How do you write a non-opinion based article?

[Geocooper]

I'm asking this from an honest perspective: How do you write a non-opinion based article? One of my articles was rejected for being being opinion based or editerial-style. I'm a bit confused at how not to write an opinion based article. Isn't every article essentially our opinion even if we're an expert on the topic? How do you write about something, even if it's fact based (which mine was), without it being considered an opinion?

[Evelyn]

These couple of forum discussions might shed some light for you.

http://www.constant-content.com/forum/v ... 19&p=55227
http://www.constant-content.com/forum/v ... 50&p=47429

[4rumid]

The most helpful excerpt from those links is probably Ed's comment:

"If the idea or concept can not be supported by fact, or if the article is based upon the opinion/perspective of the author, the article is generally rejected." [emphasis added]

Most articles here are informative in some way -- buyers are usually looking for information, not opinion. For example, on a website about Italy's Lake Como, someone wrote "Lake Como is a jewel-like oasis of tranquillity, a magical combination of lush Mediterranean foliage and snowy alpine peaks." That's mostly opinion. "Jewel-like oasis of tranquillity" and "magical" are perceptions, not facts. On the other hand, if someone wrote, "Lake Como has much less traffic than nearby Milan, and features Mediterranean foliage and snowy alpine peaks," that information can be supported. It would be possible for someone else not to find Lake Como magical at all, but no one can argue that there's no Mediterranean foliage.

It might help to ask yourself, is it possible for someone to disagree with what I wrote and not be wrong? Can I demonstrate or prove that I'm right? If someone finds Lake Como oppressive, you may think they're crazy, but you can't prove them wrong; again, "oppressive" and "magical" are matters of perception, not fact. You can't "prove" the place is magical, you can only perceive it that way. But you can point to the snow on top of the mountains.

Make sense?

[Celeste Stewart]

Yeah, but I doubt Ed would reject those descriptions as being too opinionated. He's mainly talking about opinion/editorial pieces. Not subjective descriptions in general.

For example, you could write an article about the dangers of tattoos. You might discuss the risks from unclean needles as well as documented cases of hepatitis infections linked to unsafe tattoo practices. That would be pretty straightforward, right? But what if the article said that tattoos are unclean, immoral, and would get you fired? What if the article insinuated that only losers get tattoos? The article would be considered an opinion piece.

Even with facts, if an article is overly biased, it could be an opinion piece. Just look at any of your favorite columnists featured on the op-ed page of your newspaper. They're using facts to back up their opinions, but the columns are usually one sided, showing just one perspective.

[Celeste Stewart]

Also, you could write that tattoo article with its statements that some believe tattoos are unclean, immoral, etc. and have it accepted IF the article is balanced with another perspective - with neither perspectives coming across as the author's opinion.

[4rumid]

Celeste, Yes, I realize my example isn't of "editorial"-type writing, but I was deliberately trying to pick a somewhat subtle distinction between fact and opinion to make the point. If a buyer requested a piece for his travel website to lure people to Italy, that kind of writing would of course be fine.

I think we're agreed in saying there's a difference between using facts to back up your opinions and using facts to back up facts. An opinion is still an opinion, and can't be "proven" with facts. I can list 30 different things my neighbor did to my lawn; it's still my opinion that he should be evicted. Using your example, you can do a factual expose on how dirty tattoo-parlor needles can be, but you can't "prove" immorality. As you say in your second post, it's entirely different to say that SOME PEOPLE think tattoos are immoral -- you can demonstrate that. You wouldn't even have to present another perspective. Your article might simply be about the negative views some people have of tattoos, piercings, etc., as long as you're clearly reporting on people's opinions rather than presenting your own.

I'd be interested in seeing the OP's article to see what makes it fundamentally an opinion piece. It would also be easier to explain the problem more concretely if Geo is still unclear.

[Celeste Stewart]

I think the key to having articles with some element of opinion accepted here is to approach the topic as objectively as possible and to use credible sources and facts to back up your position/opinion. So, how to write a non-opinon based article? Keep the author out of it, write objectively, and use credible sources and facts.

Opinion: Considering getting a tattoo? Dirty needles, diseases, and drugged up tattoo artists ensure that you'll have a terrible experience and wind up with AIDS.

Objective: According to the Mayo Clinic, bloodborne diseases including hepatitis B and C, tetanus, and HIV can be contracted during tattooing if the equipment used is contaminated with infected blood.

Yes, it would be helpful to see a small excerpt from Geocooper. Geo said the article was fact based, but remember, those pesky facts can be cherrypicked to present an opinion. How objectively were the facts presented? How controversial was the topic? How credible the sources? What type of language was used in presenting the topic?