So, I'm writing this article, which is getting pretty long, but I'm trying to go into some pretty lengthy detail about what the US Chamber of Commerce is doing in terms of lobbying, and why they do it, because they are the number one spender in lobbying every year. I want it to be a long read, with a lot of detail, because I want to make sure people have a real understanding of what's going on with a pretty good pool of info, but with still being article length.
I'm trying to break it up into a few different sections: the intro, which gives some explanation of what I'm writing about and why, a section where I go into detail about the history of why the Chamber has become what it has over the last 40 years, and the one I'm currently still writing, the section on what the Chamber lobbies so heavily for and why they do it. Some of the sections have a few subsections too.
Now, I wonder if there are any tips that you guys can give to me on writing pretty long, political articles that make it more interesting to read to someone who might have no idea what I'm talking about before starting, and without becoming too taxing of a read by being too long. What would you like to see and make it easier to read and absorb this topic well?
Thanks, guys.
Do you have an outline? If you do, cover your outline, then expand, then edit, edit edit. rearrange, cut, add, etc. If you don't have an outline? get an outline, dawg. I have wasted SO MUCH TIME writing articles without outlines and now I am a convert. I find them so much easier to organize my thoughts and get from A to z.
First thing I ever write is my "Table of Contents" ie. logic flow ie. outline. It helps to know where you think you are going. Even if that changes along the way and you have to modify, if you fail to plan, you plan to fail.
Unfortunately, I'm pretty new to writing (outside of simple highschool and college essay stuff), and haven't taken any real classes on writing, so I'm not too used to using outlines and forget to 99% of the time. I need to make one and flesh it out, because it's getting hard to reread everything a lot to see what I've covered already. Thanks!
only other tip: Don't worry about how things are going down on paper the first time, and don't be precious about your words. If you're really passionate about your subject and you want to get it right, you'll be writing 90% of it over again (or more, ask KB about his book). Last thing. Someone once said to me, "don't focus on being perfect, because you will never be perfect". I find this a very freeing concept: it gives you permission to make mistakes to take risks. I do my best to embrace it. There's lots of great writers here, hopefully they can hook you up with further good advice.
Perhaps intersperse your hard analysis with sections about one or two particular example to contextualize what you are driving towards. Depending on your target audience it could be a Mom and Pop story that is less a heavy news piece and more of a "human interest" angle that illustrates a pragmatic example of your point. Someone that was helped by the effort, for example, and then maybe contrast that with a "but across town" example of someone that was hurt by an initiative. For example, I remember reading an extremely long read a few years ago about a libertarian public interest law firm called The Institute for Justice. They generally choose sympathetic Mom and Pop type of cases to litigate but the big picture is that they are fighting for big business rights. So the article contextualized their political big picture with the small picture example of the Caswell Motel. Hope that helps.
I guess that giving some of the history behind the Chamber and why they are doing what they are doing, and specifically breaking down the Powell Memo and the meaning behind it would be similar to that. As well as breaking down one of the bills they lobbied for, and a testimony against the bill, which I go into detail about why the bill is bad. I'm not exactly sure if that counts. Maybe I could add onto that by giving some narrative of someone who has been hurt by the very thing the bill would make harder to get compensation for, which is asbestos exposure. Although, I have other instances of lobbying I want to go into, since there are quite a few, and I want to make sure people realize the depth of the situation of lobbying as a whole. So going into one instance too much might just complicate the article too much.
There are so many that would fit well as a contrast there. And an individual account would undoubtedly fit well as a "Mom and Pop" story. Ralph Nader and Unsafe at Any Speed particularly annoyed Powell if I remember correctly. Or you could use many examples without going into one in depth.
Whenever I have to write something I read it back to myself with an accent and doing that helps me figure out if it flows well. Since I'm writing it and reading it over so much in my own head I don't really notice the bits that don't flow but if I read it in an accent I trip over them. If someones writing doesn't flow well I end up not being able to absorb anything and just moving on to something else.