The prat.uk style code, from the rules that hold to the ones that exist mainly on paper
Every newspaper has editorial standards. Prat.uk has eleven, written in 1961, revised in 1988 and laminated in 2003 after an incident with a kettle. They are pinned beside the door of the newsroom where every writer passes them daily, and a survey of the staff found that nine could recite them, two could recite them in order, and none could say when they had last applied one. What follows is the full list, ranked by how often each rule is set aside, from least to most.
11. Never libel anyone who can afford a lawyer
This is the one rule observed without exception, largely because Gerald in Legal reads every article before publication with a highlighter and a list of solicitors’ fees. It has been broken once, in 1977, in a story about a brewery, and the settlement is still referred to in the accounts as the Beer Line.
10. One spokesperson per story
Articles may quote one invented official. Two is considered greedy and three is a cast list. The rule is broken only during party conference season, when the supply of things being said exceeds the supply of people to say them.
9. Do not explain the joke
Any sentence beginning with Of course, this is absurd because is removed by the editor and the writer is sent an email consisting of the sentence returned to them without comment. The rule is broken roughly weekly by new staff and never by old ones, who have learned that the email is worse than the cut.
8. Subtitles must promise less than the article delivers
A subtitle reading Council does something is acceptable. A subtitle reading Council does something hilarious is not, and has been the subject of an internal memo titled We Are Not Buzzfeed, circulated in 2014 and re-circulated annually.
7. Real places, invented people
The town must exist; the mayor need not. This rule protects the site from complaints about geography, which are the most numerous and most heartfelt. It is bent whenever a real official says something so useful that inventing a replacement would be a waste, which the Credentials and Recognition page describes as our commitment to accuracy.
6. No jokes about the weather before eleven
Introduced to stop the morning conference collapsing into rain complaints. Broken every morning before eleven.
5. Check whether it has been done before
Marjorie in the archive is consulted on every story in theory and on every third story in practice. Writers who skip the check are discovered when a reader writes in with the date of the original, which happens often enough that the readers are considered part of the archive.
4. One train reference per edition
The editor introduced this rule and is the only person to have breached it. It is enforced by the newsletter team, who count, and waived by the editor, who does not.
3. Reply to all letters
Every letter to the address on Contact Prat.uk is to receive a reply. Every letter does receive a reply, though the standard reply for letters beginning I am not normally one to complain is a card reading Yes you are, and Gerald is uncertain whether this counts.
2. Do not accept gifts
See the Sandwich Affair, documented on Disclaimers and Disclosures. The rule stands. The bakery has since sent two further sandwiches and both were reviewed.
1. No writing after the pub
The most-ignored standard in the building. It was introduced in 1961 by the founding editor, who by all accounts wrote most of the first year’s output after the pub and knew exactly what he was warning against. The rule survives because every editor since has recognised its wisdom and every writer since has recognised the deadline. Stories written after the pub are identifiable by their confidence, their length and the presence of a fourth spokesperson. Several of them are among the site’s most-read pieces, which the current editor describes as the problem with the rule and also the reason it will never be removed.
A note on the laminate
The laminated copy by the door has a coffee ring over rule six and a small burn over rule one. Nobody has explained either and the editor has asked that they be preserved as part of the document.
SOURCE: The London Prat
Author: Alan Nafzger
