Passive?
We don't need no stinking passive!

Newswriting depends upon active (not passive) syntax and active/lively diction. A passive structure usually indicates that the subject of the sentence completes no action but is instead acted upon. ("The winning home run was hit by Sammy Sosa."). It's a structure, however, where quite often the real subject of the sentence is either missing or mistakenly relegated to the object position. The above baseball sentence could be rephrased: "Sammy Sosa hit the winning home run." When in doubt, use this simple test: ask yourself, Who's responsible for the action? Passive structures are wordy and lead to "preposition chains" and far too many verbs of being (also a journalistic no-no). Passive structures are characteristic of doublespeak. You'll find them in business (where they euphemize damage or loss and make weak ideas seem more substantial) and in politics (where it's important to sound as if you're saying something, but it's in the politician's best interest never to say too much). Consider this passive structure, complete with all the unnecessary qualifiers, modifiers, and inflated diction that usually accompany such structures: "It appears as though Jim is the recipient of a kicking action being performed upon his posterior by John." Active translation? "John kicked Jim's ass" (or butt, or rear-end, if you prefer). But of course a sentence worded so directly stands out because it now seems primer, a bit thin, a bit naked. Now, your wordiness exposed, you're ready to add more information (like more details, or why?). John kicked Jim in the rear-end, sending him sprawling across the kitchen. Strive to eliminate passive structures from your writing, and it will make your prose less dense and more pleasurable to read. From the 9-6-96 Argus :

1) "Playing No. 1 Singles again this year is last year's conference champion, Laura Brockob." (Break down the subject-verb-object and you get this: playing is champion. Note too the repetition of time elements: again/this year say the same thing, but neither is needed in a preview where it's obvious it's a new year.) Improved version: "Laura Brockob, last year's conference champion, returns at the No. 1 singles spot."

2) "Part of the reason for the change to more of a three receiver look is a lack of depth at the tight end position." (S-V-O structure = Part is lack. With logic like that anchoring the sentence, can a writer hope for clarity? Also, don't separate subjects and verbs. And who implemented the change? Presumably the coach, Norm Eash.) Improved version: "Eash plans to use more three-receiver formations to compensate for a lack of depth at tight end."

3) "The petition was started by the Strategic Planning Committee of Student Senate in hopes of influencing ACS and financial alllocations. According to Mike Balsley, the Planning Committee decided to support changes in the laser printer services based on complaints from student users and personal dissatisfaction." (Repetition of "Planning Committee" should be a tip-off that these sentences could be effectively combined. Most of the information repeated info delivered earlier.) Improved version: "Student Senate's Strategic Planning Committee started the signature drive because of complaints from students." (We know the students who complained must have been "users," and we need not know it was a "personal dissatisfaction" that spurred them on. They're students too, so one term covers all.)

4) "Meals are also affected by the increase in students." (Do we mean the quality of meals? In this case, shifting to active voice really helps to clarify things.) Improved version: "The unexpected increase in students has caused long delays at the cafeteria, especially during peak hours."

YOUR ASSIGNMENT (should you choose to accept it--and you WILL):