface aquifers or in deep, hot dry rocks”

Note the style – no capitals at the start of each point and no commas or semi colons at the end.

Emphasis

To emphasise a word or phrase, use italics – not bold, and not an underline.

References

Within endnotes, italicise book titles and journal and magazine titles, but put quotation marks around all article titles and chapter titles.

• Book reference: Richard Posner, Sex and Reason. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1992, p. 312.

• Journal or newspaper articles: Peter Wood, “Sex and consequences”, The American Conservative, 28 July 2003, p. 10. Simon Leys, “Teetering on the brink of barbarity”, The Age, 4 July 1995.

• Chapter in a book: Kingsley Davis, “The Meaning and Significance of Marriage in Contemporary Society,” in Kingsley Davis, ed., Contemporary Marriage: Perspectives on a Changing Institution. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1985, p. 5

Titles and honorifics – Professor, Dr, Mr, Ms 

Dispense with them after the first mention and then only use surnames. You do not need to mention a source’s first name in the second and subsequent mentions as long as they are close to the first. If, however, they occur a few pages further on –you will need to remind the reader that “Bloggs” is the “Fred Bloggs” referred to earlier.

And no full stops afterwards, ie Dr Smith, not Dr. Smith.

One place where we do want honorifics – as a courtesy – is in the rebuttals. For example, in the first book of the series (on nuclear power) the authors, Ian Lowe and Barry Brook, refer to each other as “Professor Lowe” and “Professor Brook” in their responses.

Length of sentences and paragraphs

Shorter is generally better.

Numbers

We usually spell out numbers from one to nine (except with percentages) and then use figures from 10 onwards. Apply that style even within quotes. It keeps the style consistent without changing the sense.

We will not do this where two numbers are close to each other, eg “It will take from 5 - 60 years”.

Currency

For currency, we prefer to write, for example, US$50 billion, or A$50 billion.

Quotes, and how to introduce them

Generally, introduce quotes from books, reports, academic papers and so on with the present tense, eg “the Switkowski report claims” rather than “claimed”. The same goes for authors: “Shakespeare says”, and books, “The Penguin Concert Guide says”, and so on. We make an exception if the person is dead but is not especially well-known.

Quote marks    

Double not single, except for quotes within quotes.

Spelling

For consistency, we use Australian English (eg “colour” not “color”, “centre” not “center”). We may make an exception for quotes, but we prefer to Australianise.

Exceptions

We can waive any of these rules in a particular case if we think it will make your writing clearer or more vigorous. But it’s our choice.

If it appears we’ve waived one of these rules in your opponent’s case, and you think we shouldn’t have, please point it out to us, even if it is too late for us to fix.

 

‹ Previous

 

Pantera Press reserves the right to change or vary these Submission Guidelines & Requirements including the Style Guide at any time

WHY vs WHY™ making sense of everything™ are trademarks of Pantera Press Pty Limited

Copyright © Pantera Press Pty Limited 2010. All rights reserved.