mx5cartalk.com

Hi everyone, I am an aspiring journalist. I wrote this ND MX-5 review and if it's popular it will help me towards my goal. I appreciate any feedback and comments PS There is also a brief comparison with a black turbo NB

http://performancedrive.com.au/2016-maz ... ideo-1413/

Hi V.A.

Thanks for posting the review, it's clear that a lot of effort went into it.

If I were to change one thing, I'd probably make the transitions in the video slightly faster. The camera dipping or soaring was a little disorienting.

Other than that though, overall great stuff.

Cheers

The article is too long and needs to be pared back by at least 30- 50% . It reads more like an advertisement for the ND than a review of the car. There are many comments that are unsuitable for a wider audience and slang expressions that you would not normally find in professionally written reviews. The RACV and NRMA car reviews or Drive provide the essentials of how to compose and all of these are done to a preset space / word count allowance. A tightly written article is essential.

Agree with Morlock - the writing needs thorough editing. I appreciate there's some 'colouring' in the writing to make it more descriptive but it comes across as clunky, tacked on, and in some places clichéd. It come across as a 'stream of consciousness' which can work well, but the degree of polishing needed to make that method work is underestimated.

An example is this paragraph:
"A three-spoke tiller featuring a neat array of audio and cruise control buttons is a delight to use, while the two cloth-trimmed seats look good and a far more comfortable and supportive than they have any right to be for lightweight, sports car items. There is an overall impression of commonality with other Mazdas, but it does not suffer for this. The turbine-style air vents and switchgear do not feel cheap. A high central tunnel with primary audio controls makes you feel like you’re sitting embedded into the car itself, while the single-latch roof mechanism is so elegant and easy to use, you will take it down at every possible opportunity."

This could be pared right down, and sequencing could be much better - it has poor flow. A rule I use to to start with the 'big picture' and work down. so to rewrite this I would 'dot point' it out, something along these lines:
- cabin
- controls
- seating
- roof

You can then start to fill it from there. I would use sub points here rather than brackets and commons, but we're working within the limits of the forum software here.
- cabin (overall impression, Mazda commonality, quality)
- controls (central tunnel, steering wheel)
- seating (quality, comfort, support, seating position)
- roof (ease of use, cabin feel with roof closed)

From there, you can then start to build the paragraph. I use a rule of twenty five words to a sentence, four sentences to a paragraph, each paragraph a concept, with the sentences four ideas relevant to the concept. Whilst I've split the ideas up here to illustrate my method, I'd be inclined to split this over two paragraphs.

You have kept to short sentences and paragraphs, which makes reading easier as it gives the information in nice digestible chunks. The back end of the piece is a bit photo heavy and you might be better with a 'scrollable' gallery so users can peruse photos if they so desire.