op ed vs essay

• Guides & Resources

How To Write an Op-ed: A Step By Step Guide

There’s a formula that we call the “ABCs” that can be used to write compelling op-eds, columns, or blogs. The same formula can also be used to write almost any document that offers up an argument or gives advice. This is a “news flash lede,” a comment that will make sense in a  moment .

The ABC Formula

This formula for writing op-eds is based on our experience and our op-eds that appeared in the  New York Times , the  Wall Street Journal , and the  Washington Post .  I first came across a version of this formula while I was at  US News and World Report . It was called “FLUCK,” and we have tweaked it a bit since then. 

This is probably obvious, but this ABC formula is meant to guide writers rather than restrict them. In other words, these are recommendations, not a rigid set of instructions.

Better yet, think of the formula as a flexible template for making an effective argument in print—one that you personalize with your specific style, topic, and intended audience in mind.

This guide is divided into five parts.

Part I: Introduction:  In this section, we give a brief overview of the approach and discuss the importance of writing and opinion.

Part II: The ABCs:  Here we cover the important steps in writing for your audience: Attention, Billboard, and Context.

PART III: The ABCS in Example:  In this section, we give you different examples of the ABCs in action and how to effectively use them.

PART IV: Pitching:  Here we will go over how to effectively pitch ideas and submit ideas to an editor for publication.

PART V: Final tips and FAQs: Here we go over a few more key things to do and answer the most commonly asked questions.

Part I: Introduction To Op-Eds

Op-eds are one of the most powerful tools in communications today. They can make a career. They can break a career.

But there’s often lots of mystery around editorials and op-eds. I mean: What does op-ed even stand for?

Well, let’s start with editorials. Editorials are columns written by a member of a publication’s board or editors, and they are meant to represent the view of the publication. While reporting has the main purpose of informing the public, editorials can serve a large number of purposes. But typically editorials aim to persuade an audience on a controversial issue.

Op-eds, on the other hand, are “opposite the editorial” page columns. They began as a way for an author to present an opinion that opposed the one on the editorial board. Note that an op-ed is different than a letter to the editor, which is when someone writes a note to complain about an article, and that note is published. Think of a letter to the editor as an old, more stodgy form of the comments section of an article.

The New York Times  produced the first modern op-ed in 1970, and over time, op-eds became a way for people to simply express their opinions in the media. They tend to be written by experts, observers, or someone passionate about a topic, and as media in general becomes more partisan, op-eds have become more and more common.

How to start . The first step for writing an op-ed is to be sure to: Make. An. Argument.

Many op-eds fail because they just summarize key details. But, wrong or right, op-eds need to advance a strong contention. They need to assert something, and the first step is to write down your argument.

Here are some examples:

• I want to write an op-ed on the plague that are drinks that overflow with ice cubes. This op-ed would argue that restaurants serve drinks with too many ice cubes.
• Superman is clearly better than Batman. In this op-ed, I would convince readers why Superman is a better superhero than Batman.
• My op-ed is on lowering the voting age in America. An op-ed on this topic would list reasons why Congress should pass a law to allow those who are 14 years old like me to be able to vote in elections.

How to write.  So you have yourself an argument. It’s now time to write the op-ed. When it comes to writing, this guide assumes a decent command of the English language; we’re not going to cover the basics of nouns and verbs. However, keep in mind a few things:

• Blogs, op-eds, and columns are short.  Less than 1,000 words. Usually between 500 and 700 words. Many blogs are just a few hundred words, basically a few graphs and a pull quote often does the job.
• Simplicity, logic, and clarity are your best friends  when it comes to writing op-eds and blogs. In other words, write like a middle schooler. Use short sentences and clear words. Paragraphs should be less than four sentences. Please take a look at Strunk and White for more information. I used to work with John Podesta, who has written many great op-eds, and he was rumored to have given his staff a copy of Strunk and White on their first day of employment.
• Love yourself topic sentences.  The first sentence of each paragraph needs to be strong, and your topic sentences should give an overall idea of what’s to follow. In other words, a reader should be able to grasp your article’s argument by reading the first sentence of each paragraph.

How to make an argument.  This guide is not for reporters or news writers. That’s journalism. This guide is for people who make arguments. So keep in mind the following:

• Evidence . This might be obvious, but you need evidence to support your argument. This means data in the forms of published studies, government statistics, and anything that offers cold facts. Stories are good and can support your argument. But try and go beyond a good anecdote.
• Tone . Check out the bloggers and columnists that are in the publications that you’re aiming for, and try to emulate them when it comes to their  argumentative tone . Is their tone critical? Humorous? Breezy? Your tone largely hinges on what type of outlet you are writing for, which brings us to…
• Audience .  Almost everything in your article — from what type of language you use to your tone — depends on your audience. A piece for a children’s magazine is going to read differently than, say, an op-ed in the Washington Post. The best way to familiarize yourself with your audience is to read pieces that have already been published in the outlet you are writing for, or hoping to write for. Take note of how the author presents her argument and then adjust yours accordingly.

Sidebar: Advice vs Argument.  Offering advice in the form of a how-to article — like what you’re reading right now — is different than putting forth an argument in an actual op-ed piece.

That said, advice pieces, like this  one  by Lifehacker or this  one  by Hubspot, follow much of the same ABC formula. For instance, advice pieces will still often begin with an attention-grabbing opener and contextualize their subject matter.

However, instead of trying to make an argument in the body of the article, the advice pieces will typically list five to ten ways of “how to do” something. For example, “How to cook chicken quesadillas” or “How to ask someone out on a date.”

The primary purpose of an advice piece is to inform rather than to convince. In other words, advice pieces describe what you could do, while op-ed pieces show us what we should do.

Part II: Dissecting The ABC Approach

Formula.  Six steps make up the ABC method, and yes, that means it should be called the ABCDEF method. Either way, here are the steps:

Attention  (sometimes called the lede): Here’s your chance to grab the reader’s attention. The opening of an opinion piece should bring the reader into the article quickly. This is also sometimes referred to as the flash or the lede, and there are two types of flash introductions. They are: Option 1.  Narrative flash . A narrative flash is a story that brings readers into the article. It should be some sort of narrative hook that grabs attention and entices the reader to delve further into the piece. A brief and descriptive anecdote often works well as a narrative flash. It simultaneously catches the reader’s attention and hints at the weightier argument and evidence yet to come.

When I first started writing for US News, I wrote a flash lede to introduce an article about paddling school children. Here’s that text:

Ben Line didn’t think the assistant principal had the strength or the gumption. But he was wrong. The 13-year-old alleges that the educator hit him twice with a paddle in January, so hard it left scarlet lines across his buttocks. Ben’s crime? He says he talked back to a teacher in class, calling a math problem “dumb.”

Option 2.  News flash . Some pieces — especially those tied to the news — can have a lede without a narrative start. Other pieces, including many op-eds, are simply too short to begin with a narrative flash. In either of these instances, using the news flash as your lede is likely your best bet.

If I were writing a news flash lede for the paddling piece, I might start with something as simple as: Congress again is considering legislation to outlaw paddling.

• Billboard  (also often called the nut graph): The billboard portion of the lede should do two things:

First, the “billboard” section should make an argument that elevates the stakes and begins to introduce general evidence and context for the argument. So start to introduce some general evidence to support your argument in the nut portion of the lede.

For an example of a nut graph for a longer piece on say, sibling-on-sibling rivalry, consider the following:  The Smith sisters exemplify a disturbing trend. Research indicates that violence between siblings—defined as the physical, emotional, or sexual abuse of one sibling by another, ranging from mild to highly violent—is likely more common than child abuse by parents. A new report from the University of Michigan Health System indicates the most violent members of American families are indeed the children. Data suggests that three out of 100 children are considered dangerously violent toward a brother or sister, and nine-year-old Kayla Smith is one of those victims: “My sister used to get mad and hit me every once in a while, but now it happens at least twice a week. She just goes crazy sometimes. She’s broken my nose, kicked out two teeth, and dislocated my shoulder.”

Second, the billboard should begin to lay the framework of the piece and flush out important details—with important story components like Who, What, When, Where, How, Why, etc. A good billboard graph often ends with a quote or call to action. Think of it like this: if someone reads only your “billboard” section, she should be able to grasp your argument and the basic details. If you use a narrative flash lede, then the nut paragraph often starts with something like: They are not alone. So in the padding article, for instance, the nut might have been: “Ben is not alone. In fact, 160,000 students are subject to corporal punishment in U.S. schools each year, according to a 2016 social policy report.”

For another example, here’s a history graph from a recent op-ed by John Podesta that ran in the  Washington Post :

“To give some context: On Oct. 7, 2016, WikiLeaks began leaking emails from my personal inbox that had been hacked by Russian intelligence operatives. A few days earlier, Stone — a longtime Republican operative and close confidant of then-candidate Donald Trump — had mysteriously predicted that the organization would reveal damaging information about the Clinton campaign. And weeks before that, he’d even tweeted: ‘Trust me, it will soon [be] Podesta’s time in the barrel.’”

If you’re writing an advice piece, then similar advice applies. A how-to guide for Photoshop, for example, might include recent changes to the program and information on the many ways that Photoshop can be used to edit pictures.

• Demonstrate:  In this section, you must offer specific details to support your argument. If writing an op-ed, this section can be three or four paragraphs long. If writing a column, this section can be six or ten paragraphs long. Either way, the section should outline the most compelling evidence to support your thesis. For my paddling article, for instance, I offered this argument paragraph:  The problem with corporal punishment, Straus stresses, is that it has lasting effects that include increased aggression and social difficulties. Specifically, Straus studied more than 800 mothers over a period from 1988 to 1992 and found that children who were spanked were more rebellious after four years, even after controlling for their initial behaviors. Groups that advocate for children, like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Education Association, oppose the practice in schools for those reasons.

While narrative can be vital when capturing a reader’s attention, it’s equally important to offer hard facts in the evidence section. When demonstrating the details of your argument, be sure to present accurate facts from reputable sources. Studies published in established journals are a good source of evidence, for instance, but blogs with unverified claims are not.

Also, when providing supporting details, you should think about using what the Ancient Greeks called ethos, pathos, and logos. To explain, ethos refers to appeals based on your credibility, that you’re someone worth listening to. For example, if you are arguing why steroids should be banned in baseball, you might talk about how you once used steroids and their terrible impact on your health.

Pathos refers to using evidence that plays to the emotions. For example, if you are trying to show why people should evacuate during hurricanes, you might describe a family who lost their seven-year-old child during a hurricane.

Logos refers to logical statements, typically based on facts and statistics. For example, if you are trying to convince the audience why they should join the military when they are young, provide statistics on their income when they retire and the benefits they receive while in the military.

• Equivocate : You should strengthen your argument by including at least one graph that briefly describes—and then discounts—the strongest counterargument to your point. This is often called the “to be sure” paragraph, and it hedges your bets about the clarity of your piece with phrases such as “to be sure” or “in other words.”Here’s an  example  from a recent op-ed in Bloomberg:  Of course, that doesn’t mean that Hispanics simply change while other Americans stay the same. In  his 2017 book  “The Other Side of Assimilation: How Immigrants Are Changing American Life,” Jimenez recounts how more established American groups change their culture and broaden their horizons based on their personal relationships with more recently arrived immigrant groups. Assimilation isn’t slavish conformity to white norms, but a two-way process where the U.S. is changed by each new group that arrives.
• Forward : This is where you wrap up your piece. It carries greater impact, though, if you can write an ending that has some oomph to it and really looks forward. So try to provide some parting thoughts and, when appropriate to the topic, draw your readers to look toward the future. If you began with a narrative flash lede, it’s optimal whenever possible to find a way to tie back into that introductory story. It allows you to simultaneously finalize the premise of your argument and neatly conclude your article. In an  op-ed  about gun violence that ran last year, minister Jeff Blattner looks toward the future and seamlessly ties the end of his piece back to his lede with this simple but effective kicker:  If we don’t commit ourselves to solving them together—to seeing one another as part of a bigger “us”—we may reap a whirlwind of ever-widening division. Let Pittsburgh, in its grief, show us the way.

An op-ed needs to advance a strong contention. It needs to assert something, and and the first step is write down your argument.

Part III: The ABCs In Example

Now that we have gone over the basic ABC formula, let’s examine a recent blog item and identify the six ABC steps.

Written by E.A. Crunden, the piece appeared in  ThinkProgress  and is titled, “ Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is embroiled in more than one scandal .”

• Attention :  “A controversial contract benefiting a small company based in his hometown is only the latest possible corruption scandal linked to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke…” This opening sentence introduces the most recent news on Zinke while also signaling that other scandals might be discussed in the article.
• Billboard :  “On Monday, nonprofit watchdog group the Campaign Legal Center (CLC) accused Zinke’s dormant congressional campaign of dodging rules prohibiting individuals from converting political donations into individual revenue.” The second paragraph adds more information about Zinke’s alleged missteps.
• Context :  “Zinke’s other ethical close-calls, as the CLC noted, are plentiful.”  This provides some background to the main argument and lets the reader know that Zinke has a long history of questionable ethics, which the author expands upon in the following paragraphs.
• Demonstrate :  “As a Montana congressman, Zinke took thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies, many of whom drill on the same public lands he now oversees…”  Here the author gives specific evidence of Zinke’s actions that some believe to be unethical. This fortifies the argument. The following few paragraphs continue in this vein.
• Equivocate :  “I had absolutely nothing to do with Whitefish Energy receiving a contract in Puerto Rico,” the interior secretary wrote in a statement on Friday.”  In this case, the equivocation appears in the form of a counterargument. The writer goes on to dismiss it by presenting additional clarifying evidence to support his point.
• Forward:   “Monday’s complaint comes amid a Special Counsel investigation into Zinke’s spending habits, as well as a separate investigation opened by the Interior Department’s inspector general. Audits into Puerto Rico’s canceled contract with Whitefish Energy Holdings are also ongoing.”  These final two sentences “zoom out” from the specifics of the article, showing that the main news item (i.e., Zinke’s poor ethics) will continue to be relevant in the future. These forward-looking sentences also circle back neatly to the point of the flash news lede by reiterating that “Monday’s complaint” is yet another in a growing list against Zinke.

Part IV: Pitching

When it comes to op-eds, most outlets want to review a finished article. In other words, you write the op-ed and then shop it around to different editors. In some cases, the outlet might want a pitch — or brief summary— of the op-ed before you write it.

Either way, you’ll need a short summary, even just a few sentences that describe your argument. Here is an example of the pitch that I wrote that landed me on the front page of the Washington Post’s Outlook section. Note that this pitch is long, but I was aiming for a more feature-like op-ed.

I wanted to pitch a first-person piece looking at Neurocore, the questionable brain-training program that’s funded by Betsy DeVos.  

DeVos just got confirmed as Secretary of Education, and for years, she’s been one of the major investors in Neurocore. Located in Michigan and Florida, the company makes some outlandish promises about brain-based training. The firm has argued, for instance, that its neuro-feedback programs can increase a person’s IQ by up to 12 points.

I was going to take Neurocore’s diagnostic program to get a better sense of the company’s claims. As part of the story, I was also going to discuss the research on neuro-feedback, which is pretty weak. Insurance companies are also skeptical, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan recently refused to reimburse for Neurocore’s treatments. I’d also discuss some of my research in this area and talk about some of the dangers of spreading myths about learning.

There’s been some recent coverage of Neurocore. But the articles have typically focused on the conflict of interest posed by the company since DeVos herself has refused to disinvest. What’s more, no one appears to have written a first-person piece describing the experience of attending one of their brain training diagnostic sessions.

A few bits of advice:

• Newsy.  Whenever possible, build off the news. A good way to drum up interest in your piece is to connect it to current events. People naturally are interested in reading op-eds that are linked to recent news pieces — so, an op-ed on Electoral College reform will be more relevant around election season, for instance. It’s often effective to pitch your piece following a major news event. Even better if you can pitch your op-ed in advance; for example, a piece on voter suppression in the United States might be pitched in advance of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Here’s an  article  from McGill University that has some advice on this idea.
• Tailor.  Again, in this step of the process, it’s worth considering the audience of the publication. For example, if you’re writing in the business section of a newspaper, you’ll want to frame the article around business. If you are writing for a sports magazine, you’ll want to write about topics like “Who is the greatest golfer of all time, Tiger Woods or Jack Nicklaus?”

Also, websites sometimes have information on pitching their editors. Be sure to follow whatever specific advice they give — this will improve your chances of catching an editor’s eye.

Advice pieces describe what you could do, while op-ed pieces show us what we should do.

Part V: FAQs And Tips

I have lots to say. Can I write a 3,000-word op-ed?

Not really. Most blog articles, op-eds, and columns are short. What’s more, your idea is more likely to gain traction if it’s clear and simple. Take the Bible. It can be broken down to a simple idea: Love one another as you love yourself. Or take the Bill of Rights. It can be shortened to: Individuals have protections.

I want to tell a story. Can I do that?

Maybe. If you do, keep it short and reference the story at the top and maybe again at the bottom. But again, the key to an op-ed is that it makes an argument.

What should do before I hit submit?

We could suggest two things:

• Make sure you cite all your sources. Avoid plagiarism of any kind. If you’re in doubt, provide a citation via a link or include endnotes citing your sources.
• Check your facts. The  New York Times  op-ed columnist Bret Stephens says it this way: “Sweat the small stuff. Read over each sentence—read it aloud—and ask yourself: Is this true? Can I defend every single word of it? Did I get the facts, quotes, dates, and spellings exactly right? Yes, sometimes those spellings are hard: the president of Turkmenistan is Gurbanguly Malikguliyevich Berdymukhammedov. But, believe me, nothing’s worse than having to run a correction.” For more guidance, see Stephen’s  list of tips for aspiring op-ed writers .
• Read it out loud. Before I submit something, I’ll read it out loud. It helps me catch typos and other errors. For more on talking out loud as a tool, see this  article  that I pulled together some time ago.

What’s the difference between a blog article and an op-ed?

A blog article can be about anything such as “What I had for lunch today” or “Why I love Disney World.” An op-ed typically revolves around something in the news and is meant to be persuasive. It typically runs in a news outlet of some kind.

What if no one takes my op-ed?

Be patient. You might need to offer your op-ed to multiple outlets before someone decides to publish it, and you can always tweak the op-ed to make it more news-y, tying the article to something that happened in the news that day or week.

Also, look for ways to improve the op-ed. You might, for instance, focus on changing the “attention” section to make it more creative and interesting or try to improve the context section.

What is the best way to start writing an op-ed?

Before writing, make sure to create an outline. I will often write out my topic sentences and make sure that I’m making a strong, evidence-based argument. Then I’ll focus on a creative way to open my op-ed.

Don’t worry if you get writer’s block while writing the “attention” step. You can always come back and make it more interesting. Really, the most important step is having an outline.

Should I hyperlink?

Yes, include hyperlinks in your articles to provide your readers with easy access to additional information.

–Ulrich Boser

16 thoughts on “How To Write an Op-ed: A Step By Step Guide”

Thanks for this excellent refresher!

I am writing this with the hope that the leasing of the port of Haifa will not come to fruition,It will give the Chinese a strong foothold in the middle east. No longer will the United States 6th fleet have a home away from home..May i remind those who are in command that NO OTHER COUNTRY in the world has helped Israel more than the US.and it would be a slap in the face of our best friend and cause many , many consequences in the future for the state of Israel. I pray to G-D that those in charge will come to their senses and hopefully cancel the agreement. M A, Modiin

Excellent piece of writing ideas, Thanks a lot for sharing these amazing tricks.

INTERESABTE TODA LA INFORMACION

Gracias, Julio!

Good information

So glad you enjoyed it!

Glad it was helpful. Did I miss something in your comment?

Well done, But it’s needs practice!! Hands on!

Write with is one of the most critical steps of the writing process and is probably relevant to the first point. If you want to get your blood pumping and give it your best, you might want to write with passion, and give it all you got. How do you do this? Make sure that you have the right mindset whenever you are writing.

Create a five-paragraph editorial about a topic that matters to you.

Reading this I realized I should get some more information on this subject. I feel like there’s a gap in my knowledge. Anyway, thanks.

Thank you very much for your really helpful tips. I’m currently writing a lesson plan to help students write better opinion pieces and your hands-on approach, if a bit too detailed for my needs, is truly valuable. I hope my students will see it the same way 😉

Great article! Will implement these own steps in my own top 10 website!

Thank you for sharing your expertise. Your advice on incorporating storytelling, providing evidence, and addressing counterarguments is invaluable for ensuring the effectiveness and persuasiveness of op-eds.

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More Insights

How Investment In Education R&D By Texas Policy Leaders Could Spur Economic Growth

Texas has a rich history as a leader in innovation. State policy leaders could help it have an even richer future as a leader in R&D education.

5 Questions With Alvin Irby of Barbershop Books

Alvin Irby of Barbershop Books discusses how adults can help children from underrepresented communities build their reading identity and develop a love of reading that can translate into academic gains.

Assessing ChatGPT’s Writing Evaluation Skills Using Benchmark Data

We tested ChatGPT’s default model’s performance for providing summative and formative feedback on student writing using two benchmarks for automated writing evaluation.

Stay up-to-date by signing up for our weekly newsletter

clock This article was published more than  1 year ago

Opinion The Washington Post guide to writing an opinion article

The Washington Post is providing this news free to all readers as a public service.

Follow this story and more by signing up for national breaking news email alerts.

Each month, The Washington Post publishes dozens of op-eds from guest authors. These articles — written by subject-matter experts, politicians, journalists and other people with something interesting to say — provide a diversity of voices and perspectives for our readers.

The information and tips below are meant to demystify our selection and editing process, and to help you sharpen your argument before submitting an op-ed of your own.

Op-Ed? Editorial? What do all these terms really mean?

Terms like op-ed can be confusing. let us explain them for you..

You've probably heard the term op-ed a lot recently. The New York Times' decision to publish an anonymous op-ed from a "senior official" in the Trump administration pulled the term into the national spotlight.

The op-ed has left people, including the president, asking who wrote this? What was the author's motive? Why would the Times agree to withhold the author's name? They're all valid questions, and ones we may never get answers to.

But we know from social media and data from search providers that it also left many people asking, what is an op-ed? As journalists, we have a responsibility to ensure our readers understand the terms we use. 

Opinion sections publish several different types of content in the spirit of presenting a wide range of viewpoints and to encourage thoughtful debate. All of the different terms can get confusing. Here's a primer on all of the terms we use to describe content appearing in the Register's Opinion section.

What is an op-ed?

An op-ed, short for opposite editorial, is an opinionated article submitted to a newspaper for publication. They are written by members of the community, not newspaper employees.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines them as "an essay in a newspaper or magazine that gives the opinion of the writer and that is written by someone who is not employed by the newspaper or magazine."

In the Register, most op-eds are labeled as "Your Turn" or "Iowa View." They can also be called guest columns. Op-eds can range from public policy debates to first-person experiences. 

SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM: Start a Des Moines Register subscription today

HOW TO: Submit a guest essay

In recent weeks, we've published op-eds from Rob Tibbetts about how he didn't want his daughter Mollie's name used in immigration debates , advocates worried about how the Monsanto-Bayer merger will hurt farmers , a working mother on the need for the FAMILY Act to pass the U.S. Senate  and Vice President Mike Pence touting the country's economic success before a visit to Des Moines.

Op-eds give the Register's opinion pages the opportunity to present views we wouldn't normally be able to publish. Opinion Editor Kathie Obradovich and planning editor James Kramer sift through dozens of submissions each week to decide which op-eds are published.

What's an editorial?

An editorial is an opinion article that states the position of a publication's editorial board, which usually consists of top editors and opinion writers. At the Register, that board includes Obradovich, Executive Editor Carol Hunter, Editorial Writer Andie Dominick and retired Register staffers Richard Doak and Rox Laird. 

Recent editorials have questioned why Iowa's schools are suspending an increasing number of elementary students , advocated for making E-Verify mandatory as part of larger immigration reform  and challenged lawmakers to ensure the war against opioids didn't leave cancer patients in pain .

Andie Dominick was awarded the 2018 Pulitzer Prize for editorial writing for a selection of editorials on health care and the state's decision to privatize Medicaid. The Pulitzer Prize citation states that Dominick won "for examining in a clear, indignant voice, free of cliché or sentimentality, the damaging consequences for poor Iowa residents of privatizing the state’s administration of Medicaid." 

Dominick was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 2014 for a series of editorials challenging Iowa's licensing laws that regulate occupations ranging from cosmetologists to dentists and often protect practitioners more than the public. The Register also won Pulitzer Prizes for editorial writing in 1956, 1943 and 1938.

RELATED: Why do newspapers still have editorials?

Here's how the New York Times describes its editorial board : "Their primary responsibility is to write The Times’s editorials, which represent the voice of the board, its editor and the publisher. The board is part of the Opinion department, which is operated separately from The Times’s newsroom, and includes the Letters to the Editor and Op-Ed sections."

The Register uses the same separation in its newsroom.

What's a column?

A column is an article that often — but not always — contains opinions. Op-eds can be a type of column. 

Columnists are often some of the most well-known names at a news organization. The Register's columnists include Rekha Basu (opinion), Iowa Columnist Courtney Crowder , Randy Peterson (Iowa State athletics), Chad Leistikow (Iowa athletics), Reader's Watchdog Lee Rood and Metro Columnist Daniel P. Finney . Obradovich was a political columnist before becoming opinion editor and continues to write columns . 

Though uncommon, reporters occasionally express opinions by writing columns about topics on their beat.

Columns can be personal stories, like when Crowder wrote about crying at an "American Idol" concert , or calls to action, like when Obradovich wrote about the need for politicians to address mental health care in Iowa .

In addition to its staff columnists, the Register publishes columns from contributor Joel Kurtinitis and syndicated columns from writers like Leonard Pitts, Marc A. Thiessen and John Kass.

What's a letter to the editor?

A letter to the editor is a shorter, usually opinionated article written by a reader who wants to share an opinion about something they've just read or seen.

You can submit your own letter at DesMoinesRegister.com/Letters .

Submissions should be short — 200 words or less is ideal — but they can be about the topic of a reader's choosing. They can share a political opinion, criticize something the Register published or thank a helpful stranger. 

All of these different types of content can be found on Opinion pages both online and in print of publications across the country.

Still left with questions?

As I wrote at the start of this article, it's up to journalists to ensure our readers understand the terms we use. If you're still unsure or you see another journalism term you don't understand, reach out to me and let's chat about it.

Brian Smith is the Register's engagement editor and served as a member of its editorial board from 2014-2017. He's a native Iowan and graduate of Iowa State University. Brian works with Register journalists to help them connect with Iowans through social media, events and more. Reach him at [email protected] , 515-284-8214, @SmithBM12  on Twitter or at Facebook.com/SmithBM12

— USA TODAY NETWORK's Ethan May contributed to this report.

How to write an Op-Ed or Guest Opinion Essay

Unlike a standard academic essay where you are required to strictly maintain an academic tone, not to use first-person (or at least use it only in some essays), and use certain academic phrases , writing an opinion article or Op-Ed allows you the freedom but your writing skills must be top-notch. This is why we have written this comprehensive guide to guide you through writing an Op-Ed essay.

If you are a professional, student, or layperson who wants someone to write your Op-Ed, guest opinion, or guest essay for publication, you can hire a ghostwriter on our website. They are adaptable, flexible, and knowledgeable enough.

However, if you intend to learn how to write an Op-Ed and do it yourself, flip through these few headings and subheadings to find what can help you hone your skills. These insights have been sought and compiled from our editorial team, researchers, and top writers who have produced world-class Op-Eds for different individuals.

These guidelines also borrow ideas from top Op-Ed writers and resources over the internet. In addition, we have condensed information to make it easier for you to plan, craft, and submit a top-of-the-grade Op-Ed.

Let's dig deep and see what we have here. In a nutshell, the article covers the contents displayed below.

Table of Contents

What is an op-ed essay, what is the purpose of the op-ed essay, how long is an op-ed essay, who writes an op-ed essay.

• Steps to writing an Op-Ed Essay

Tips and tricks when writing an Op-Ed Essay

Dos and don'ts when writing an op-ed essay, format of an op-ed essay, having trouble with your op-ed or guest essay paper.

When you think Op-Ed , the names Herbert Bayard Swope and Michael Socolow come into mind. These were the brilliant minds behind what would today be known as Op-Ed, although recently a retired label by The New York Times, and henceforth known as Guest Essays .

An Op-Ed, a short name for opposite the editorial page refers to a written piece of prose published in a magazine or a newspaper where the author expresses their opinion on a given issue. The author, in this case, is never affiliated with the editorial board of the publication.

In this opinion piece from contributors not affiliated with the editorial board, you must show that your writing skills are worth the salt. Being published in a top national paper or at least scoring the entire total grade in a class-assigned Op-Ed essay is no joke.

When you understand how to write and actually write a strong Op-Ed essay, you will have proven that you have mastered a real-world writing skill that you need to succeed anywhere in this age of competition : it's a unique competitive advantage.

Op-Ed or guest essays are meant to help the readers of a publication to understand the world. It enables people who are not journalists or have no affiliation to the editorial boards to speak directly to the readers without the mediation of the reporters. These Op-Eds often present arguments and voices that either dissent or diverge from the editorials ( opinion pieces submitted by the editorial board members) or columnists.

The pieces are meant to give the readers robust, distinctive, and wide-ranging arguments and ideas on specific issues. They are also intended to sway public opinion and change minds by presenting convincing arguments in a concise, clear, and readable format.

As an assignment, an Op-Ed reflects the real-world applications outside the classroom. So, for instance, you can use the critical race theory or any other theory to diffuse inequalities in society.

They are also used to assess the accomplishment of learning outcomes at any level of the cognitive domain of Bloom's Taxonomy. So, for instance, you can be evaluated based on how you defend your position on the budget crisis or how you explain your thoughts on using innovative technologies in higher education.

Most newspaper outlets limit Op-Eds to 700-1200 words, four pages double-spaced in an academic format. As per the new guidelines by The New York Times, the word count should be between 800 and 1200 words. Nevertheless, shorter or longer essays are sometimes published. When writing an Op-Ed for publication, strive to reach at least 750 or 800 words.

Op-Eds are written by members of the public not affiliated with the publishing institution. They are printed opposite the editorials written by the newspaper staff. The modern Op-Ed is published online thanks to the advancement in technology.

In many cases, when submitting your work for consideration, you are required to declare your professional, personal, or academic background that connects you to the idea or arguments in your essay.

Steps on how to write an Op-Ed Essay

So, you are now ready to take it to a higher notch and write an A-grade or noteworthy Op-Ed? First, let's set you up with some of the seven easy steps to writing an opinion editorial article in any niche and nail it properly.

Step 1: Conduct thorough research

When writing an Op-Ed, you need to begin by researching to find out what is recent happening around the niche you've chosen. Consider the hot topic, general perspective of the public, any changes in legislation or laws in the marketplace, and pretty much new occurrences.

It would help if you did research on high-profile websites in your chosen niche, check social media pages, or check forums. But, equally, focus on the scholarly resources that support what you are writing about.

Good research puts you on a pedestal towards writing a convincing Op-Ed that attracts readership and gets you good grades.

Step 2: Choose a workable position

When researching, you will notice that you will develop a thesis or a central claim. Choosing a position on an issue helps you grow your voice, choose your words, and resonate with the readers. So instead of being on the fence, choose a side and stand by it. It is either you like it or totally don't. It is either relevant or irrelevant.

Choosing a position also helps you to own an opinion. Our ghostwriters are so keen because this is the point where the problem sets in. however, as long as you tell your writer what perspective to take, you are good to go. They are so good at adopting the role of the opinion until the work is over.

When you own an idea off the bat, you will be able to nail the call-to-action or call for further thought over an issue and win the trust of your readers.

Step 3: Draft your Op-Ed

Once you have chosen your position, you need to carefully choose your title, hook, thesis statement , body paragraphs, and the call-to-action.

Begin writing your Op-Ed with a sound hook that relates to the issue alongside a story that personalizes it to the readers and yourself. As you make the hook, be very brief. For instance, if a shooting was reported in the news, and your Op-Ed supports measures to control gun ownership, briefly cover the gun death statistics or make a relatable story to it.

Focus on what each paragraph will entail and how you plan to end the essay with a call-to-action.

Step 4: Include supporting facts and examples

When writing your personal opinions, you need evidence and support to make them relevant, believable, and insightful. Use the data, facts, and statistics from scholarly sources to reinforce points in your Op-Ed. In addition, you can use historical facts, figures, and quotes to bolster the case that you are making.

Remember, when writing an opinion article, you might be tempted to leave out the sources. However, using external sources helps you stand out as a credible, deep, and insightful expert. Mostly, the body paragraphs are solutions you propose to be implemented.

Step 5: Avoid generalizations and overdoing it

When writing, avoid generalizing issues. Instead, be as direct and specific as possible lest you confuse your readers. On the same tone, write the paper in simple terms and let it attract attention, drive traffic, or whatever its intention is. In the case of a classroom assignment, write an Op-Ed that meets the requirements for a top grade on your rubric. Having a perfectionist mindset and approach can ruin the happiness and sweetness in writing an Op-Ed.

Step 6: Have a call to action

The call to action is usually your concluding paragraph. It should remind the reader that solving the problem or addressing the issue might take time, dedication, and cooperation, but it is worth all the efforts. Finally, invite the readers to become part of the solution from their own angle.  

Step 7: Proofread, Edit, and Polish

Avoid jargon or industry-speak to ensure that your audience is not confused or limited. Make sure that the concepts, theories, and any complex terms are explained to broaden the understanding of the readers and encourage them to think. An Op-Ed should be devoid of grammar, stylistic, formatting, and spelling mistakes. Therefore, ensure that your essay is well-polished.

When assigned to write an opinion over an interesting issue, it is a chance to persuasively and clearly express your opinion in an Op-Ed article. You are going to reach a mammoth of people, change minds, reshape public opinion or policy, and sway hearts. If your institution is publishing the Op-Ed, you would probably win accolades, recognition, and significant publicity compared to the sweat and tears it takes to be published in a professional journal article. To nail it and leave everything else to chance, of course with higher success chances, here are some tips and tricks to guide your writing process:

Look, listen, and think around the news

The timing of your Op-Ed is usually very critical. Therefore, choose to write when an issue is dominating the news. For instance, check news relating to innovation, wars, diseases, pandemics, stock markets, economies, or controversial celebrity news from a reality show. Also, ensure that it is an issue that you can link to your area of study.

Avoid Jargon

By any chance, avoid using technical terms of jargon as they have no place in your arguments. Instead, make it as easy as possible for the audience to resonate with your ideas. If you are in doubt about a given vocabulary, leave it out. Using simple language means that you are considerate of the lay readers : you're simply taking care of anyone.

Embrace your personal voice

When assigned to write an Op-Ed, write it in your personal voice. It is easier to resonate with the readers if you are speaking from experience. Technically, this means that your hook must be strong enough and founded on your personal experiences with the issue or problem. While academics tend to avoid first-person in professional journals, you have the freedom to incorporate your ideas here. Doing so helps you connect with the reader to care to read and understand what you are saying attentively. Even more important, the personal voice gives you as a student or a person with no fancy title or degree leverage to capture the attention of the readers.

Put your main point on top

Since you are not writing scientific journals that require a systematic approach, reveal your punchline off the bat. An Op-Ed is technically the opposite of a scholarly article; you have 10 seconds or less to hook the busy reader, so put aside the witticism and the historical facts. Instead, penetrate the mind of your reader by getting directly to the point, convincing them, and giving them a reason to even read past the first few lines.

Focus on a single point or issue

You have between 600 and 1200 words to handle an issue. So, the shorter your Op-Ed is, the better. On the other hand, it is impossible to solve all the problems in the world in around 750 words. Therefore, cut down your lengthy opinion article to size : it helps you get published without rejection.

Let your audience know why they should care

When you dawn the shoes of a busy reader looking at your article, you will most likely want yourself to know what's going on. Therefore, every few paragraphs remind the readers about why they should care (so what? Why now? Who care? Why should I care?) and whatnots. Appeal to self-interest instead of having some abstract punditry.

Use shorter sentences

Be concise, clear, and coherent when writing your opinion article. Some publications count characters, words, and sentences. Therefore, use shorter sentences, mainly declarative sentences, to ease the reading for your audience. If possible, cut the long paragraphs into two or more balanced paragraphs.

Offer specific recommendations

An op-ed is an opinion about how to improve a situation. Therefore, make it live up to its name. Do not just stick to a mere classroom analysis. Instead, extend your argument by providing specific recommendations to specific bodies, organs, and people. For example, you can suggest that opposing parties reconcile their differences or need more collaborative research.

Use Active Voice

Active voice is better than passive voice. It improves the reading with ease ratings, which makes your Op-Ed readable and relatable. With such easy-to-read pieces, the audience can resonate with the whole point of the Op-Ed. Besides, you leave no doubt about recommending action or proposing a solution.

Make a killer ending

The ending of your Op-ed should be a winner in the aspect that you summarize your argument strongly. Let it reflect how the thesis of the op-ed has been supported. Most casual readers will skim through the conclusion to gauge if the op-ed is worth their time. Mostly, concluding with a thought or phrase that appeared in your strong opening closes the circle, which is a plus for a keen reader.

Acknowledge the other side of the debate

Instead of piling one reason after the other, why you are wrong, and the opponent is wrong. Instead, appeal to the readers concerning the other side of the debate. That way, you intellectually bring the debate to the table and leave your readers to decide which works for them.

Use examples to show rather than discuss

Humans have a short memory that can be jogged by examples that paint colorful details compared to dry facts. You can leverage this when writing your Op-ed essay. Include great examples that breathe life into your arguments.

Here are some dos and taboos when writing an Op-ed either as a school assignment or for newspaper/magazine publication.

• Think of a topic based on an issue that interests you. In most cases, you can use your interests or focus on a topic assigned from class based on the theories covered. For instance, you can focus on student athletics or gender bias in politics.
• Ground your opinions on the specific subject or your Major. You should ensure that you back up your arguments with a credible scholarly study from your field. It helps you prove your thesis statement.
• Hook your piece to a recent occurrence in the world. For instance, you can focus on the global pandemic, exodus from Afghanistan, drought, climate change, and any other recent occurrences. Make your hook very recent, national, local, or international.
• Use short sentences and paragraphs
• Have a reasonable, concise, and clear title

Don'ts

• Avoid unnecessary rebuttals. Do not do a point-by-point rebuttal when writing in response to an earlier piece that chilled your blood. Such pettiness is unwelcomed and uncalled for in the op-ed world.
• Avoid using jargon and industry-speak
• Avoid using passive voice
• Avoid using long paragraphs and long sentences
• Do not worry too much about the headline if it is for newspaper publication; the newspaper staff consistently crafts the best.

Examples of Professionally Written Op-Ed (Guest Opinion)

Here are some excellent examples of Op-Eds written and published in Newspapers and Magazines

• Sheryl Sandberg on the Myth of the Catty Woman
• Why the internet should win a Nobel prize
• Stop Hate influencers
• How changeable is gender?
• Bring back high school librarians
• LAUSD's students need better libraries, not iPads
• Closing School Libraries and Cutting Certified Librarians Does Not Make Sense
• Betrayed by Obama
• Stop playing defense on Hate crimes

Op-Eds take many formats, including:

• Communication from influencers/ public figures - written by public officials to explain their position or tell stories. These personalities are already famous on many platforms, and their essays are held with high regard and standards as they offer readers valuable insights.
• Communication from Experts : experts can use the Op-Eds to highlight problems, propose solutions, present findings to the public and other experts. In this case, such essays possess in-depth expertise, robust scholarly rigor, and original arguments. Such essays are written by economists, doctors, lawyers, plumbers, researchers, teachers, librarians, playwrights, producers, psychologists, and any experts in a given field.
• First-Person Accounts : these are written by the public or anybody concerning daily experiences in their own words to compel the readers to see the world or at least reflect on their personal experiences from a different angle or perspective.

In class, you can be asked to write from either perspective. The goal is to test whether you have mastered writing skills that can place you better in the writing world.

As long as you challenge and engage the audience, you will consistently score the best grade. There are guidelines given in the Op-Ed essay prompts concerning the formatting styles.

Most Op-Eds that our essay writers have helped students like yourself write are in APA or MLA formats . Well, there are always a few required in Chicago/Turabian, Oxford, and Harvard formats.  

Thus far, we hope that this guide has been elaborative, practical, and nothing short of a whole lecture on writing an Op-Ed and scoring the best grade for it. You need to have the lion or bear type of confidence when attacking your opinion article. Consult your rubric and prompt for formatting style and general approach.

As a student or professional, you may have too much workload or too little time in your hands. Well, if that is the case with you, rather than procrastinating, you can hire someone to help you write an Op-Ed from our essay website.

We work with professionals who understand how to plan, draft, and write better papers, whether with academic or professional tones. So do not let that deadline pass because you can use our urgent essay service to beat approaching deadlines. When you buy an essay from us, we write it from scratch within the deadline.

Paying for an essay on our website means you commit that a professional writer with the right experience and qualifications handles your piece of writing task. We are accomplished, decorated, and always ready to help anybody who is stuck : at a relatively affordable fee. Talk to us!

Gradecrest is a professional writing service that provides original model papers. We offer personalized services along with research materials for assistance purposes only. All the materials from our website should be used with proper references. See our Terms of Use Page for proper details.

What Is an Op-Ed Article? Op-Ed Examples, Guidelines, and More

Have you ever wondered the name of those articles in newspapers or online that seem to be more conversational in style than standard news stories?

These are called op-ed articles, and they are an entirely different style and format of writing that is typically found in the opinion section of a newspaper, magazine, or website.

In this article, I’m going to answer the question what is an op-ed article by digging into exactly what an op-ed article is as well as looking at some op-ed examples, how to write an op-ed, and how (and where) to submit an op-ed.

What Is an Op-Ed Article?

Op-ed stands for “opposite the editorial page,” and an op-ed article is an article in which the author states their opinion about a given topic, often with a view to persuade the reader toward their way of thinking.

Despite the “op” in “op-ed” not standing for “opinion,” op-eds are often called opinion pieces because, unlike standard news articles, the authors of op-eds are encouraged to give their opinions on a certain topic, as opposed to simply reporting the news.

Op-eds are sometimes written by a ghostwriter, which means somebody writes the op-ed on behalf of someone else (such as a businessperson or politician), then the intended author makes some tweaks, with the final version being attributed—bylined—to the intended author instead of the ghostwriter.

Anonymous Op-Eds

Op-eds can also be anonymous, although for larger publications, such as the New York Times , Wall Street Journal , and Washington Post , an anonymous op-ed is typically only allowed when the writer’s job (or in extreme cases, their life) would be jeopardized if their name or other distinguishing details were disclosed. In cases when an anonymous op-ed is allowed to go ahead, the author’s true identity is known by the publisher.

Whether or not anonymous op-eds should be allowed to be published comes up for frequent scrutiny, the most recent episode of which being in September 2018 after the New York Times published an anonymous opinion piece by a senior official working in the Trump administration. (In October 2020, former chief of staff in the Department of Homeland Security, Miles Taylor, publicly confirmed that he had authored the article.)

Op-Ed Responses

Often, op-ed articles are written in response to something that is happening in the news at a particular time; such as during a climate change summit or election cycle, or they are written as a response to another op-ed, whether the first opinion piece was published in the same newspaper or, for example, somebody decided to write an op-ed in the New York Times in response to an op-ed that appeared in the Wall Street Journal .

While there is no generalized word limit for an op-ed, most published op-eds run under 1,000 words. The New York Times notes that:

Written essays typically run from 800 to 1,200 words, although we sometimes publish essays that are shorter or longer.

Op-Ed Examples

For an article to be an op-ed it must, as noted above, appear in an opinion column. As many people find themselves reading op-eds after clicking a link online, op-ed columns typically also have the words ‘Opinion’ or ‘Guest Essay’ displayed above or close to the column’s headline.

If you’re looking for op-ed examples, look no further than the opinion pages of three of the largest newspapers in the United States, namely the New York Times , Wall Street Journal , and Washington Post opinion pages (for a longer list, see the How (and Where) to Submit an Op-Ed section below).

The Difference Between Op-Eds and Regular Articles

Some columns that look like a good op-ed article example are in fact lifestyle articles that, while not being timely in relation to the news of the day, aren’t defined as op-ed articles because they are purely factual, with no opinion being given.

Articles I have personally written for the New York Times , New York Observer , Quwartz , and similar publications had to be meticulously sourced and fact-checked before publication; and my opinion surrounding any of the topics in question was not taken into consideration, unlike for an op-ed.

That’s not to say you can simply make up facts when writing an op-ed. You can’t have your own opinion about the year Queen Elizabeth II was born (1926), the height of the Empire State Building (1,454 ft.), or the length of the Great Wall of China (21,196 km). Depending on what your op-ed is discussing, you can sprinkle your opinion in around facts, but those facts must be deep-rooted in order for your audience to get on board with your argument—and for a reputable source to choose to print your article.

How to Write an Op-Ed

Of course, knowing what an op-ed is and knowing how to write an op-ed are two different things entirely.

Here are my top five tips on how to write an op-ed:

• Get to the point: The moment a reader (or your potential editor) starts reading your op-ed article they need to know what it is about, and why it matters to them.
• Have a clear thesis: Submitting a meandering opinion column is a surefire way to ensure you do not hear back from the editor. Outline your entire op-ed before sitting down to write, and keep a clear thesis in mind.
• Write what you know: While many factors go into the op-ed selection process, having authority in the topic you’re writing about, as well as a persuasive argument, is required above all else.
• Write for the publication you’re pitching: Don’t use technical phrases if it is a non-technical publication. Look into what they have published on your topic in the past. How can you advance this discussion?
• Stick to the rules: Most op-ed sections list their rules for publication. These often include information on how to source your facts, a well as the house style.

How (and Where) to Submit an Op-Ed

It’s easy to submit an op-ed to either a national or local newspaper, or to a trade publication in your field. Assuming you’ve read my advice on how to write an op-ed above, here are the links you’ll need to submit an op-ed to the following newspapers:

• New York Times
• Wall Street Journal
• Washington Post
• Los Angeles Times
• Houston Chronicle
• Chicago Tribune
• San Francisco Chronicle
• Tampa Bay Times
• Dallas Morning News
• Denver Post
• Seattle Times

If you want to submit an op-ed to your local newspaper or a trade publication, look in their opinion columns for information on how to send in your submission, or search for their name alongside the word “submissions” online.

I hope this article on what an op-ed article is will help you on your journey toward writing and submitting your first op-ed to a major newspaper or publication.

If you’re interested in hearing more from me, be sure to subscribe to my free email newsletter , and if you enjoyed this article, please share it on social media, link to it from your website, or bookmark it so you can come back to it often. ∎

Benjamin Spall

You might also like....

Introducing Acne Club

Nature-Deficit Disorder: What It Is, and How to Overcome It

How to Feel Less Anxious About the Coronavirus (COVID-19)

How We Redesigned the New York Times Opinion Essay

When a team of editors, designers and strategists teamed up to talk about how times opinion coverage is presented and packaged to readers, they thought of a dinner party..

The NYT Open Team

By Dalit Shalom

Picture a dinner party. The table is set with a festive meal, glasses full of your favorite drink. A group of your friends gather around to talk and share stories. The conversation swings from topic to topic and everyone is engaged in a lively discussion, excited to share ideas and stories with one another.

This is what we imagined when we — a group of New York Times editors, strategists and designers — teamed up last summer to talk about how to think about how our Opinion coverage is presented and packaged to our readers. We envisioned a forum that facilitated thoughtful discussion and would invite people to participate in vibrant debates.

The team was established after a wave of feedback from our readers showed that many people found it difficult to tell whether a story was an Opinion piece or hard news. This feedback was concerning. The Times publishes fact-based journalism both in our newsroom and on our Opinion desk, but it is very important to our mission that the distinction between the two is clear.

The type of Opinion journalism our group was tasked with rethinking was the Op-Ed, which was first introduced in the Times newspaper in 1970. The Op-Ed was short for “opposite the Editorial Page,” and it contained essays written by both Times columnists and external contributors from across the political, cultural and global spectrum who shared their viewpoints on numerous topics and current events. Because of the Op-Ed’s proximity to the Editorial Page in the printed newspaper, it was clear that published essays were Opinion journalism.

Then The Times began publishing online. Today, most of our readers find our journalism across many different media channels. The Op-Ed lost its clear proximity to the Editorial Page, and the term has been used broadly as a catch-all phrase for Opinion pieces, leaving the definition of what an Op-Ed is unclear.

To learn more about the friction our readership was describing, we held several research sessions with various types of Times readers, including subscribers and non-subscribers. Over the course of these sessions, we learned that readers genuinely crave a diversity of viewpoints. They turn to the Opinion section for a curated conversation that introduces them to ideologies different than their own.

In the divided nature of politics today, many readers are looking for structured arguments that prepare them to converse thoughtfully about complicated topics. Some readers said they want to challenge and interrogate their own beliefs. Others worry that they exist in their own bubbles and they need to understand how the “other side” thinks.

And across the board, readers said they are aware that social media platforms can be echo chambers that help validate their beliefs rather than illuminate different perspectives. They believe The Times can help them look outside those echo chambers.

Considering this feedback, we took a close look at the anatomy of an Op-Ed piece. At a glance, Opinion pieces shared similar, but not necessarily cohesive, properties. They had an “Opinion” label at the top of the page that was sometimes followed by a descriptive sub-label (for example, “The Argument”), as a way to indicate a story belonged to a column. That would be a headline, a summary and a byline, often accompanied by an image or video before the actual text of the story.

By looking at those visual cues, it became clear to us that they could be reconfigured to better communicate the difference between news and opinion.

We created several design provocations and conducted user testing sessions with readers to see how this approach and a new layout might resonate. Some noticeable changes we made include center-aligning the Opinion label and header, labeling the section in red and providing more intentional guidance and art direction for visuals that accommodate Opinion pieces.

While many readers could tell the difference between news and opinion stories, they didn’t understand why certain voices were featured in the Opinion section. They wanted more clarity about the Op-Ed, such as who wrote it and whether the writer was Times staff or an external voice. In the case of external contributors, readers wanted to know why the desk chose to feature their voice.

These questions took our team back to the drawing board. We began to realize that the challenge at hand was not solely a design problem, but a framing issue, as well.

We had long philosophical conversations about the meaning of Op-Ed pieces. We talked about the importance of hosting external voices and how those voices should be presented to our readers. The metaphor of a dinner party figured prominently in our conversations: the Opinion section should be a place where guests gather to engage in an environment that is civil and respectful.

We began to sharpen how we might convey the difference between an endorsement of a particular voice and hosting a guest — one of many who might contribute to a lively debate around a current event.

The more we thought about the Opinion section as a dinner party, the more we felt how crucial it was to communicate this idea to readers.

As we approached the designs, we set out to create an atmosphere for open dialogue and conversation. Two significant editorial changes came out of our group conversations.

After many iterations, we decided to introduce a two-tiered labeling system, so that readers could understand unequivocally the type of Opinion piece they were about to engage with. For external voices, we added the label “ Guest Essay ,” alongside other labels that indicate staff contributors and internal editorials. The label “Guest Essay” not only shifts the tone of a piece — a guest that we are hosting to share their point of view — but it also helps readers distinguish between opinions coming from the voice of The Times and opinions coming from external voices.

The second important editorial change is a more detailed bio about the author whose opinion we are sharing. With the dinner party metaphor in mind, this kind of intentional introduction can be seen as a toast, providing context, clarity and relevance around who someone is and why we chose them to write an essay.

Some of these changes may seem subtle, but sometimes the best dinner conversations are nuanced. This body of work signals an important moment for The New York Times in how we think about expressing opinions on our platform. We believe that one of the things that makes for a healthy society and a functioning democracy is a space for numerous perspectives to be honored and celebrated. We are confident these improvements will help further Times Opinion’s mission of curating debate and discussion around the world’s most pressing issues.

Dalit Shalom is the Design Lead for the Story Formats team at The New York Times, focusing on crafting new storytelling vehicles for Times journalism. Dalit teaches classes on creative thinking and news products at NYU and Columbia, and in her free time you can find her baking tremendous amounts of babka.

Written by The NYT Open Team

We’re New York Times employees writing about workplace culture, and how we design and build digital products for journalism.

More from The NYT Open Team and NYT Open

How to Dox Yourself on the Internet

A step-by-step guide to finding and removing your personal information from the internet..

CJ Robinson

How the New York Times Games Data Team Revamped Its Reporting

Huge amounts of data from wordle and connections changed the way our team approached data infrastructure and design.

Rethinking How We Evaluate The New York Times Subscription Performance

An exploration into the growth data team’s process of designing and building a new subscription reporting model..

Estimation Isn’t for Everyone

The evolution of agility in software development, recommended from medium.

Bringing Dark Mode to our News Apps

How teams across the new york times launched the dark mode feature to our news apps..

Matej Latin

UX Collective

90% of designers are unhirable?

Or why your cookie-cutter portfolio doesn’t cut it and how to fix it.

Stories to Help You Grow as a Designer

Interesting Design Topics

Icon Design

Ameer Omidvar

Apple’s all new design language

My name is ameer, currently the designer of sigma. i’ve been in love with design since i was a kid. it was just my thing. to make things….

JTBD Toolkit

Accelerating JTBD Research with AI

By jim kalbach (feb 2024).

Fredrick Royster

A UX Design “Influencer” Tried To Get Me Fired From Teaching

It is illegal to try to get someone fired using false claims.

Punit Chawla

How Airbnb Became a Leader in UX Design

From a small bed & breakfast to a leader in ux/ui design, this billion dollar startup is a leader in innovation and design thinking.

Text to speech

Writing Studio

How to write an op-ed.

These tips are based on an “ On Writing ” panel hosted by the Writing Studio and the Russell G. Hamilton Graduate Leadership Institute on November 20, 2019 that included Professor of Communications Bonnie Dow, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Strategic Communications Ian Morrison, Professor of History Moses Ochonu, and Associate Professor of Earth and Environmental Science Jonathan Gilligan.

Why Write an Op-Ed in Graduate School?

As our panelists pointed out, writing op-eds can be a useful exercise, even an important piece of academic training.

It can be a way for you to take your research, your expertise, and communicate to the public and make an engagement with people who aren’t in the academic world, regardless of where the op-ed is placed.

Writing an op-ed, in other words, is a way of practicing, or putting your effort into saying, “My work matters.”

Know Your Audience

“Really take the time to think about, where am I trying to place this? Who are their readers? How do they want to hear this? What is going to grab their attention?” – Ian Morrison

As an op-ed writer your audience is twofold: you need to think about both the publisher’s attention—for which you will be competing with thousands of other submissions—as well as the reader’s. For this reason, an attention-grabbing first paragraph, if not first sentence, is paramount.

It also helps to think about the role of opinion pages: as a forum for opinion, they create conversations that live beyond the pages of the publication in which they originally appear. In other words, op-eds seek to amplify the discussion.

Really take the time to think about where you are trying to place the op-ed, who the readers are, what and how do they want to hear this, and what is going to grab their attention. At the same time, aim to be interesting and relevant. You need to address issues in the public conversation.

Organization and Style

“Examples and anecdotes engage readers. Opening with an example, an anecdote, or with a startling statistic works really well at the top of an op-ed.” – Bonnie Dow

Short paragraphs—two to three sentences, maybe four—are a must. If you submit traditional academic paragraphs, you risk having them shortened by the publisher in ways you don’t like. You might end up with something that doesn’t make sense to you. So keep your paragraphs short.

Use structure to build to your point. In other words, make the paragraphs do the work of transitions and previews for you. Instead of saying “first,” “second,” or “third” in op-eds, start a new paragraph when you want to say something.

Use short, punchy, declarative sentences. This will help you stick to the word limit and avoid a situation in which the publisher chops up the piece for you. You absolutely want to maintain control of your own message. Be wary of semicolons or colons; if you need the latter, your sentences are probably too long. Use active rather than passive writing.

Content and Accuracy

“If you’re looking for places to have an impact, look at all the media that you can engage with. The op-ed is one specific thing, and it is one specific writing style, and one specific medium.” –Jonathan Gilligan

Think about your goals and your narrative. Ask yourself, does it fit with other op-eds I’ve read? Can I accomplish my goals using this structure of writing? Remember: don’t under-qualify things. Factual accuracy is incredibly important. If you write an op-ed and you oversimplify, your words are out there permanently.

Avoid giving the wrong impression of too much certainty that comes from blunting nuance or veering close to misrepresentation (even if there is wiggle-room for justification). That’s part of the struggle: strive for simplicity, be punchy, but make sure that you are willing to stand behind exactly what you said the way you said it with your reputation as a scholar.

And remember: Always proofread, proofread, proofread!

My Timetable

LOG IN to show content

My Quick Links

Op-Ed Writing

Op-ed articles were originally named because they appeared opposite the editorial page in a newspaper. Like a persuasive essay, an op-ed article attempts to convince the reader of a particular perspective. Although op-ed articles are often written by newspaper and magazine columnists, academics are increasingly writing op-eds to share their general research with a broader audience.

Op-eds range in length but are often between 600-800 words.

Taking a Position

As an argumentative piece of writing, an op-ed takes a clear position on an issue (i.e., it contains a thesis).

Since op-eds are intended for a broader readership, the thesis often includes both a theoretical position and a practical position. The theoretical position makes a contestable claim about a particular issue. The practical position, meanwhile, provides a policy recommendation or a solution to a real-world problem.

The following theoretical and practical positions are taken from the op-ed, " Getting active is the closest thing we have to a ‘magic pill’ for good health ":

Theoretical position

Getting active is the closest thing we have to a “magic pill.” Even just a little bit of exercise per day can provide broad benefits to our physical and mental health, and in many settings can also enhance our sense of belonging and inclusion. That’s why regular physical activity is so much more than a nice-to-have hobby for those who can afford it – it is a necessity of life.

Practical position

A new comprehensive and well resourced physical-activity strategy is urgently needed. We need to rediscover the value of school-based physical education programs, the importance of enlightened urban-planning policies, the significance of active transportation plans, and to apply the lessons learned in other jurisdictions. Our new federal Minister of Health, Jean-Yves Duclos, could convene a physical-activity summit to kickstart the development of such a strategy.

Argumentation and Evidence

Much like a persuasive academic essay, the op-ed writer needs to support their thesis by making an evidence-based argument. This can include discussing sources, such as reports, and including evidence. However, op-eds do not include citations (unless specified by your assignment guidelines). Instead, you can hyperlink sources within the text.

Unlike a persuasive academic essay, the op-ed writer can use other argumentative tools to make an emotional connection with the reader. This can include discussing a personal experience or anecdote or using inclusive language such as “we” and “us.”

Structuring an Op-Ed

The first few sentences are critical to an effective op-ed. Readers of op-eds will not be as patient as academic readers. You need to capture their interest right away. Here are some ways to develop an effective hook:

• Connect your topic to an event in the news.
• Ask an interesting question or make a provocative statement.
• Draw upon a personal experience.

Unlike a persuasive academic essay, an op-ed thesis (both the theoretical and practical position) is usually found towards the middle or end of the article. This convention helps build intrigue as the author leads the reader to their position.

A Variation on Counterarguments

It is standard practice in a persuasive essay to consider and respond to counterarguments. Op-ed writers often adapt this traditional counterargument structure by:

• Posing a question/debate.
• Discussing a possible position and then refuting that position.
• Presenting their thesis.

By using this structure, op-ed writers can engage their readers in a problem and lead them on a journey toward the thesis.

Writing Considerations

Since op-ed articles tend to be for a broader audience, use words and sentence structures that are more accessible. This can include using:

• Simple language (avoid jargon and technical language)
• Short sentences and short paragraphs
• Contractions (i.e., “can’t” instead of “cannot”)
• The active voice (e.g., “I wrote the op-ed” rather than “The op-ed was written by me.”)

Op-Ed Examples

To familiarize yourself with op-ed articles, The New York Times is a useful resource. They publish numerous op-ed articles every day.

Writing Services, Wilfrid Laurier University, CC By-NC 2023

Search for academic programs , residence , tours and events and more.

News from the Columbia Climate School

Writing and Submitting an Opinion Piece

Kevin Krajick

The opinion pages are one of the best-read sections of any publication, in print or online—often on par with front-page news. And, some of the most attentive readers are decision makers: top people in government, corporations and nonprofit institutions. Appearing there is a prime way for the nonprofessional writer to get a valuable perspective into the public eye. Here is a how-to guide.

What kind of piece?

There are two basic forms: the essay (often referred to as op-ed), and letter to the editor. (“Op-ed” comes from when all newspapers were actually printed on paper, and outside writers customarily appeared on the page OPposite staff-written EDitorials. The New York Times recently traded this old-fashioned term for “guest essay.”)

Opinion essays don’t normally come from just anyone; the writer usually has some special expertise or credibility on the topic. This might include lawyers, ex-government officials or scientists. A piece may also come from someone with an especially telling or powerful personal experience relating to the topic—for example, an essay on homelessness by someone who has been homeless. They can run 400-1,200 words. Some generate a small fee.

Letters to the editor generally run just 100 to 150 words (or edited, even shorter). They are welcome from pretty much anyone. But those with credentials often stand a better chance of getting published. Whoever you are, don’t expect payment.

What are my chances?

Most publications want only pieces that play off the news of the last few days, or the week. After that, your letter is a dead one. So, in most cases, is your op-ed. Act fast.

That said, something may be going on below the public radar that should be in the news, but has not surfaced. If you know something, you say something; an op-ed can help to break the news. Maybe an invisible threat to public safety, or an unnoticed scientific discovery. Ideally, your topic will be timely, but at the same time have a long shelf life (i.e., the issue won’t be solved in a day or a month). Occasionally, you may find a “peg” for your piece: a holiday, anniversary, election, upcoming conference, report, a pending vote in Congress.

In all cases, depending on where you submit, calibrate expectations accordingly. Major publications, especially big dailies like The New York Times , may receive hundreds of op-eds each day, and even more letters to the editor. They will use only a few. In publications with less competition, your odds increase.

What makes a good op-ed?

It’s not just your opinion. It begins with facts, and makes an argument based on facts. It is informed by logic—not emotion or ideology. You can educate without preaching. And it’s not just a complaint; you must almost always offer next steps or possible solutions for the matter at hand.

Editors want pieces that don’t just wow you with expertise; they want pieces that are colorful, fast-moving and provocative—hallmarks of any good writing. A good op-ed is concise. It hits hard. It marshals vivid images, analogies and, when appropriate, anecdotes. E ditors see the opinion page as a place for advocacy, denunciations, controversy and astonishment. They want to stimulate community discussion and drive public debate. They want people to say, “Wow! Did you see that op-ed today?”

What makes a good letter to the editor?

Same stuff basically, except in a nutshell. OK, maybe a little more pure outrage is acceptable. Just make your case, and make it fast.

How to write it ?

Whether op-ed or letter, your piece must unfold quickly. Focus on a single issue or idea. State what the issue is, and let us know where you stand. That should happen in the first short paragraph or two. Following paragraphs—the meat in the sandwich, so to speak—should back your viewpoint with factual or first-hand information. Near the end, clearly restate your position and issue a call to action.

Some specifics to keep in mind:

• Grab the reader’s attention in the first line. End with a strong, thought-provoking line.
• Come down hard on one side of the argument. Never equivocate.
• Identify and acknowledge the counterargument; then refute it with facts.
• Use active verbs; g o easy on adjectives and adverbs.
• Avoid clichés.
• Avoid acronyms.
• A void technical jargon.
• Cite specific references and easy-to-understand data.

 Next step: All writers need editors. You might show your piece to a colleague or two in your field to see if they can poke holes in it. Or, if you know a good writer, ask them how the piece might be strengthened. You can also contact your institution’s communications staff; helping out is often part of their job. (But ghostwriting is not.) No guarantee someone can turn your junky screed into an influential masterpiece—but editing almost always helps.

Finally, include a catchy headline that conveys your message. This will help the editor grasp the idea quickly, and help sell your contribution. (However, expect the publication to write its own headline; that’s just how it works.)

Must someone sign off?

In most workplaces, there is no requirement that you submit a piece to management— especially in academia. It is understood that you’re speaking for yourself, not the institution. That said: your title and affiliation will usually appear with your byline. So in that sense, you indirectly represent the honor and credibility of your institution. A controversial piece that is well articulated, well read and respectful raises the profile of your institution. This is rarely viewed as bad.    

Where and how to submit?

Everyone wants their piece in The New York Times . Few will ever see it there. Unless you have something super-strong, consider other options. Some national general-interest outlets with a big demand for copy include The Hill , CNN Opinion , Huffington Post, The Daily Beast and Slate . The Conversation specializes in op-ed-type pieces from academics. Is your piece more regional or specialized? Check regional or specialized media. Local papers are always looking for a local angle on wider issues. Publications that cover energy, law or other topics are of course looking for that kind of piece.

If you or someone you know happens to know the opinion editor, you can send directly to him or her. Otherwise, most publications have a web page telling you where to send, and their particular requirements. Don’t fret if you don’t have an inside line; editors really do read those over-the-transom submissions.

Letters to the editor can often be sent in the body of an email. Most op-ed submissions are made in an emailed Word document. For the subject line in either case, that catchy title mentioned earlier will come in handy. If it’s an op-ed, write the editor a short note in the email body telling her/him what the piece gets at, and why you’re the person to get at it. Include your contact info and, if you want, a brief bio. 

In general, submit to one publication at a time. Unfortunately, editors may take days or weeks to get back—and if it’s a rejection, you may not hear at all. ( New York Times policy: if you don’t hear in 3 days, you’re rejected.) If you feel you must submit to more than one, let the editors know. But avoid submitting the same piece to two publications in the same geographical or readership market. Higher-prestige places will require that you offer to them exclusively.

Where can I find more guidance?

Below, some good resources. The OpEd Project in particular has not only advice, but a list of specific contacts and guidelines for submitting pieces. Good luck!

The OpEd Project website  

How to Write an Op-ed, Step by Step   The Learning Agency

Writing Effective Op-eds   Duke University

Writing Letters to the Editor     Community Toolbox

Writing Effective Letters to the Editor     National Education Association

Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers   New York Times

And Now a Word From Op-Ed   New York Times

Related Posts

Why the COP28 Loss and Damage Decision Is Historic

How Word Choices in the Mainstream News Media Signal a Country’s Level of Peace

Putting This Summer’s Record Global Heat Into Context

              NO MORE BLOOD FOR OIL

       While war rages in Eastern Europe, life goes on elsewhere.  Yet it is marked by fear and

       resentment, especially in the United States, already torn apart by political strife and the

       dread of yet another election cycle, with all that it entails.  Understandably, the average

       person (however one defines that abstraction) is worried about inflation.  At the moment,

       Americans are complaining vehemently about the high price of gasoline. Yet very little has

       been said or written about how high (or low) those fuel prices are. When we compare the

       current price at the pump to that in several other countries, including our North American

       neighbors, Great Britain, the European Union, and the three nations most affected by the

      war in Ukraine, the enormous disparity between our own situation and that facing people

      elsewhere becomes apparent.  Extrapolating from accurate and up-to-date data available 

      on the web, here is a table (adjusted for currency values, units of measurement and annual

      household income) that makes those differences as precise as they are unmistakable:*

                                   Gas Price    Unit Cost       Annual Income         Relative Cost    Purchase Power   

           U.S.               $4.84       1.00           $79,400              1/16,405           (100.00)                                                                                     U.K.               $3.70       0.76            $40,040               1/10,822            65.96                

           E.U.               $4.46        0.92            $44,091                1/9,886            60.26                        Canada            $6.20       1.28            $54,652                1/8,815            53.73        

              Poland            $22.22       4.59             $5,906               1/265.80             1.62                      Mexico          $103.17      21.32             $7,652                1/74.17             0.45        

           Ukraine         $145.17      29.99              $2,145                1/14.78            0.09        

           Russia          $672.79      139.00              $6,493                1/9.65             0.06       

            *Currency Rates: 1 USD = $0.92 EU, $0.76 £, $1.28 CAN, $22.80 złoty, $20.92 pesos, $29.66 UAH, $133 roubles     Sources: globalpetrolprices.com; worldpopulationreview.com; statista.com; CNNbusiness.com (March 12, 2022)  

       By a sublime yet tragic irony, Russia, whose proven oil and natural gas reserves are three times                larger than those of the United States, has by far the highest petroleum prices in the world. As

      Ukraine is suffering from the Russian onslaught, Russians are suffering from the actions of their

      government on a scale we can scarcely imagine.  Adjusted for income levels, the gap between

      both countries and their more affluent counterparts becomes astronomical.  Mexico, although

      still classed as a developing nation, is much better off than either one; Poland, though besieged

      by refugees and threatened by invasion, is downright wealthy compared to the other three.  As 

     the purchasing power index shows, America enjoys a standard of living that (in crude oil terms)

     is 1,667 times higher than Russia, 1,111 times that of Ukraine, and 222 times that of Mexico, an

     oil producing nation in its own right.  That does not imply that we have no right to object to an

    increase in gas prices, or that we should be grateful for what we have, and not make noise about

    the conditions we face, both as individuals and as a society.  It does mean that we must put such

    matters in global perspective, and that it is not becoming for us to act beleaguered, put upon, or

   oppressed, when our situation is not so much a major hardship as it is a minor inconvenience, or

   a mere side effect of an underlying economic disease, caused by the unholy alliance between oil

   cartels and political operatives, East and West.  The pandemic started two years ago; but OPEC

   is nearly half a century old, and shows no signs of abating, despite the routine lip service paid to

   alternative energy sources, environmental regulations, and an end to domestic drilling, both on

   land and off-shore.  “Energy independence” is neither an unattainable ideal nor an inducement

  to promote the use of fossil fuels.  But if Europe relies on Russian oil, what does Russia rely on? 

  And for how long can it withstand the misery and suffering that it has inflicted on itself, let alone

  those whom it failed to bully into submission?  Who will die first—the oligarch, the imperialist,

  or the global monopolist?  And who will pay the steep price, let alone, clean up the whole mess?

  Meanwhile. the U.S. imports nearly half (48%) of its oil, not from Venezuela or the Middle East

  but from Canada, which accounts for over 90% of their oil exports.  How long can we continue

  deceiving ourselves about why trucker convoys swarmed upon Ottawa?  Or about the role that

  Athabascan sands (in the province of Alberta) play in fiscal diplomacy, never mind the Alaska 

  pipeline? And how long can either Russia or the United States remain superpowers, while mired

  in myths, misconceptions and militarism, while everyone on the ground is caught in a vise, even

  as they struggle to survive?  Blaming the villain (Putin) is easy; rooting out economic causes 

  and human consequences of what passes for domestic as well as foreign policy is much harder.

 [cf. Vaclav Smil, Energy and Civilization: A History (Cambridge, MA, 2017); Richard Rhodes, 

 Energy: A Human History (New York, 2018); R. Buckminster Fuller, Critical Path (New York,

  1981).  Fuller’s warnings are as apt now as they were four decades ago, only far more urgent].

  Yet it must be done, or the world will perish in flames, losing its grip while clinging to illusions.

  As Adam Smith prophesied on the eve of the American Revolution, “this empire [Great Britain]

  . . . has hitherto existed in imagination only . . . it is surely now time that our rulers should either

 realize this golden dream . . . or that they should awake from it themselves, and endeavour to

 awaken the people.  If the project cannot be completed, it ought to be given up” (The Wealth

 of Nations [1776], “Of Public Debts,” V.3. ad fin.; ed. Edwin Cannan [1904], new pref. George J. 

 Stigler (Chicago, 1976), Vol, II, 486).  If we don’t change our ways, extinction will be our lot—

 our fossils will tell the tarry tale, as it did for all the dinosaurs who once ruled the earth.

I think Putin will go down in history as a waster of young russian lives also a barbarian and for nothing he must not like the russian people ether as thay also suffer mothers losing sons wives losing husband children losing father’s what an a*%*#h##&£#_

That goes without saying, yet it does nothing to change the situation. It also ignores the fact that neither his friends nor his foes among the nations of the world are any less guilty of creating and perpetuating the misery and suffering which you rightly condemn. Invective is neither helpful nor illuminating. As Sam Rayburn used to say, “you can always tell a man to go to hell, but making him go there is another story entirely.” When you find the words to make that happen, let me know.

Get the Columbia Climate School Newsletter →

Developed in collaboration with Dr. Dan Pomeroy, manager of MIT’s International Policy Lab .

Criteria for success

A successful op-ed…

• Provides a strong, provocative opinion
• Focuses on a clear, single issue
• Is both important and timely
• Supplies facts and anecdotes that support the main message
• Avoids unnecessary technical jargon
• Leaves the reader a memorable take-away message

Structure diagram

Identify your purpose.

The opinion pages in newspapers and magazines (and their equivalent in online outlets) are often among the best-read sections of a publication. As such, writing an opinion piece is an opportunity to reach a massive audience and influence the conversation of the general public. Further, decision-makers also see these opinions; politicians and their staff track opinion editorials, as do executives and higher-ups at companies, nonprofits, and think tanks. Thus, an op-ed provides two mechanisms for influencing public policy: indirectly by placing an issue for the public to consider, and directly by appealing to these decision-makers.

As a researcher at MIT, you’re an expert in your field at a highly respected institution. You’re a prime candidate to write an op-ed, particularly on topics that influence or are influenced by your research projects, program, institution, field – or, importantly, your professional and personal experiences. Newspaper and magazine editors want strong opinion pieces from experts whom their readers will consider both highly credible and passionate about a topic. And you want to write an op-ed because it can magnify the societal impact of your work and field.

Analyze your audience

The readership of news outlets varies significantly, e.g., the NY Times demographic is quite different than that of the Kansas City Star. To even get past the paper’s editor, your piece needs to cover a topic that’s important to the paper’s readers. Then to be effective, you need to connect with those readers (or at least the ones important to your strategic goal). You can appeal to their values, ethics, emotions, etc.

For example, if you’re writing an op-ed advocating for science funding and targeting a paper with a conservative audience, you can appeal to their readers’ values and ethics by focusing on how scientific research benefits their local industries. As another example, if you’re writing an op-ed on the importance of net neutrality, you can immediately appeal to your readers’ emotions by reminding them how infuriating it can be to deal with internet service providers.

Plan your writing process

Prior to starting the writing process, consider the following questions that will help direct the content and style of your op-ed.

Show your passion with descriptive language and narrative.

Don’t use an academic argument: Regulations to reduce mercury are needed to protect tribal populations because of higher fish intake from subsistence fishing and unique cultural practices.

Do use a compelling story: In the rainy Pacific Northwest, tribal populations spend much of their time on boats hunting swordfish, shark, and king mackerel to feed their families and for use in cultural rituals. Unfortunately, mercury levels in these fish are putting the health and safety of their community in serious jeopardy. The federal government needs to take vulnerable populations like this into account when developing mercury regulations.

Use active voice (i.e. active verbs).

Active: This experience convinced me that we need to support science.

Passive: I was convinced by this experience that we need to support science.

Turn numbers or statistics into specific and easy-to-understand references or examples.

Difficult to understand: Since the pre-vaccination era, the estimated annual morbidity rate in the U.S. decreased from 530,000 to 70.

Easy to understand: Thanks to vaccines, the measles virus that used to infect hundreds of thousands of Americans each year is now virtually eliminated.

Avoid jargon and acronyms

Jargon-filled: Nonintrusive load monitors can disaggregate total energy use by appliance.

Jargon-less: Advanced smart meters can tell you how much energy each of your appliances use.

Avoid clichés – they dilute your message

Examples:  “It’s not rocket science,” “is the holy grail,” “avoid like the plague”

Submitting Your Piece

Prior to submitting your piece, make sure the op-ed meets your target paper’s formatting requirements (word length, etc.) and read their submission instructions. As a general rule, only submit your op-ed to one publication at a time. If your piece is extremely timely, you can provide a time limit for consideration in your cover letter, after which you plan to submit the op-ed to another paper.

When submitting, the body of the email should contain a succinct paragraph establishing why the issue is important, why their readers care, and why your expertise and/or experiences qualify you to write this piece. After this paragraph, provide a brief (1-3 sentences) bio, your contact information (phone number, email address, and mailing address), and the wordcount of the piece (both the full length and length including the title and bio).

An example pitch is provided below.

After submitting, follow-up with a phone call to the editor. Be prepared to pitch it directly as they may have missed the email. Leave a message if he or she does not answer. Do not incessantly hound them, but it is ok to send follow up emails or phone calls if you have not heard back after a couple days.

If you do not hear back from the editor in 10 days or your op-ed is rejected outright, try another paper, or you can shorten it and resubmit your piece as a letter to the editor (might be a different editor). While shorter, letters are still very visible.

Example Pitch

I’d like to submit an opinion piece on the March for Science happening next Saturday 4/22.

I am a CT native, PhD physicist, and currently manage Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s International Policy Lab. The goal of this piece is to explain why, as a scientist, I am joining the March for Science, how science impacts CT, and to urge others to join. I am hoping it can be placed this weekend or sometime next week, just ahead of the March.

The piece is exclusive at 641 text/691 with title and bio notes. Happy to make any needed edits.

Home address: XXX Phone: YYY

Thank you for your consideration,

-Dan [op-ed pasted below and attached]

Further Resources

• Writing an Op-Ed – From the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), this article provides key points to consider when writing an op-ed as well as three examples of science focused op-eds.  The article is a part of their larger Communication Toolkit provided under the AAAS Center for Public Engagement with Science & Technology Program.
• Op-Ed Writing: It’s OK to Argue for Something by Brooke Smith & Sarah Sunu from COMPASS.  In addition to providing tips and resources for writing op-eds, the authors also link to several scientist-authored op-eds featuring a wide variety of arguments.
• Ten Steps to Writing an Op-Ed by Joanne Omang, free-lance writer and former Washington Post reporter. Provides insight into the necessary components of an op-ed from an editor’s perspective along with her “ten steps” you should consider prior to writing your op-ed.
• Op-Ed and You by Trish Hall, Senior Editor, New York Times. Provides an editor’s perspective on “what makes the cut” out of the “flood” of op-eds submitted to the New York Times every day.
• Writing Op-Eds – From the Union of Concerned Scientists, this article provides information on the basic structure of op-eds and gives concrete tips towards optimizing your message and improving your chances of having your piece placed.
• The Op-Ed Project – Started as a social venture aiming to increase the number of op-eds from women and other underrepresented experts. The website provides tips for writing an op-ed , guidelines for pitching your op-ed to an editor , and information on op-ed submittals to leading news publications .

Resources and Annotated Examples

Annotated example 1.

Marcel Bruchez on the March for Science (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) 117 KB

Annotated Example 2

Eric Lander and Eric Schmidt on investing in scientific research (Washington Post) 103 KB

Annotated Example 3

Maria T. Zuber on coal emissions (Washington Post) 100 KB

• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

How to write an op-ed or column

Tip sheet on formulating, researching, writing and editing news opinion articles.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by The Journalist's Resource, The Journalist's Resource January 28, 2013

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/home/how-to-write-an-op-ed-or-column/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The following is reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey Seglin , lecturer in public policy and director of the Harvard Kennedy School Communications Program :

An op-ed piece derives its name from originally having appeared opposite the editorial page in a newspaper. Today, the term is used more widely to represent a column that represents the strong, informed and focused opinion of the writer on an issue of relevance to a targeted audience.

Distinguishing characteristics of an op-ed or column

Partly, a column is defined by where it appears, but it shares some common characteristics:

• Typically, it is short, between 750 and 800 words.
• It has a clearly defined point.
• It has a clearly defined point of view.
• It represents clarity of thinking.
• It contains the strong, distinctive voice of the writer.

Questions to ask yourself when writing an op-ed or column

• Do I have a clear point to make? If so, what is it?
• Who cares? (Writing with a particular audience in mind can inform how you execute your column. Who is it that you are trying to convince? Why are you targeting that specific reader?)
• Is there substance to my argument?

Topic and theme

Every successful op-ed piece or column must have a clearly defined topic and theme.

• The topic is the person, place, issue, incident or thing that is the primary focus of the column. The topic is usually stated in the first paragraph.
• The theme is the big, overarching idea of the column. What’s your point in writing about the chosen topic and why is it important? The theme may appear early in the piece or it may appear later when it may also serve as a turning point into a deeper level of argument.

While columns and op-ed pieces allow writers to include their own voice and express an opinion, to be successful the columns must be grounded in solid research. Research involves acquiring facts, quotations, citations or data from sources and personal observation. Research also allows a reader to include sensory data (touch, taste, smell, sound or sight) into a column. There are two basic methods of research:

• Field research: going to the scene, interviews, legwork; primary materials, observations, and knowledge.
• Library, academic, or internet research: using secondary materials, including graphs, charts, and scholarly articles.

Openings and endings

The first line of an op-ed is crucial. The opening “hook” may grab the reader’s attention with a strong claim, a surprising fact, a metaphor, a mystery, or a counter-intuitive observation that entices the reader into reading more. The opening also briefly lays the foundation for your argument.

Similarly, every good column or op-ed piece needs a strong ending that fulfills some basic requirements. It:

• Echoes or answers introduction.
• Has been foreshadowed by preceding thematic statements.
• Is the last and often most memorable detail.
• Contains a final epiphany or calls the reader to action.

There are two basic types of endings. An “open ending” suggests rather than states a conclusion, while a “closed ending” states rather than suggests a conclusion. The closed ending in which the point of the piece is resolved is by far the most commonly used.

Having a strong voice is critical to a successful column or op-ed piece. Columns are most typically conversational in tone, so you can imagine yourself have a conversation with your reader as you write (a short, focused conversation). But the range of voice used in columns can be wide: contemplative, conversational, descriptive, experienced, informative, informed, introspective, observant, plaintive, reportorial, self-effacing, sophisticated or humorous, among many other possibilities.

Sometimes what voice you use is driven by the publication for which you are writing. A good method of developing your voice is to get in the practice of reading your column or op-ed out loud. Doing so gives you a clear sense of how your piece might sound – what your voice may come off as – to your intended reader.

Revision checklist

Below are some things to remember as you revise your op-ed or column before you submit it for publication. You should always check:

• Coherence and unity.
• Simplicity.
• Voice and tone. Most are conversational; some require an authoritative voice.
• Direct quotations and paraphrasing for accuracy.
• That you properly credit all sources (though formal citations are not necessary).
• The consistency of your opinion throughout your op-ed or column.

Further resources

Below are links to some online resources related to op-ed and column writing:

• The Op-Ed Project is a terrific resource for anyone looking to strengthen their op-ed writing. It provides tips on op-ed writing, suggestions about basic op-ed structure, guidelines on how to pitch op-ed pieces to publications, and information about top outlets that publish op-eds. Started as an effort to increase the number of women op-ed writers, The Op-Ed Project also regularly runs daylong seminars around the country.
• “How to Write an Op-Ed Article,” which was prepared by David Jarmul, Duke’s associate vice president for news and communications, provides great guidelines on how to write a successful op-ed.
• “How to Write Op-Ed Columns,” which was prepared by The Earth Institute at Columbia University, is another useful guide to writing op-eds. It contains a useful list of op-ed guidelines for top-circulation newspapers in the U.S.
• “And Now a Word from Op-Ed,” offers some advice on how to think about and write op-eds from the Op-Ed editor of The New York Times .

Author Jeffrey Seglin is a lecturer in public policy and director of the Harvard Kennedy School Communications Program .

Tags: training

About The Author

The Journalist's Resource

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• The four main types of essay | Quick guide with examples

The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples

Published on September 4, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

An essay is a focused piece of writing designed to inform or persuade. There are many different types of essay, but they are often defined in four categories: argumentative, expository, narrative, and descriptive essays.

Argumentative and expository essays are focused on conveying information and making clear points, while narrative and descriptive essays are about exercising creativity and writing in an interesting way. At university level, argumentative essays are the most common type. 

In high school and college, you will also often have to write textual analysis essays, which test your skills in close reading and interpretation.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Argumentative essays, expository essays, narrative essays, descriptive essays, textual analysis essays, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of essays.

An argumentative essay presents an extended, evidence-based argument. It requires a strong thesis statement —a clearly defined stance on your topic. Your aim is to convince the reader of your thesis using evidence (such as quotations ) and analysis.

Argumentative essays test your ability to research and present your own position on a topic. This is the most common type of essay at college level—most papers you write will involve some kind of argumentation.

The essay is divided into an introduction, body, and conclusion:

• The introduction provides your topic and thesis statement
• The body presents your evidence and arguments
• The conclusion summarizes your argument and emphasizes its importance

The example below is a paragraph from the body of an argumentative essay about the effects of the internet on education. Mouse over it to learn more.

A common frustration for teachers is students’ use of Wikipedia as a source in their writing. Its prevalence among students is not exaggerated; a survey found that the vast majority of the students surveyed used Wikipedia (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). An article in The Guardian stresses a common objection to its use: “a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing” (Coomer, 2013). Teachers are clearly not mistaken in viewing Wikipedia usage as ubiquitous among their students; but the claim that it discourages engagement with academic sources requires further investigation. This point is treated as self-evident by many teachers, but Wikipedia itself explicitly encourages students to look into other sources. Its articles often provide references to academic publications and include warning notes where citations are missing; the site’s own guidelines for research make clear that it should be used as a starting point, emphasizing that users should always “read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says” (“Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia,” 2020). Indeed, for many students, Wikipedia is their first encounter with the concepts of citation and referencing. The use of Wikipedia therefore has a positive side that merits deeper consideration than it often receives.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

An expository essay provides a clear, focused explanation of a topic. It doesn’t require an original argument, just a balanced and well-organized view of the topic.

Expository essays test your familiarity with a topic and your ability to organize and convey information. They are commonly assigned at high school or in exam questions at college level.

The introduction of an expository essay states your topic and provides some general background, the body presents the details, and the conclusion summarizes the information presented.

A typical body paragraph from an expository essay about the invention of the printing press is shown below. Mouse over it to learn more.

The invention of the printing press in 1440 changed this situation dramatically. Johannes Gutenberg, who had worked as a goldsmith, used his knowledge of metals in the design of the press. He made his type from an alloy of lead, tin, and antimony, whose durability allowed for the reliable production of high-quality books. This new technology allowed texts to be reproduced and disseminated on a much larger scale than was previously possible. The Gutenberg Bible appeared in the 1450s, and a large number of printing presses sprang up across the continent in the following decades. Gutenberg’s invention rapidly transformed cultural production in Europe; among other things, it would lead to the Protestant Reformation.

A narrative essay is one that tells a story. This is usually a story about a personal experience you had, but it may also be an imaginative exploration of something you have not experienced.

Narrative essays test your ability to build up a narrative in an engaging, well-structured way. They are much more personal and creative than other kinds of academic writing . Writing a personal statement for an application requires the same skills as a narrative essay.

A narrative essay isn’t strictly divided into introduction, body, and conclusion, but it should still begin by setting up the narrative and finish by expressing the point of the story—what you learned from your experience, or why it made an impression on you.

Mouse over the example below, a short narrative essay responding to the prompt “Write about an experience where you learned something about yourself,” to explore its structure.

Since elementary school, I have always favored subjects like science and math over the humanities. My instinct was always to think of these subjects as more solid and serious than classes like English. If there was no right answer, I thought, why bother? But recently I had an experience that taught me my academic interests are more flexible than I had thought: I took my first philosophy class.

Before I entered the classroom, I was skeptical. I waited outside with the other students and wondered what exactly philosophy would involve—I really had no idea. I imagined something pretty abstract: long, stilted conversations pondering the meaning of life. But what I got was something quite different.

A young man in jeans, Mr. Jones—“but you can call me Rob”—was far from the white-haired, buttoned-up old man I had half-expected. And rather than pulling us into pedantic arguments about obscure philosophical points, Rob engaged us on our level. To talk free will, we looked at our own choices. To talk ethics, we looked at dilemmas we had faced ourselves. By the end of class, I’d discovered that questions with no right answer can turn out to be the most interesting ones.

The experience has taught me to look at things a little more “philosophically”—and not just because it was a philosophy class! I learned that if I let go of my preconceptions, I can actually get a lot out of subjects I was previously dismissive of. The class taught me—in more ways than one—to look at things with an open mind.

A descriptive essay provides a detailed sensory description of something. Like narrative essays, they allow you to be more creative than most academic writing, but they are more tightly focused than narrative essays. You might describe a specific place or object, rather than telling a whole story.

Descriptive essays test your ability to use language creatively, making striking word choices to convey a memorable picture of what you’re describing.

A descriptive essay can be quite loosely structured, though it should usually begin by introducing the object of your description and end by drawing an overall picture of it. The important thing is to use careful word choices and figurative language to create an original description of your object.

Mouse over the example below, a response to the prompt “Describe a place you love to spend time in,” to learn more about descriptive essays.

On Sunday afternoons I like to spend my time in the garden behind my house. The garden is narrow but long, a corridor of green extending from the back of the house, and I sit on a lawn chair at the far end to read and relax. I am in my small peaceful paradise: the shade of the tree, the feel of the grass on my feet, the gentle activity of the fish in the pond beside me.

My cat crosses the garden nimbly and leaps onto the fence to survey it from above. From his perch he can watch over his little kingdom and keep an eye on the neighbours. He does this until the barking of next door’s dog scares him from his post and he bolts for the cat flap to govern from the safety of the kitchen.

With that, I am left alone with the fish, whose whole world is the pond by my feet. The fish explore the pond every day as if for the first time, prodding and inspecting every stone. I sometimes feel the same about sitting here in the garden; I know the place better than anyone, but whenever I return I still feel compelled to pay attention to all its details and novelties—a new bird perched in the tree, the growth of the grass, and the movement of the insects it shelters…

Sitting out in the garden, I feel serene. I feel at home. And yet I always feel there is more to discover. The bounds of my garden may be small, but there is a whole world contained within it, and it is one I will never get tired of inhabiting.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Though every essay type tests your writing skills, some essays also test your ability to read carefully and critically. In a textual analysis essay, you don’t just present information on a topic, but closely analyze a text to explain how it achieves certain effects.

Rhetorical analysis

A rhetorical analysis looks at a persuasive text (e.g. a speech, an essay, a political cartoon) in terms of the rhetorical devices it uses, and evaluates their effectiveness.

The goal is not to state whether you agree with the author’s argument but to look at how they have constructed it.

The introduction of a rhetorical analysis presents the text, some background information, and your thesis statement; the body comprises the analysis itself; and the conclusion wraps up your analysis of the text, emphasizing its relevance to broader concerns.

The example below is from a rhetorical analysis of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech . Mouse over it to learn more.

King’s speech is infused with prophetic language throughout. Even before the famous “dream” part of the speech, King’s language consistently strikes a prophetic tone. He refers to the Lincoln Memorial as a “hallowed spot” and speaks of rising “from the dark and desolate valley of segregation” to “make justice a reality for all of God’s children.” The assumption of this prophetic voice constitutes the text’s strongest ethical appeal; after linking himself with political figures like Lincoln and the Founding Fathers, King’s ethos adopts a distinctly religious tone, recalling Biblical prophets and preachers of change from across history. This adds significant force to his words; standing before an audience of hundreds of thousands, he states not just what the future should be, but what it will be: “The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.” This warning is almost apocalyptic in tone, though it concludes with the positive image of the “bright day of justice.” The power of King’s rhetoric thus stems not only from the pathos of his vision of a brighter future, but from the ethos of the prophetic voice he adopts in expressing this vision.

Literary analysis

A literary analysis essay presents a close reading of a work of literature—e.g. a poem or novel—to explore the choices made by the author and how they help to convey the text’s theme. It is not simply a book report or a review, but an in-depth interpretation of the text.

Literary analysis looks at things like setting, characters, themes, and figurative language. The goal is to closely analyze what the author conveys and how.

The introduction of a literary analysis essay presents the text and background, and provides your thesis statement; the body consists of close readings of the text with quotations and analysis in support of your argument; and the conclusion emphasizes what your approach tells us about the text.

Mouse over the example below, the introduction to a literary analysis essay on Frankenstein , to learn more.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is often read as a crude cautionary tale about the dangers of scientific advancement unrestrained by ethical considerations. In this reading, protagonist Victor Frankenstein is a stable representation of the callous ambition of modern science throughout the novel. This essay, however, argues that far from providing a stable image of the character, Shelley uses shifting narrative perspectives to portray Frankenstein in an increasingly negative light as the novel goes on. While he initially appears to be a naive but sympathetic idealist, after the creature’s narrative Frankenstein begins to resemble—even in his own telling—the thoughtlessly cruel figure the creature represents him as. This essay begins by exploring the positive portrayal of Frankenstein in the first volume, then moves on to the creature’s perception of him, and finally discusses the third volume’s narrative shift toward viewing Frankenstein as the creature views him.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

At high school and in composition classes at university, you’ll often be told to write a specific type of essay , but you might also just be given prompts.

Look for keywords in these prompts that suggest a certain approach: The word “explain” suggests you should write an expository essay , while the word “describe” implies a descriptive essay . An argumentative essay might be prompted with the word “assess” or “argue.”

The vast majority of essays written at university are some sort of argumentative essay . Almost all academic writing involves building up an argument, though other types of essay might be assigned in composition classes.

Essays can present arguments about all kinds of different topics. For example:

• In a literary analysis essay, you might make an argument for a specific interpretation of a text
• In a history essay, you might present an argument for the importance of a particular event
• In a politics essay, you might argue for the validity of a certain political theory

An argumentative essay tends to be a longer essay involving independent research, and aims to make an original argument about a topic. Its thesis statement makes a contentious claim that must be supported in an objective, evidence-based way.

An expository essay also aims to be objective, but it doesn’t have to make an original argument. Rather, it aims to explain something (e.g., a process or idea) in a clear, concise way. Expository essays are often shorter assignments and rely less on research.

The key difference is that a narrative essay is designed to tell a complete story, while a descriptive essay is meant to convey an intense description of a particular place, object, or concept.

Narrative and descriptive essays both allow you to write more personally and creatively than other kinds of essays , and similar writing skills can apply to both.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/essay-types/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write an argumentative essay | examples & tips, how to write an expository essay, how to write an essay outline | guidelines & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Ethics & Leadership
• Fact-Checking
• Media Literacy
• The Craig Newmark Center
• Reporting & Editing
• Ethics & Trust
• Tech & Tools
• Business & Work
• Educators & Students
• Training Catalog
• Custom Teaching
• For ACES Members
• All Categories
• Broadcast & Visual Journalism
• Fact-Checking & Media Literacy
• In-newsroom
• Memphis, Tenn.
• Minneapolis, Minn.
• St. Petersburg, Fla.
• Washington, D.C.
• Poynter ACES Introductory Certificate in Editing
• Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing
• Ethics & Trust Articles
• Get Ethics Advice
• Fact-Checking Articles
• International Fact-Checking Day
• Teen Fact-Checking Network
• International
• Media Literacy Training
• MediaWise Resources
• Ambassadors
• MediaWise in the News

Support responsible news and fact-based information today!

Opinion | Opinion: Opt-in to op-eds, a final attempt to distinguish news from opinion

Americans can’t tell the difference between fact and factoid and assign political labels to news outlets based on columnists rather than reporters..

The New York Times deploys 1,700 journalists in 160 countries “to bear witness and hold power to account.”

Founded in 1851, the newspaper rose in prestige through the decades, beginning with coverage of the Titanic in 1912 and continuing with publication of The Pentagon Papers in 1971, changing the course of history and helping establish First Amendment freedoms in the process.

In 1913, librarians designated the Times as “the newspaper of record” because it indexed stories . The newspaper has won 132 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other outlet, with its first for public service in 1918 — publishing full texts of official World War I records .

As of August 2021, the Times listed 16 op-ed columnists, including Maureen Dowd, Thomas L. Friedman and Paul Krugman.

Arguably, these and other columnists have shaped the newspaper’s reputation as much as the phalanx of reporters on the ground around the world, with many Americans still believing the Times is a bastion of liberal thought.

Media Bias/Fact Check rates the newspaper as moderately left of center, with highly factual reporting “considered one of the most reliable sources for news information due to proper sourcing and well-respected journalists/editors.” The analysis did find false claims in reportage with timely corrections made as soon as new information was available. Further, the site adds, “failed fact checks occurred on Op-Ed pages and not straight news reporting.”

The Times also was noted for its efforts on impartiality. For years it hired independent public editors to address newsroom bias. In “ Why Readers See The Times as Liberal ,” Liz Spayd, the sixth and last public editor, recommended “leaving editorials on the editorial page, banning campaign ads from the home page,” and diversifying political values in the newsroom.

A year later, the Times eliminated her position.

In her last report, “ The Public Editor Signs Off ,” Spayd wrote:

Having the role was a sign of institutional integrity, and losing it sends an ambiguous signal: Is the leadership growing weary of such advice or simply searching for a new model?

I am going to recommend that model — an opt-in newsletter for anyone willing to pay for op-eds. I am focusing on the Times because the newspaper already is moving in that direction . The model works for any major newspaper with a digital website.

Fact or factoid?

Many Americans do not know the difference between news and opinion.

A Media Insight Project survey found only 43% of respondents being able to easily sort news from opinion in online-only news or social media. They were more confident differentiating news from opinion in local TV news, “which usually contains no formal commentary.” Even when a news publisher labeled opinion as such, many people still could not tell the difference.

In “ Opinion, news or editorial? Readers often can’t tell the difference ,” Poynter contributor Eliana Miller noted that print media readers typically know what is and isn’t news. “Online, things aren’t so clear. Confusion fuels readers’ complaints that opinions, political agendas and bias are creeping into reporters’ work.”

Miller detailed efforts to delineate news from opinion, such as labeling and page design. She cited an editorial page editor explaining to the audience that op-ed writers are “paid to opine” and a content director videotaping interviews with columnists about their opinions.

All nice. All ineffective.

The situation has become alarming in recent years. A report by the Pew Research Center, “ Distinguishing Between Factual and Opinion Statements in the News ,” tested people’s ability to “recognize news as factual — something that’s capable of being proved or disproved by objective evidence — or as an opinion that reflects the beliefs and values of whoever expressed it.”

The study found that a majority of Americans could identify three of the five statements as news or opinion. “But this result is only a little better than random guesses. Far fewer Americans got all five correct, and roughly a quarter got most or all wrong.”

Some editors now label op-eds as “Opinion:” (with colon) in the first word of the headline. The New York Times, which retired the term “op-ed” earlier this year, includes the label “guest essay,” as in this recent one with a distinct political viewpoint: “ The South’s Republicans Talk About Freedom While People Die .”

That was published on Sept. 6, 2021. The Times front page that day had comprehensive reports on a new abortion law in Texas, COVID-19 deaths, Afghan refugees, a Napoleonic general, and Nicaraguans who fear President Daniel Ortega — hardly content of a left-wing Democratic mouthpiece. But that is precisely what a federal appeals judge believed about the Times and The Washington Post (among others) in a dissenting opinion about an unrelated defamation case.

To combat such stereotypes, some newspapers have taken steps beyond labeling and design considerations. For instance, The San Diego Union-Tribune has a “ News vs. Opinion” site, defining a news story, an editorial, a column, an analysis, a letter and an op-ed.

The Chicago Tribune responded last year to reader complaints with a multi-pronged approach, labeling op-eds “Tribune Voices,” developing headline standards for commentary, and revising the design of print pages with all columns in one place.

“Finally,” wrote then editor-in-chief Colin McMahon , “we are experimenting with other callouts we may add as we strive to be as transparent as possible with readers about what we do — particularly amid what is by all accounts a raw and hyperpartisan political environment.”

McMahon stepped down Aug. 10, 2021, “after a challenging 18 months at the helm of Chicago-based Tribune Publishing’s flagship newspaper.”

Every newspaper is experiencing challenging times, in part, because people increasingly do not believe legitimate news. Many Americans associate newsmakers, events—and even the pandemic —with partisan politics.

Consumers get free political news from websites, blogs and social media. That diet has consequences.

It’s time to opt in.

The case for newsletters

The New York Times has three types of email newsletters: briefings, personalized alerts, and subscriber-only. Briefings are free but point to the Times’ paywall. Personalized alerts build viewership in the same manner, attracting people passionate about a topic, writer or trend.

Some 19 out of 50 Times newsletters are now available only to subscribers. Nieman Lab staff writer Sarah Scire quoted Alex Hardiman , chief product officer at the Times, promoting newsletters because they attract people who “are far more likely to pay and to stay.”

Opinion writers reportedly are the anchor of newsletters, incentivizing recruitment and retention of subscribers.

Krugman, in fact, is mentioned as a particularly valuable asset to the newsletter format. You can find his columns in newsletters and on the Times’ digital website.

The Times should make one more adjustment to its model, removing Krugman and other opinion writers from the digital edition and including them only as opt-in newsletter headliners.

No doubt Krugman et. al. would dislike the option as it diminishes influence. That’s the point here. By all means, retain op-ed writers in print editions because readers readily can distinguish viewpoints from news.

This reverses a common marketing strategy that aligns viewpoints of columnists with the perceived psychographics of the target audience. This practice has blurred the line between news and opinion, exacerbated now because some current and former opinion page editors operate as digital engagement editors .

In “ It’s time to rethink the opinion section ,” media reporter Chris M. Sutcliffe makes the case for change when voices of columnists undermine reportage, often because news outlets promote commentary on social media.

“There is considerable incentive for columnists to be controversial or deliberately strident on some arbitrary issue, because they are rewarded for driving views,” Sutcliffe writes. “That controversy may be good for newspaper businesses in the short-term. However, when it undermines trust in the news side of the house, it undermines the business as a whole.”

In sum, newspapers should adopt all of the methods cited here:

• Fact-check op-eds and require corrections for any fabrication, half-truth or exaggeration.
• Survey audiences to see if they can tell the difference between news and opinion.
• Create stand-alone digital and print pages, defining a news story, an editorial, a column, an analysis, a letter and an op-ed.
• Clearly label op-eds, using “Opinion:” or “Guest Essay:” as the first words in the headline so that the term also appears in social media links.
• Revise the design of the website and print page so that columnists are clustered in one place.
• Hire or assign audience engagement editors with reporter rather than opinion credentials.
• Consider an opt-in newsletter for op-eds, removing columnists from digital but not print editions.

Society and social media are awash with opinion, and we are paying the price, with people no longer believing in democracy, science and each other. Publishers need to do more so journalism regains its lost allure and people new respect for the demanding, dangerous and yes, impartial , jobs of reporters.

Otherwise, the lack of trust and perceived bias will taint reputations and decimate subscriptions.

Fact-checking grows but concerns remain over funding, harassment, report finds

The 2023 State of the Fact-Checkers report surveyed 137 fact-checking organizations across at least 69 countries

Opinion | Elon Musk hired safety chiefs for X. Will it actually get safer?

Based on Musk’s history as the owner of the social network, you can see why the news has been met with skepticism.

Opinion | Who should fact-check the fact-checkers? Everyone

Transparency of sources is the key to evaluating the work of any fact-checker

Opinion | Fact-checking’s impact on elections: A case study from Portugal

Elections are the ultimate expression of democracy and the prime metric for assessing the influence of fact-checking within democratic societies

Why the federal government is paying upfront to fix the Baltimore bridge

The federal government stepping in to pay to rebuild the bridge doesn’t necessarily mean taxpayers will cover the entire bill

Comments are closed.

Disagree. I suspect many readers can’t distinguish news they like from news they dislike, for heaven’s sake. When they see facts they disagree with, they call it opinion.

Wish the industry would survey Americans on their ability to identify a story as news (fact) when it’s not what they want to hear. If they dismiss disagreeable news as opinion, then what good will it do to isolate news from opinion? Readers will just argue that a news story was misclassified — “That shoulda been labeled opinion!” Where’s the gain in trust?

Start your day informed and inspired.

Get the Poynter newsletter that's right for you.

Commentary: UCLA-LSU is America’s sweethearts vs. its basketball villains

• Show more sharing options
• Copy Link URL Copied!

Editor’s Note: The original version of this commentary did not meet Times editorial standards. It has been edited to remove language that was inappropriate and offensive. We apologize to the LSU basketball program and to our readers. On Monday, Ben Bolch offered an apology, which is appended to the bottom of this commentary.

ALBANY, N.Y. — This isn’t just a basketball game, it’s a reckoning. Picking sides goes well beyond school allegiance.

10:10 p.m. March 30, 2024 A previous version of this commentary did not meet Times editorial standards. It has been updated.

Do you prefer the team that wants to grow women’s basketball or the one seemingly hellbent on dividing it?

The coach who embraces reporters or the one who attacks them?

When UCLA plays defending national champion Louisiana State on Saturday at MVP Arena in the Sweet 16 of the Albany 2 Regional, the contrasts don’t stop with blue and purple.

Some might see this as inclusive versus divisive.

There’s little debate as to which side of the ledger Tigers coach Kim Mulkey falls on. Long after she reportedly failed to support Brittney Griner , in essence telling her gay star to keep her sexual orientation to herself, Mulkey has stumbled again in the wake of an imminent Washington Post profile on the veteran coach.

Last week, Mulkey threatened to sue the newspaper without knowing the contents of the story, labeling it a “hit piece.” Without naming the reporter, she described the Post’s Kent Babb as “sleazy.” She slammed the paper for giving her a deadline to respond to questions while also disclosing that she had refused requests going back two years to sit for an interview.

In doing so, Mulkey turned a non-story into a blockbuster. How many more readers will that Post story get as a result of her grandstanding?

Just as befuddling, Mulkey sidestepped the issue Friday, refusing to address the story she created. The first two questions Mulkey fielded at her media session involved the Post story. The coach dropped the ball each time.

UCLA Sports

Prattle of sexes: How trash-talking men helped UCLA women reach the Sweet 16

UCLA relies on talented male scout team players to help the Bruins prepare for opponents and fuel their NCAA tournament run.

March 28, 2024

Reporter: “What’s it been like kind of waiting for that story to come out?”

Mulkey: “I did make a statement, and that’s all I’ll comment on at this time because all I am focused on is to try and win another basketball game. Thank you for asking, though.”

Reporter: “Not to belabor the point, but from what you have been told or what you have been asked ... ”

Mulkey: “I’m only here today to talk about the next game.”

How convenient for someone who couldn’t stop talking about the story less than a week ago. She’s only mum when it suits her.

Mulkey’s best player also can’t get out of her own way. A year after she taunted Caitlin Clark by giving the Iowa superstar the ring finger and mocking Clark’s hand-waving gesture late in the national championship game, Angel Reese is at it again. When Middle Tennessee’s Anastasiia Boldyreva fouled out of a second-round loss to LSU, Reese waved goodbye as a crying Boldyreva headed to the bench.

The wave led to significant blowback on social media, sparking a virtual shrug from Reese.

“clickbait everything i do keep going viral,” Reese posted to the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, after the game.

“clickbait everything i do keep going viral” — Angel Reese (@Reese10Angel) March 24, 2024

Then there’s UCLA, which operates in the saintly shadows while being as wholesome as a miniature stuffed Bruin mascot. UCLA coach Cori Close gives reporters unfettered access to players and practices, repeatedly thanking them for trumpeting the emergence of the women’s game.

She’s unfailingly cheery, loudly announcing her presence early Friday morning after the team’s flight was delayed by 2½ hours and arrived close to midnight.

“Coach is here!” Close said joyfully in a corridor outside the interview area.

Her players reflect her sunny disposition while being as controversial as a pledge drive for underprivileged children.

“She’s a little bit cornier than us,” senior guard Charisma Osborne said, “but yeah, I think she really sets the standard.”

So, maybe they really are America’s sweethearts?

“Sure, I kind of like that,” star forward Lauren Betts said.

Said Osborne: “I like it too!”

Added Betts: “But don’t get it twisted — we’re not sweethearts on the court. It doesn’t mean we’re soft.”

Kiki Rice’s scoring flurry rallies UCLA past Creighton and into the Sweet 16

Kiki Rice finishes with 24 points and Lauren Betts scores 20 as UCLA rallies to defeat Creighton and set up a showdown with LSU in the NCAA tournament.

March 25, 2024

They also won’t give in to easy narratives. Betts and Osborne disputed the notion that Reese lacked class, and they should know — they played with her for Team USA last summer.

“She’s an amazing teammate and I really enjoyed playing with her,” Betts said. “I think she’s an amazing person and obviously when it comes to basketball you’re trying to win, so it’s like, whatever you have to do to win, I don’t think that people should judge her for that.”

Said Osborne: “She’s really nice off the court as well and people don’t always see that.”

Everyone can see for themselves Saturday. How will the nation’s most polarizing team conduct itself versus the one known for its class? The reckoning is here.

Ben Bolch’s apology:

It has taken me two days to write this apology because I wanted to be as thoughtful as possible in my response to the situation I have created. These are words I have not been asked to write by anyone at my paper, but they need to be expressed so that I can own up to my mistake.

Words matter. As a journalist, no one should know this more than me. Yet I have failed miserably in my choice of words. In my column previewing the LSU-UCLA women’s basketball game, I tried to be clever in my phrasing about one team’s attitude, using alliteration while not understanding the deeply offensive connotation or associations. I also used metaphors that were not appropriate. Our society has had to deal with so many layers of misogyny, racism and negativity that I can now see why the words I used were wrong. It was not my intent to be hurtful, but I now understand that I terribly missed the mark.

I sincerely apologize to the LSU and UCLA basketball teams and to our readers. UCLA, a school I have covered for nearly a decade, champions diversity and is known as a leader in inclusivity. However, I have not upheld that standard in what I wrote and I will do much better. I am deeply sorry.

— Ben Bolch

More to Read

Granderson: Caitlin Clark is having a moment in women’s basketball. She shouldn’t be the only one

April 1, 2024

UCLA vows to turn disappointment into an elusive Final Four run next season

March 31, 2024

UCLA women falter at the finish in NCAA tournament loss to LSU

March 30, 2024

Go beyond the scoreboard

Get the latest on L.A.'s teams in the daily Sports Report newsletter.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Ben Bolch has been a Los Angeles Times staff writer since 1999. He is serving his second stint as the UCLA beat writer, which seems fitting since he has covered almost every sports beat except hockey and horse racing. Bolch is also the author of the recently released book “100 Things UCLA Fans Should Know & Do Before They Die.” He previously covered UCLA basketball from 2010-11 before going on to cover the NBA and the Clippers for five years. He happily traded in gobs of hotel points and airline miles to return to cover UCLA basketball and football in the summer of 2016. Bolch was once selected by NBA TV’s “The Starters” as the “Worst of the Week” after questioning their celebrity journalism-style questions at an NBA All-Star game and considers it one of his finer moments.

More From the Los Angeles Times

Louisville guard Skyy Clark announces he is transferring to UCLA

UCLA opens spring football practice with an emphasis on welcoming fans

April 2, 2024

UCLA spring practice five things to watch: Can anyone challenge Ethan Garbers?

UCLA hopes imposing Lauren Betts returns for battle with Creighton for Sweet 16 bid

March 24, 2024

• Subscribe Now (Opens in new window)
• Air Force Times (Opens in new window)
• Army Times (Opens in new window)
• Marine Corps Times (Opens in new window)
• Pentagon & Congress
• Defense News (Opens in new window)
• Flashpoints
• Benefits Guide (Opens in new window)
• Military Pay Center
• Military Retirement
• Military Benefits
• VA Loan Center (Opens in new window)
• Discount Depot
• GearScout (Opens in new window)
• Military Culture
• Military Fitness
• Military Movies & Video Games
• Military Sports
• Transition Guide (Opens in new window)
• Pay It Forward (Opens in new window)
• Military History
• Black Military History (Opens in new window)
• Congressional Veterans Caucus (Opens in new window)
• Military Appreciation Month (Opens in new window)
• Vietnam Vets & Rolling Thunder (Opens in new window)
• Hall of Valor (Opens in new window)
• Service Members of the Year (Opens in new window)
• Create an Obituary (Opens in new window)
• Medals & Misfires
• Installation Guide (Opens in new window)
• Battle Bracket
• CFC Givers Guide
• Task Force Violent
• Newsletters (Opens in new window)
• Early Bird Brief
• Photo Galleries
• Long-Term Care Partners
• Navy Federal
• Digital Edition (Opens in new window)

Pacific problems: Why the US disagrees on the cost of deterring China

In 2020, Mac Thornberry wanted to answer two questions: How much is the U.S. spending to prevent a war with China, and is it enough?

These were difficult, even for the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. And he wasn’t the only one asking. Thornberry often traveled to Asia, where U.S. allies had the same questions. Thornberry didn’t know what to tell them.

“What do we have to offer?” he said.

For two years, Congress had asked the Pentagon for a report on how much extra money it needed for the Pacific region, but never received one. So Congress demanded one.

“The attitude was, tell us what you need and we’ll try to help,” Thornberry said during a recent interview. “Well, if they’re not going to tell us, then we’re going to tell them.”

The defense policy bill for fiscal 2021 — named for Thornberry, who was retiring — created the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, a new section of the defense budget. PDI had two goals: to push the Pentagon to spend more on the region and to make that money easier to track.

Four years later, PDI has done only one of those two things, according to experts. It has certainly made China-focused defense spending more transparent, but it hasn’t driven much new spending on the Pacific. In fact, the part of America’s defense budget created to help deter a war with China has no actual money.

“Your priorities are always better reflected in your budget rather than in your rhetoric,” Thornberry said.

Whether those two areas match up may be the most important question in American defense policy right now. The last three administrations have decided China is America’s top threat, and a rising one at that. But it’s less clear how much money it will cost to address it and who gets to decide — Congress, the Pentagon or military leaders in the Pacific?

“I don’t think that we are somehow dangerously short of funding for the Indo-Pacific, whether it’s PDI or not,” Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawaii, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee’s defense panel, told Defense News in February.

“We’re going in the right direction, but the question is: Are we going there fast enough?”

A second opinion

This was the question that led to PDI.

In 2021, the head of Indo-Pacific Command, Adm. Phil Davidson, was in Washington ahead of his planned retirement to testify before Congress . Davidson hadn’t appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee in two years due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Early on, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., presented a set of charts during a short call and response. Wicker read a list projecting the number of Chinese and American weapons in the region by 2025, asking Davidson to check his numbers.

Three Chinese aircraft carriers to America’s one. Six Chinese amphibious assault ships to America’s two. Fifty-four Chinese combat ships to America’s six.

The admiral confirmed each one.

“Our conventional deterrent is actually eroding in the region,” Davidson said.

What concerned him most was not that Beijing had a more powerful military overall; it was a problem of speed and distance. Taiwan — which the Chinese government considers a rogue province and has threatened to take back by force — is about 100 miles from the mainland. It’s more than 5,000 miles from Hawaii, the headquarters of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.

It would take three weeks for the U.S. to rush ships to the area from the West Coast, and around 17 days to do so from Alaska, Davidson estimated. If China launched a rapid invasion, it might overwhelm Taiwan before the U.S. had a chance to arrive.

A soldier launches an American-made TOW 2A missile during a live-fire exercise in Pingtung County, Taiwan, on July 3, 2023. (Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images)

“The important factor here is time,” he said.

Davidson’s answer, and that of many committee members, was to push America’s forces closer to Taiwan — the military version of a full-court press. But the U.S. didn’t yet have the necessary infrastructure in place. It would need to construct bases, airfields, radars and other buildings along the Pacific islands that arc around Taiwan.

And this would cost money — lots of money.

PDI was, at first, meant to be the source of that money. To understand why, it’s important to understand how the Pentagon writes its budget.

The process depends mostly on the military services — in particular the Army, Navy and Air Force. These services hold about four-fifths of defense spending each year and direct where that money goes.

Their incentives are different from those of the seven geographic combatant commands, who carry out America’s military goals around the world. Given their roles, the commands often focus on shorter-term needs. Hence, the services often don’t fund everything the combatant commands want.

To lawmakers, the gap seemed especially wide in the Pacific, where China has spent the last two decades upgrading its military.

Noticing this problem, lawmakers as far back as Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in 2017 wanted to fund Indo-Pacific Command’s goals with a separate account — something Thornberry also later supported.

It didn’t come together until three years later. In May 2020, the chair and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee announced plans for a Pacific Deterrence Initiative that would reassure U.S. allies and improve its forces.

It had five goals: to improve presence, logistics, exercises, infrastructure and the strength of partners in the Pacific. The bill also added a voice to the budgeting process. Indo-Pacific Command would now give Congress an annual second opinion on America’s military needs in the region.

There was, however, a structural problem. The lawmakers that created PDI didn’t actually get any money for it. The policy bill named for Thornberry gave the Pentagon about $2 billion in authority for the effort but not permission to spend it. That would’ve required a signoff from the defense appropriations committees, who control the nation’s purse.

Those committees balk at initiatives like PDI, according to multiple congressional aides, because passing them makes it harder to write a defense budget — the same reason it’s harder to write a recipe when someone else decides your shopping list.

U.S. Army soldiers and Indonesia airborne troops conduct a joint forcible entry operation at Baturaja Training Area on Aug. 4, 2021. (Staff Sgt. Thomas Calvert/U.S. Army)

“The hope was for the following year that the appropriations and the budget would match,” said Kimberly Lehn, a former aide on the House Armed Services Committee who helped write the PDI legislation.

That didn’t happen, and by the time Davidson testified before Congress a year later, the initiative had become an accounting drill.

Think about it like a home improvement fund. If you want an upgrade — say, a nicer kitchen — then you have two options: Earn more money or spend less money elsewhere. Instead, PDI was, and still is, implemented in reverse. Each year, the Pentagon builds its budget and then reviews it to see what contributes to deterrence in the Pacific. It then labels that as PDI and highlights the total number in its budget request.

“It reflects their decisions, it doesn’t drive their decisions,” said Dustin Walker, a former Senate Armed Services Committee aide who helped write the PDI legislation and now works at the drone-maker Anduril.

‘Free chicken’

This was not the model PDI’s authors had in mind.

“It started basically as a straight copycat of [the] European Deterrence Initiative,” Walker said, referring to an effort that stemmed from Russia’s 2014 seizure and annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

The Obama administration wanted to show commitment to NATO allies rattled by war on the continent. The government did so within months using what it originally dubbed the European Reassurance Initiative .

Russian soldiers patrol outside the naval headquarters in Simferopol on March 19, 2014. Russia's Constitutional Court unanimously backed President Vladimir Putin's move to make Crimea part of Russia. (Filippo Monteforte/AFP via Getty Images)

U.S. forces in Europe had declined for decades after the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s — down to about 62,000 personnel by 2016 . The smaller size made sense in Europe given there were fewer needs for America’s military muscle. But Russia’s invasion showed how far readiness had fallen, said Tod Wolters, the former head of U.S. European Command.

With the European Deterrence Initiative, the administration wanted to bulk up.

“We knew that we could not go back to Cold War status, with the number of forces that were going to be in the theater. So the question became: How do we make sure that we can rapidly deploy combat power?” said Al Viana, who works in European Command’s force structure and requirements office.

This became the focus of EDI, whose name changed in 2018 when it became clear Russia’s military activities in the region weren’t coming to an end. From 2015 to 2023, the U.S. spent $35 billion on the effort to empower allies and ensure its own forces were more agile. The second goal required funding to run more exercises, rotate more troops, improve infrastructure and store important equipment on the continent.

By the end of fiscal 2014 , European Command had dissolved two heavy combat brigades. However, EDI helped rebuild those forces — deferring cuts to Air Force personnel, supporting a combat aviation brigade and making sure the Army had an armored brigade combat team rotating through the theater. In FY16, the Army’s forces in Europe conducted 26 total exercises per year . By 2023, that number was around 50.

In 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine , the U.S. surged 20,000 extra personnel to Europe. That included an armored brigade combat team — including about 4,000 personnel, 90 tanks and more than 200 other vehicles — which arrived within a week from notification. Without those stocks already stored in the theater, it would’ve taken between four and six weeks, according to U.S. Army Europe and Africa.

“EDI is the place to go and see exactly what we’re doing,” Viana said.

The two initiatives’ different fates come almost entirely down to money. EDI was paid for through an account called overseas contingency operations, more commonly referred to as OCO (pronounced like “cocoa”). That fund started for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, supplementing the annual Pentagon budget.

“EDI was easy because you weren’t fighting with a service,” a senior defense official told Defense News, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the individual was not permitted to talk to the press. “It was free chicken.”

By the start of this decade, Congress had soured on OCO, partly because the Pentagon used it to dodge some budget cuts it faced in the 2010s. Lawmakers called it a slush fund.

This meant the Pacific Deterrence Initiative didn’t get any extra funding. The European counterpart transitioned away from supplemental money in fiscal 2022 , and its funding amounts since then have steadily dropped.

Amphibious armored vehicles attached to a brigade of the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy Marine Corps make their way to a beach during maritime amphibious assault training in China's Guangdong province on Aug. 17, 2019. (Yan Jialuo and Yao Guanchen/Chinese Defense Ministry)

The result is that many items Indo-Pacific Command lists in its annual report to Congress — the things the command says it needs to maintain its strength in the region — aren’t funded. So the command just resubmits those unfunded priorities on top of additional needs in the next year’s report. Hence, each year’s dollar amount snowballs.

When Davidson testified before Congress in 2021, his report listed $4.7 billion in requirements. This year, the number was $26.5 billion — $11 billion of which is unfunded. The bulk of that $11 billion would go to construction costs — much higher in the Pacific than on the U.S. homeland — and munitions.

“Our demand signal has been consistent,” George Ka’iliwai, the director of requirements and resources at the command, said in a March interview. “It is what it is because they are our requirements.”

The Pentagon has questioned some of Indo-Pacific Command’s priorities and whether they’re possible to carry out, even with funding. Infrastructure projects, for example, sometimes require negotiations with the host government as well as expensive labor and material costs. Only about a fifth of Indo-Pacific Command’s desired construction projects appear in the FY25 budget request, Ka’iliwai said.

Since its first report, the command has said the missile defense architecture of Guam — a U.S. territory crucial to the military’s Pacific posture — is its top goal. Others, such as infrastructure on Pacific islands or a secure network to communicate with allies, have also appeared each year.

PDI “doesn’t come close to scratching the itch,” the defense source said.

‘Trade-offs’

There are a few paths forward. One of them would see Congress give Indo-Pacific Command new money each year, like the account McCain sought in 2017.

There are lawmakers, such as Hawaii’s Case, who support that. But the appropriations committees don’t, and it’s unlikely that will change in the short term, according to multiple congressional aides.

Another option is in the Pentagon’s control. At the start of the budgeting process, department leaders could reserve money for the command’s priorities and build everything else around it. That would resemble how the deputy defense secretary is funding two signature initiatives: the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve, which helps accelerate prototyping; and Replicator, an effort to buy drones faster.

But these programs are loose change compared to what the command says it needs — hundreds of millions of dollars compared to more than $11 billion in unfunded priorities.

The way PDI works now is important, according to another senior defense official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the topic. The official argued that a different model for the initiative would make it more difficult for the Defense Department to plan and budget.

“The department has the best ability to find the right trade-offs,” the official said.

Points of view

Three years after Davidson testified, his successor stepped into a House hearing room this March.

“The risk is still high, and it is trending in the wrong direction,” Adm. John Aquilino noted in his opening statement, later adding that the Pacific is the most dangerous he’s ever seen it.

Sitting next to him, Ely Ratner, the assistant secretary of defense for Indo-Pacific security affairs, was more hopeful, citing higher spending and the administration’s “historic momentum” with allies in the region.

The higher spending is easier to see with PDI, which has charted large increases in funding over the last four years. Whether the initiative is working depends on whether you look at the Pacific through the eyes of Ratner or Aquilino. Both agree war isn’t imminent, but they’re split on whether deterrence is getting better or worse.

If it’s eroding, as Davidson argued in 2021, then PDI’s current model may not be enough. If the region is more stable, then the initiative looks better too.

The biggest misconception about PDI, according to the second defense official, is that the Pentagon doesn’t take it seriously.

“This is not a gradual slope of increase,” the official said of Pacific funding. “This is a significant and dramatic increase in investment, and we are more committed than ever.”

The PDI request for this year is $9.9 billion — more than $800 million over last year’s. But up until soon before the Pentagon released its FY25 budget request, it wasn’t, according to the first defense official and a congressional aide.

To show the Pentagon was focused on the threat from China, defense leaders tagged more items under the initiative at the last minute to raise its dollar figure, the first defense source and a congressional aide told Defense News. Among the late entries was the drone program Replicator.

At the recent March hearing, a member of Congress asked Ratner whether the $9.9 billion includes everything the Pentagon needs “for the PDI to be as effective as possible.”

“Congresswoman,” Ratner responded, “the PDI is simply an accounting mechanism.”

Noah Robertson is the Pentagon reporter at Defense News. He previously covered national security for the Christian Science Monitor. He holds a bachelor’s degree in English and government from the College of William & Mary in his hometown of Williamsburg, Virginia.

In Other News

Eisenhower’s salty pilots are putting kill marks on their jets

The practice of noting enemy kills on navy ships and aircraft dates back to world war ii..

Troops at 14 bases to begin testing new approach to military moves

Troops at 14 installations will soon try out a new system for shipping their belongings to their next base..

No snakes in couches: What to know for a smooth PCS move in 2024

Read up on tips and tricks in military times' 2024 permanent change of station guide ahead of peak moving season..

US military plans for Gaza unchanged after killing of aid workers

Pentagon officials mourned seven aid workers in gaza killed by an israeli air strike but said they will move ahead with u.s. military aid in the region..

New materials launched for Every Sailor is a Recruiter program

The service is looking to have sailors in the fleet help alleviate an historic recruiting shortfall..

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The Two-State Solution Is an Unjust, Impossible Fantasy

By Tareq Baconi

Mr. Baconi is the author of “Hamas Contained” and the president of the board of al-Shabaka, the Palestinian Policy Network.

After 176 days, Israel’s assault on Gaza has not stopped and has expanded into what Human Rights Watch has declared to be a policy of starvation as a weapon of war. More than 32,000 Palestinians have been killed, and the international community has reverted to a deeply familiar call for a two-state solution, under which Palestinians and Israelis can coexist in peace and security. President Biden even declared “the only real solution is a two-state solution” in his State of the Union address last month.

But the call rings hollow. The language that surrounds a two-state solution has lost all meaning. Over the years, I’ve encountered many Western diplomats who privately roll their eyes at the prospect of two states — given Israel’s staunch opposition to it, the lack of interest in the West in exerting enough pressure on Israel to change its behavior and Palestinian political ossification — even as their politicians repeat the phrase ad nauseam. Yet in the shadow of what the International Court of Justice has said could plausibly be genocide, everyone has returned to the chorus line, stressing that the gravity of the situation means that this time will be different.

It will not be. Repeating the two-state solution mantra has allowed policymakers to avoid confronting the reality that partition is unattainable in the case of Israel and Palestine, and illegitimate as an arrangement originally imposed on Palestinians without their consent in 1947. And fundamentally, the concept of the two-state solution has evolved to become a central pillar of sustaining Palestinian subjugation and Israeli impunity. The idea of two states as a pathway to justice has in and of itself normalized the daily violence meted out against Palestinians by Israel’s regime of apartheid.

The circumstances facing Palestinians before Oct. 7, 2023, exemplified how deadly the status quo had become. In 2022, Israeli violence killed at least 34 Palestinian children in the West Bank, the most in 15 years, and by mid-2023, that rate was on track to exceed those levels. Yet the Biden administration still saw fit to further legitimize Israel, expanding its diplomatic relations in the region and rewarding it with a U.S. visa waiver . Palestine was largely absent from the international agenda until Israeli Jews were killed on Oct. 7. The fact that Israel and its allies were ill prepared for any kind of challenge to Israeli rule underscores just how invisible the Palestinians were and how sustainable their oppression was deemed to be on the global stage.

This moment of historical rupture offers blood-soaked proof that policies to date have failed, yet countries seek to resurrect them all the same. Instead of taking measures showing a genuine commitment to peace — like meaningfully pressuring Israel to end settlement building and lift the blockade on Gaza or discontinuing America’s expansive military support — Washington is doing the opposite. The United States has aggressively wielded its use of its veto at the United Nations Security Council, and even when it abstains, as it did in the recent vote leading to the first resolution for a cease-fire since Oct. 7, it claims such resolutions are nonbinding. The United States is funding Israel’s military while defunding the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, a critical institution for Palestinians, bolstering the deeply unpopular and illegitimate Palestinian Authority, which many Palestinians now consider to be a subcontractor to the occupation, and subverting international law by limiting avenues of accountability for Israel. In effect, these actions safeguard Israeli impunity.

The vacuity of the two-state solution mantra is most obvious in how often policymakers speak of recognizing a Palestinian state without discussing an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory. Quite the contrary: With the United States reportedly exploring initiatives to recognize Palestinian statehood, it is simultaneously defending Israel’s prolonged occupation at the International Court of Justice, arguing that Israel faces “very real security needs” that justify its continued control over Palestinian territories.

What might explain this seeming contradiction?

The concept of partition has long been used as a blunt policy tool by colonial powers to manage the affairs of their colonies, and Palestine was no exception. The Zionist movement emerged within the era of European colonialism and was given its most important imprimatur by the British Empire. The Balfour Declaration, issued by the British in 1917, called for a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine without adequately accounting for the Palestinians who constituted a vast majority in the region and whom Balfour referred to simply as “non-Jewish communities.” This declaration was then imposed on the Palestinians, who by 1922 had become Britain’s colonized subjects and were not asked to give consent to the partitioning of their homeland. Three decades later, the United Nations institutionalized partition with the passage of the 1947 plan, which called for partitioning Palestine into two independent states, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish.

All of Palestine’s neighboring countries in the Middle East and North Africa that had achieved independence from their colonial rulers and joined the U.N. voted against the 1947 plan. The Palestinians were not formally considered in a vote that many saw as illegitimate; it partitioned their homeland to accommodate Zionist immigration, which they had resisted from the onset. The Palestine Liberation Organization, established more than a decade later, formalized this opposition, insisting that Palestine as defined within the boundaries that existed during the British Mandate was “an indivisible territorial unit”; it forcefully refused two states and by the late 1970s was fighting for a secular, democratic state. By the 1980s, however, the P.L.O. chairman, Yasir Arafat, along with most of the organization’s leadership, had come to accept that partition was the pragmatic choice, and many Palestinians who had by then been ground down by the machinery of the occupation accepted it as a way of achieving separateness from Israeli settlers and the creation of their own state.

It took more than three decades for Palestinians to understand that separateness would never come, that the goal of this policy was to maintain the illusion of partition in some distant future indefinitely. In that twilight zone, Israel’s expansionist violence increased and became more forthright, as Israeli leaders became more brazen in their commitment to full control from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Israel also relied on discredited Palestinian leaders to sustain their control — primarily those who lead the Palestinian Authority and who collaborate with Israel’s machinations and make do with nonsovereign, noncontiguous Bantustans who never challenge Israel’s overarching domination. This kind of demographic engineering, which entails geographic isolation of unwanted populations behind walls, is central to apartheid regimes. Repeating the aspiration for two states and arguing that partition remains viable presents Israel as a Jewish and democratic state — separate from its occupation — giving it a veneer of palatability and obfuscating the reality that it rules over more non-Jews than Jews .

Seen in this light, the failed attempts at a two-state solution are not a failure for Israel at all but a resounding success, as they have fortified Israel’s grip over this territory while peace negotiations ebbed and flowed but never concluded. In recent years, international and Israeli human rights organizations have acknowledged what many Palestinians have long argued: that Israel is a perpetrator of apartheid. B’Tselem, Israel’s leading human rights organization, concluded that Israel is a singular regime of Jewish supremacy from the river to the sea.

Now, with international attention once again focused on the region, many Palestinians understand the dangers of discussing partition, even as a pragmatic option. Many refuse to resuscitate this hollowed-out policy-speak. In a message recently published anonymously, a group of Palestinians on the ground and in the diaspora state wrote, “The partition of Palestine is nothing but a legitimation of Zionism, a betrayal of our people and the final completion of the nakba,” or catastrophe, which refers to the expulsion and flight of about 750,000 Palestinians with Israel’s founding. “Our liberation can only be achieved through a unity of struggle, built upon a unity of people and a unity of land.”

For them, the Palestinian state that their inept leaders continue to peddle, even if achievable, would fail to undo the fact that Palestinian refugees are unable to return to their homes, now in Israel, and that Palestinian citizens of Israel would continue to reside as second-class citizens within a so-called Jewish state.

Global powers might choose to ignore this sentiment as unrealistic, if they even take note of it. They might also choose to ignore Israeli rejection of a two-state solution, as Israeli leaders drop any pretenses and explicitly oppose any pathway to Palestinian statehood. As recently as January, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River.” He added: “That collides with the idea of sovereignty. What can we do?”

And yet the two-state solution continues to be at the forefront for policymakers who have returned to contorting the reality of an expansionist regime into a policy prescription they can hold on to. They cycle through provisions that the Palestinian state must be demilitarized, that Israel will maintain security oversight, that not every state in the world has the same level of sovereignty. It is like watching a century of failure, culminating in the train wreck of the peace process, replay itself in the span of the past five months.

This will not be the first time that Palestinian demands are not taken into account as far as their own future is concerned. But all policymakers should heed the lesson of Oct. 7: There will be neither peace nor justice while Palestinians are subjugated behind walls and under Israeli domination.

A single state from the river to the sea might appear unrealistic or fantastical or a recipe for further bloodshed. But it is the only state that exists in the real world — not in the fantasies of policymakers. The question, then, is: How can it be transformed into one that is just?

Source photographs by Jose A. Bernat Bacete, Daily Herald Archive and Lior Mizrahi, via Getty Images.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .