Editorial Writing

Editorial – An article that states the newspaper’s stance on a particular issue. Basically a persuasive essay that offers a solution to a problem.

Principles of Editorial Writing

The code of principles emphasizes the scientific method in arriving at

 The editorial writer should present facts honestly and fully.
 The editorial writer should draw objective conclusions from the stated facts, basing them upon the weight of evidence and upon his
considered concept of the greatest good.
 The editorial writer should never be motivated by personal interest, nor use his influence to seek special favors for himself or for others.
 The editorial writer should realize that he is not infallible.
 The editorial writer should regularly review his own conclusions in the light of all obtainable information.
 The editorial writer should have the courage of well-founded conviction and democratic philosophy of life.
 The editorial writer should support his colleagues in their adherence to highest standards of profession integrity.
Contents of the Editorial

1. The current issue (news peg) which is affecting many readers

2. Facts and concerns (evidences) to support opinion
3. Suggestions and indications as to outcome of the issue
4. Opinions that are well-prepared and informed one, taking into consideration many aspects from both sides of the issue.

Parts of the Editorial

1. News peg – (introduction) is a brief statement about the news event upon which the editorial is based or an existing issue that needs to be solved
right away
2. The Body may take two or three short paragraphs that support or justify the reaction.
3. The conclusion, oftentimes called the punchline or clincher, summarizes the editorial’s stand on issues

Tips on writing the Editorial

1. Lead with an objective explanation of the issue/ controversy(news peg).
a. Include the five Ws and H. Pull in the facts and quotations from sources which are relevant.
2. Present opposition first.
a. Use facts and quotations to state objectively their opinion
b. Give a strong position of the opposition
c. You gain nothing in refuting a weak position
3. Directly refute the oppositions beliefs
a. Pull in other facts and quotations from people who support your position
b. Concede a valid point of the opposition which will make you appear rational, one who has considered all the options
4. Give other, original reasons/ analogies\
a. In defense of your position, give reasons from strong to strongest order.
b. Use literary or cultural allusion that lends to your credibility and perceived intelligence
5. Make the editorial interesting enough to read
6. Develop it from one specific, limited idea, phrased in one sentence and expanded into the body of the editorial
7. Have a purpose well in mind which should be accomplished with sufficient data
8. Organized all data into well-reasoned arguments, with each argument leading up to the conclusion.
9. Peg the lead sentence on recent relevant news for its impact value
10. Present both sides of an issue and clarify tricky aspects with a widely understood analogy or with an illustration that makes for easier
understanding.
11. Direct the editorial towards the establishment of a consensus.
12. Is the writing simple, direct, clear and forceful?

Do’s and Dont’s in Editorial

1. Avoid generalities by using plenty of facts and by telling what these facts mean.
2. Keep it short around 300 to 500 words only
3. Do not preach, scold or moralize
4. Relate the editorials to the lives of the readers
5. Avoid first person “I”. Use the editorial “we”
6. Write simply
7. Make sentences and paragraphs short
8. Research your topic and find out what is happening and what went on in the past
9. Know the facts and be able to refer them in your paragraph
10. Use facts and details to back up your opinion and help you make your case.
11. Leave your readers with a lasting impression – a strong point that will make them consider your point of view
12. Do not preach to the reader. A good editorial will make the readers notice of the situation and for their own opinions on the issue.
13. Avoid the use of logical fallacies

Types of Editorials

1. Editorial of Argumentation and Persuasion (critical/one-sided)

2. Editorial of information and interpretation (balanced)
 3. Editorial of tribute, appreciation or commendation
4. Editorial of entertainment (short humorous treatment/ satirical treatment of a serious subject)
5. Editorials that explains (expository)
6. Editorials of criticism or evaluation (something is wrong that needs improvement)

Sample Editorials

Showcase
posted January 19, 2017 at 12:01 am, Manila Standard

The Philippines is hosting the Miss Universe pageant. Nearly 200 of the world’s most beautiful women—beauty defined, of
course, by conventional standards—have descended upon our shores to spread goodwill and help us showcase the best our country
has to offer.
The pageant takes place at an interesting time. We will be the first to claim that the Philippines is a beautiful country—in natural
resources and the goodness of heart of its people—but several things make us wary about how we are doing the telling.
There is, for instance, an ongoing war on drugs—and on everyone else that appears to be in the way.

Nearly seven months after President Rodrigo Duterte took office, 5,700
people have been killed in the name of this war, and many of them under
questionable circumstances. And while the drug menace is prevalent among rich
and poor Filipinos alike, it appears the crackdown is skewed toward those who do
not have the wherewithal to protect themselves.
And then, the President is known to be hostile towards those who do not
agree with his methods. In fact, did he not say we could do without aid and other
foreign assistance—even as, much later, he graciously accepted an investment
package from Japan and has been cozying up to the Chinese for joint explorations
in the South China Sea, disregarding the fact that even the permanent Court of
Arbitration found merit in our claim?
Are we ready, too, to share with the world the transport woes our
motorists and commuters have to live with every day?
Finally, poverty persists despite steady economic growth every reporting
period. Pageantry will not be able to hide the ugly truth of wealth inequality.
Soon many will be caught up in the frenzy of pageantry. This will be a nice distraction from everything that ails us.
Unfortunately, distractions are meant to be just that and we will have no choice but to face these ills again. This will not be pretty for a
long time, no matter the effort we make in putting a positive spin to our circumstances.

Stupid wins again

posted August 15, 2016 at 12:01 am, Manila Standard

BARELY three weeks into his term as senator, boxing champion Manny Pacquiao has once again exposed a critical flaw in our
democracy—that anyone with half a brain and enough popularity and money can win election to high public office.
Last week, we were treated to the spectacle of the newly minted senator delivering his first privilege speech urging Congress to
reinstate the death penalty for drug-related crimes, exhibiting a dangerous combination of ignorance and arrogance.
Although he took 15 minutes to speak his mind, Paquiao’s message was rather simple. We should reinstate the death penalty
because 1) It will eradicate the drug menace; 2) the Constitution allows it; and 3) the Bible allows it.
The boxer-turned-senator did little by way of presenting facts or figures to bolster his first argument, while the second point was
based on his interpretation of Section 19 of the Bill of Rights, which states: “Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any
death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.”
Thus, Pacquiao argued, the fact that the august drafters of the 1987
Constitution left the door open means that we should perforce take that path—an
argument that seems lacking in logic and good sense.
Finally, by invoking the Bible, the boxer demonstrated his ignorance that religious
doctrine is not an acceptable basis for government policy in a secular state.
It was after his speech, however, when he had to answer questions posed by
his colleagues, that Pacquiao really came into his own. Asked by one comedian-turned-
senator which method of execution he favored, Paquiao hemmed and hawed before
admitting with some mirth that he preferred death by hanging. “All you have to do is kick
the bench away,” he said, trying to inject humor into what should have been a serious
discussion.
Were ignorance his only sin, we could write Pacquiao as a buffoon like others that preceded him in the Senate. But the new
senator also proved that he is a liar who is untrue to his word.
In May, after refusing to represent the country in the Olympics this year, Pacquaio—who was among the most delinquent
lawmakers in the House of Representatives during his two terms—promised to become a full-time lawmaker and attend every session of
the Senate.
It took him only three weeks to break this promise, announcing he would come out of retirement to fight again in Las Vegas in
October. Assurances that the fighting will not interfere with his Senate duties are about as convincing as his earlier vow to become a full-
time senator.
But we do get the government we deserve, and if majority of voters continue to leave their brains out of the electoral exercise,
stupid will win—again and again.
A festering dilemma
posted August 07, 2016 at 12:01 am, Manila Standard

During the campaign, President Rodrigo Duterte said he is in favor of interring the remains of former President Ferdinand
Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.
As the late president’s birth anniversary nears, talks are rife that the burial will be sometime next month. There are reports that
the Marcos family is already coordinating with the Armed Forces of the Philippines for the transfer of the remains from a mausoleum in
Batac, Ilocos Norte.
The AFP has jurisdiction over the cemetery in Taguig City and has set the guidelines for who and who may not be buried at the
Libingan.
The subject remains sensitive for many Filipinos and groups. The National Historical Commission of the Philippines, for
instance, is objecting vehemently to the idea as it assails Mr. Duterte’s reason for allowing the interment of the Marcos remains—
because the former president was a Filipino soldier. The commission has released a 26-page document just last month that argues,
precisely, why Marcos should not be buried at the Libingan. The claim to being a soldier, the commission says, is “fraught with myths,
factual inconsistencies, and lies.”

Numerous groups have also registered their impassioned objections

because of Marcos’ supposed violation of human rights during his 20-year
rule.
Despite the loud opposition, the former President’s son placed
second during last May’s vice presidential race and has in fact filed a protest
against the victory of Vice President Leonor Robredo.
Mr. Duterte has been unequivocal about his intention to allow the
Marcos burial, saying this will foster healing among Filipinos. No other leader
has enjoyed the political capital—and possessed the resoluteness—to put the
festering issue on the table, deal with vehement opposition and actually set
the matter to rest, however divisive and emotional it is.
It is so tempting to put the issue in the backburner again and focus
on the many complex and immediate issues now hounding the country. It is
also a convenient ploy to drown out the noise of disagreement—why risk
earning the ire of numerous groups?
But it is a good thing the burial is being talked about now. We have
good reason to believe some action is forthcoming. The arguments have been heard, and now a decision has to be made. If we at least
agree to get our act together and move forward despite differences, then we would let the President do as he deems fit and live with that
decision, for better or for worse.