Originally published at: "Lives found ended": Washington Post unveils mangled new euphemism to avoid naming the dead or the ender | Boing Boing
…
Their new headline is better; the story is still heartbreaking/infuriating
The headline is (or was, I guess) bad, but honestly, I don’t give a fucking shit about the headline. The story is more important, and the story is horrific.
:: nods ::
The headline should have read “four infants murdered by illegal assault on hospital”.
There’s a reason why it’s a war crime, and that is one of them.
I see so many examples of double speak headlines now a days from “mainstream media” it really is confusing to me why they got into journalism. Did you want to report on the facts and the stories, or produce mealy mouthed garbage headlines that obfuscate the truth?
I hate this timeline.
“In other news, the US promised to deliver an additional package of state-of-the-art life-ending equipment to ally Israel …”
Ugh, this timeline. Few things have depressed and dispirited me more in the last couple of years than the trend of using the horrifically dystopian word “unalive” instead of “dead,” or worse, replacing “killed” with “unalived.” It’s bone-chilling, IMO. Speak plainly and openly, especially if that’s your job.
“Four babies found dead in Gaza hospital.” How difficult is that?
The passive voice is a big part of the problem here and that’s still the passive voice.
Using a passive voice when what is needed is a pacifist voice.
It reminds me of that absolute classic Red Dwarf Episode, Back to Reality s5e6
COP: Forgive me.
SEBASTIAN: You know me?
COP: Of course, Voter Colonel.
SEBASTIAN: Who am I?
COP: You… are… Colonel Sebastian Doyle. Section chief of CGI. Head
of the Ministry of Alteration.
SEBASTIAN: Remind me a little. What do we do at the “Ministry of
Alteration?”
COP: You… change people, sir.
SEBASTIAN: In what way?
COP: You change them from being alive people, to being dead people.
To purify democracy.
I am a writer and an empath, and everything about this makes my head explode.
Everyone pointing out how wretched this fucking timeline is is so very right.
It’s content to which ads can be appended.
The other day, I read this-- link was in a Libraries subreddit
it’s garbage writing, and instead of telling me why I should care, it does the opposite.
Reporters report, and some editor has to decide how to headline it, or whether to allow it at all. In high pressure situations, as any reporting on something this politically radioactive, you can sometimes see the seams showing on that decision loop.
As noted by others, the revision is clearer and better.
Ok. Why are you replying to me with that? I literally said I care about the story, not the headline.
Was attempting to agree with you: good reporting, bad packaging.
That was definitely not clear, but thank you for clarifying.
“They” did. Of course.