Why I hate Rosie DiManno
Well, I don't really hate Rosie. I've never met her. I don't imagine we'd get along very well, but who can say that for sure. Let's just say I hate her writing.
Rosie DiManno is a columnist for the Star who, it seems, specializes in playing Devil's Advocate to really whatever the popular opinion of the day is. The only problem is, you can't really tell what her point is. Why? Rosie DiManno is the Queen of the $64,000 Word. She never met a seven-letter word she didn't like.
Consider the capsule statement from her latest column, in Friday's Star:
"Those were eyeball-riveting headlines last week, when appeal lawyers for convicted murderer Robert Baltovich unleashed their Paul Bernardo-as-real-killer evidentiary construct in the 1990 death of Elizabeth Bain."
Eyeball-riveting? Unleashed? Evidentiary construct? Come on now. I realize that with column writing, you do have some leeway, but really. Never has someone said so little while writing so much (movie critic Geoff Pevere has a similar problem, but I'm not annoyed with him today).
DiManno is clearly a very smart woman, and researches her stories very well, but she babbles so much whatever research she includes gets hidden between the "appellant factum"s and "disreputable cohort"s.
Well, I don't really hate Rosie. I've never met her. I don't imagine we'd get along very well, but who can say that for sure. Let's just say I hate her writing.
Rosie DiManno is a columnist for the Star who, it seems, specializes in playing Devil's Advocate to really whatever the popular opinion of the day is. The only problem is, you can't really tell what her point is. Why? Rosie DiManno is the Queen of the $64,000 Word. She never met a seven-letter word she didn't like.
Consider the capsule statement from her latest column, in Friday's Star:
"Those were eyeball-riveting headlines last week, when appeal lawyers for convicted murderer Robert Baltovich unleashed their Paul Bernardo-as-real-killer evidentiary construct in the 1990 death of Elizabeth Bain."
Eyeball-riveting? Unleashed? Evidentiary construct? Come on now. I realize that with column writing, you do have some leeway, but really. Never has someone said so little while writing so much (movie critic Geoff Pevere has a similar problem, but I'm not annoyed with him today).
DiManno is clearly a very smart woman, and researches her stories very well, but she babbles so much whatever research she includes gets hidden between the "appellant factum"s and "disreputable cohort"s.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home