In a recent article about a youtuber named Felix Kjellberg (also known as Pewdiepie), I came across this sentence:

In Kjellberg's most recent edition of Pew News, a semi-satirical series where Kjellberg offers his own take on news events [...], he dedicates [...]

The very close repetition of the name really surprised me, I'm 100% sure if I did that in an essay in my native language I would get a remark from my teacher. The writer could have easily avoided it by using he the second tim. Repeating a pronoun is really not as bad.

Does it look normal to you? Is it a thing related to journalism writing style maybe?

Another thing to note is that in the whole article, Pewdiepie is never referred to as something else than "Kjellberg", except when the writer is quoting someone else. Not even "Felix", or "the youtuber", just "Kjellberg".

Is it common practice or lazy writing?

(I don't want to link the article but it's easy to find)

3 Answers 3


It's lazy, but safe writing. It may be weak stylistically, but if you have a bunch of subjects (Kjellberg, edition, Pew News, series), especially when used some distance from the chosen subject, the repeated name unambiguously points out the reference. In this case 'he' would be clear, as there's no different person to be referred to, but it may be just a habit - imagine In Kjellberg's most recent edition of Trump News, a semi-satirical series where he offers his own take on news events would be completely ambiguous. Even in this case readers not familiar with the channel might wonder "who is Pew?" - and if you start using replacements like "Felix" or "the youtuber" you confuse the readers completely. "What youtuber?" "Who's Felix?" Only later they'd find out, "Oh, Felix is Kjellberg's first name, and he's the youtuber!"

In this case clarity takes priority over stylistic rules about repetition, and even if not strictly necessary in certain cases, the repetition may be used habitually, as typical to situations with many subjects.


I agree with the answer by @SF.

There is an more elegant solution for this particular sentence:

In his most recent edition of Pew News, a semi-satirical series offering his own take on news events, Kjellberg dedicates ...

Note that readers will not be certain who 'his' is referring to for some time, but because the subjective case (*) pronoun, 'his', is used, all ambiguity is resolved once the subject of the main sentence, 'Kjellberg', is eventually mentioned.

(*) I since have realised 'his' is not the "subjective case", but I think, the "genetive (or possessive) case". The point I was trying to make is still valid though. 'His' is unambiguously referring forward to the subject of the main sentence.

But as @SF says. This is a matter of style and there is no grammatical problem in the original sentence.


There's nothing ungrammatical about it. The challenge the author faces is that he or she wants to say what Pew News is and in the same breath talk about its most recent issue.

There are a number of ways to address that challenge, one of which would be to say what Pew News is and then in a new sentence talk about what Kjellberg does in the most recent issue.

Kjellberg publishes Pew News, a semi-satirical series in which he offers his own take on current events. In the most recent edition he ...

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .