Word limits, and attribution

The late great Ron Thomson would have loved the item about Reuters setting new drastic word limits to stories.   

He used to tell (in Mrs Moon’s, of course) how he once had an editor in some provincial paper who used to give this as the perfect illustration of a short lead:

"Dead.

"That's what he was after the number 74 bus ran him over."

I can still hear Pat Massey roaring with laughter, several pints in hands!

My friend Marcus Eliason, who recently retired from the AP after decades around the world, knew Ron when he was at the AP.

His favourite Ron story, from his AP days, happened in the Yom Kippur War.

Marcus says that, as best as he can remember (it was 40+ years ago), Ron came back from a trip to the Suez Canal very excited, saying he had a major story. The Israeli army had taken him on a trip all round Suez City to prove that this very important city was fully surrounded by the Israelis. 

He wrote: “The strategic Egyptian city of Suez is trapped in a ring of Israeli steel.”

And so on. Terse, dramatic, pure Ron.

Then came the response from New York. Good story, but could we have some attribution in the lead?

“What attribution? I was there. I saw it with my own eyes.”

Yes, but the Cairo bureau says the Egyptian military insists the city isn't surrounded.

“I'm telling you what I saw!”

Not doubting you, but would feel more comfortable with attribution, just to fireproof ourselves.

Back and forth they went, until finally an exasperated Ron proposed:

“The strategic Egyptian city of Suez is trapped in a ring of Israeli steel, I say."

I wish I could remember who won. Probably not Ron. One day I'll get into the files and try to find out. ■