This is defined as

quote:

A hackneyed style of writing supposedly characteristic of that in newspapers and magazines

There are several words, that, while perfectly good English, are almost always used by journalists in that particular way, generally in headlines. Very often almost nobody else will use the word that way.

Here are a few that come to mind; note that this is for British publications - American ones will often have their own examples, I'm sure.

Boffin
A condescending term for a scientist, inventor or researcher, or any 'back-room boy' or academic. It was WWII slang but no-one uses it nowadays apart from journalists and possibly a few 90-year-olds. Example: Cure for cancer found, say boffins
Expert
Rather similar to boffin, but not condescending, this is often used when the writer couldn't be bothered to give a proper source. Unlike 'real life' an 'expert' needn't be a real expert; the journo won't bother to check credentials anyway. Example: Cure for cancer found, say experts
Rage (verb)
Used to mean 'to disagree'. The extent of the raging varies from a mild disagreement to a vituperative attack but the same word is used for all. Usually you can't tell (at least from the headline) whereabouts on the rage range it falls. Example: Football manager rages at referee about penalty

There are plenty more; has anybody else got any further examples?

This is a fascinating subject. I wrote down a few of my own "favorites", and then went exploring on the internet to add to them. The following are some of my own, but the majority of them (including the first four) were taken from the book Journalese, by Paul Dickson and Robert Skole (I found a website advertising the book - I may buy it!): ...

"Age-related": Adjective applied to accidents or incidents involving either teenagers or old people.

"Cushy": Adjective applied to a [public] job that pays better than the reporter's.

"Near miss": synonym for "near hit", usually, but not always, in reference to an aircraft-related occurrence.

"Simpler times": "Fifteen years before the writer was born".

"Coffers": unspecified place where [vaguely illicit] money is kept

"War-torn": an area where war has been and where foreign correspondents still hang out.

"Famed": as a synonym for "famous".

"Appears": (also "seems") having no evidence to support, but we don't want that to get in the way of the story.

"Alleged": a word inserted into a potentially damaging accusation to prevent lawsuits.

"Cowardly": fundamental characteristic of any wrong-doer, particularly a "terrorist" (another example of journalese).

"As first reported": means we got scooped by some other news source.

"Reportedly": ?? "somebody thinks"; otherwise, altogether meaningless

"Scattered reports": similar to preceding.

"Active crime scene": police are on scene.

"Of no fixed address": adjective to mean "homeless".

"Activist": Someone who voices an opinion in public. One jocose explanation offered by Charlie Eckhardt, a contributor to the book Journalese: "Someone with a machine gun who espouses a cause we agree with". If we don't agree with the cause, then he is a "terrorist".

"Adamant": "Pig-headed" when applied to someone on a side of an issue we don't agree with; otherwise "[strongly] principled". Example headline from Chicago Tribune, 2 Jul 1995: "Adamant abortion foes look for a candidate". (headline quoted by Journalese)

"Known to police": adjective to describe a putative habitual law breaker not currently in jail.

"Admits": as a synonym for "says" or "states".

This message has been edited. Last edited by: WeeWilly,

The following is quoted from the source Wayne R. Whitaker et al. Mediawriting: Print, Broadcast, and Public Relations. Taylor & Francis, 2009. It is a rather nice description of Journalese:

quote:

In the language of journalese, temperatures soar. Costs skyrocket. Fires rage and rivers rampage . Projects are kicked off. Opponents weigh in. Buildings are slated for demolition or perhaps they are tagged. In journalese, people get a go-ahead and projects get a green light.

The point is that this stilted journalistic language is every bit as addictive to recognize, to manufacture and to identify as Tom Swifties are.

Excellent thread. I can't say that I've heard of "boffin," arnie. WeeWilly, we use "near miss" in medicine a lot; it is related to an error that almost was made, but it was caught in time or by luck it didn't happen.

A word used in one of the examples given by WeeWilly: Foe.
It's almost never used nowadays apart from journalese.

quote:

Foe.It's almost never used nowadays apart from journalese.

One, two, three, foe, fie,.....

Journalese, as defined by the OED Online:

quote:

colloq.
The style of language supposed to be characteristic of public journals; ‘newspaper’ or ‘penny-a-liner's’ English.

I had never heard "penny-a-liner" before, so I looked it up:

quote:

person, esp. a journalist, who practises penny-a-line writing; a writer of material of low literary quality

Wikipedia, as usual, has an article on this.

quote:

Examples

• "The governor Thursday announced ..." (date used as adverb)
  
• "The Nov. 22, 1963, assassination of John F. Kennedy ..." (date used as adjective)
  
• "Mean streets and densely wooded areas populated by ever-present lone gunmen ..."
  
• "Negotiators yesterday, in an eleventh-hour decision following marathon talks, hammered out agreement on a key wage provision they earlier had rejected." (multiple mixed metaphors)
  
• See "a bus plunged into a gorge" for a common type of gap-filler article.
  
• "Calls this morning for tighter restrictions on the sale of alcohol to immigrants."
  
• "Whoosh … whoosh … whoosh … ka-boooom. That’s the way it was at Wanganui's Cooks Gardens, for about 15 minutes on Saturday night." (genitive of placename instead of preposition)
  
• "Rioting and mayhem ..." (this example has led to popular misunderstanding causing the word "mayhem" to change its main meaning.)
  
• "Attack" to mean "criticise", because it typesets into less space in headlines. This may cause ambiguity if a physical or military attack is possible between the parties named. "Slam" is also used this way, as is, increasingly, "blast".
  
• "Foes ink pact", "Cops nab crooks after heist", "The new station is slated to open...." (rare or archaic words chosen over more commonly used words in order to save space)
  
• "The 1990s saw an increase in crime...." instead of the simpler "Crime increased in the 1990s...." (the use of "saw" to avoid using the past tense of "increase")

Altercation is another word that has changed meaning because of the media. It originally meant "The action of disputing vehemently or angrily." (OED, attested from c1405), "A heated argument or dispute; a quarrel." (OED, attested from 1410–11). Today it is often used to mean a violent confrontation.

I like the "foe", and Proofreader's take on it as well!

Tinman, you have some nice ones there, but I was puzzled by your "altercation" observations. I agree this is a journalistic favorite, but I'm not sure that I recognize any great difference between the following two meanings for it:

quote:

"The action of disputing vehemently or angrily."

... and

quote:

"a violent confrontation"

In essentials, they mean pretty-well the same, I would think.

An altercation is a noisy argument between two parties, usually angry and vehement, but not violent. A violent confrontation is a fight. Two people (or groups) shaking their fists and ranting and raging over something are having an altercation. When blows are exchanged or shots are fired, it's no longer an altercation, but a fight. But the media are not content with calling something a fight. They call it an altercation.

quote:

An altercation is a noisy argument between two parties

Judge Judy would label that a "kerfuffle." Now there's a term I haven't heard anywhere else except on her daily diatribe.

"Kerfuffle" was a word my mother liked, and, since she had three boys, there was frequent opportunity to use (NB, certainly not "utilize") it!

quote:

A violent confrontation is a fight

... Whoa, interesting notion, tinman! I rather doubt that this is even the most common use of "violent". Consider the following examples:

"I believe that truth has only one face: that of a violent contradiction." - Georges Bataille

"Tennis is a perfect combination of violent action taking place in an atmosphere of total tranquility." - Billie Jean King

"Be regular and organized in your life so that you may be violent and original in your work." - Gustave Flaubert

"The more violent the storm, the more quickly it passes." - Paulo Cuelho

"Times have not become more violent, they have become more televised." - Marilyn Manson

"Even a flower is ugly when it wilts, a bird when it seeks its prey, the ocean when it becomes violent." - Sharon Tate

"Socialism is the gradual and less violent form of communism, ..." - Vladimir Bukovsky

"His violent reaction to the medication was quite unexpected." - WeeWilly

"Jenna, for some unknown reason, took violent dislike to Keith from the outset." - WeeWilly

"Wendy's violent emotional reaction to the news left her exhausted." - WeeWilly

"There was a violent clash of opinions between the two leaders." - WeeWilly

... but do I agree that "altercation" is a pet piece of journalese.

Well, my definition may be poor, but by violence I meant physical violence resulting in harm to one or both of the parties. An altercation is just words, not physical violence.

There is something to be said in defense of some journalese.

I've been thinking about "altercation". As I see it, "fight", "dispute", "yelling at one another", "noisy clash of opinions", etc, are all "altercations", or more particularly, subsets of the term "altercation". Hence "altercation" is a general term to cover, without further characterization - that might be open to dispute - all noisy or contentious exchanges between parties.

Journalese - similar to the curious stilted jargon of the police report - tends to lean to these general terms as a way of steering clear of unwanted trouble or controversy that might arise out of being more specific. Hence, "male" rather than "man" - to convey gender while obviating any difficulties around the age of the party in question (is a 14-year-old a "man"?); "vehicle" rather than "car" - to avoid complications about the nature of the object in question (pick-up, motorcycle, sedan, coupe, SUV, tractor, etc?); "approach" rather than "walk" - to avoid dwelling on the nature of the approach (on foot, run, walk, crawl, sidle, etc?); and so on. This provides context to something I witnessed long ago: a policeman's giving the following oddly stilted testimony in court:

"So I approached the vehicle to discover whether there were any persons within."

So, if the idea is to focus on the story - while avoiding the complications that can arise from fresh, original phraseology - using well-worn and well-understood journalese fills the bill rather well!

Opinions?

Arnie, I have also been thinking about "boffin". This is a term that Rupert Bear might use! I think I take issue with your inferring a "condescending" aspect from it. I see it as bearing affectionate or endearing overtones, rather than anything condescending. It is that endearing aura about it that is missing in the term "expert". So, I am on your wavelength in seeing "expert" as being the more neutral term.

quote:

I see it as bearing affectionate or endearing overtones, rather than anything condescending.

I really see it as both. There are some times when an affectionate phrase is not really the right thing to use. In those circumstances it is condescening, in the same way as talking as if to a child would be.

I certainly can't disagree, Arnie. I also suspect that some of the safe generality (per my previous post on that aspect of journalese) is lurking around to motivate using "boffin"! It is a little softer and more general than "expert".

quote:

Judge Judy would label that a "kerfuffle."

I love the word "kerfuffle" and hear it not real often, but often enough.

WeeWilly, related to the Sharon Tate quote above: While realizing beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, I think a violent ocean is beautiful.

quote:

I think a violent ocean is beautiful.

... so do I - and probably so do many more of us - but her diction was flawless, whatever her sentiments!

Bad Journalese:

quote:

Police charged John Smith with allegedly robbing the bank at Leslie and Cummer this morning, after it was held up on Dec 13.

... that was the report I heard just now on 680 Radio News. The punctuation is my own best attempt to fit the report.

This is an execrable piece of reporting because it is execrable diction. It is flatly wrong, it is ambiguous, and/or it is internally inconsistent. The offenses it commits are as follows:

• in fact no-one was charged with "alleged robbery", because alleged robbery isn't a crime.
  
• The report says that the robbery took place this morning, with John Smith named as the perpetrator.
  
• Maybe: The report introduces another hold-up that occurred on Dec 13, but it mentions no perpetrator, alleged or not, for that hold-up. Moreover, there is no explanation how this relates to the more recent robbery that took place this morning.
  
• Maybe: The hold-up referenced in the second part of the sentence is the "robbery" that took place this morning, but why, then, flatly contradict the stated time it occurred?
  

BTW, to the best of my memory the report actually stated "... after it was allegedly held up on Dec...", but there were already enough language offenses here to make a good story.

Of course, we know what the report means, but that is as much a comment on our - the audience's - perspicacity and willingness to co-operate in sorting our way through the mess that is this report! That willingness has much to do with our essential disinterest, or neutrality, with the story.

Aside: Note that, in business, that neutrality - and willingness to make allowances - is often totally absent in communications between service supplier and service user. In fact, in this latter instance the interests involved may even be actively combative or malevolent, with one side eagerly seeking opportunity to misunderstand the other, if doing so will confer an advantage ... and there is abundant professional help available to assist one in developing and exploiting such "beneficial misunderstanding"! I mention this because it is a significant part of what motivates me to be involved in a forum like this, as I have a direct and long experience with these issues.

Anyway, better diction for the report might be as follows:

quote:

This morning police charged John Smith with robbery, alleging he held up the bank at Leslie and Cummer on Dec 13.

...Can anyone better this by making it clearer or more succinct, without losing anything?

I believe that news broadcasters and newspapers are the last de facto custodians of our language in that they, by default, offer the only potential place for us all to regularly hear and see language used properly, and to learn from it. Movie and documentaries, TV, sports people (from reporters to color commentators), parents, and schools, particularly here in NA, have long ago all been claimed by the dark side, and must be counted as being beyond succor!

That is a good point about being charged with "allegedly robbing." I don't think I've read that before, but I am going to watch for it.

WW is dead right - news media are no longer the custodians of "proper" grammar. Sometimes it's a source of great entertainment, but not of ungarbled information.

It depends on the medium, in my humble opinion. I still have a fair respect of the media, just not the outliers.

I saw a report in my paper that was headlined

SCHOOL ORDERS HIV TESTS ON STUDENTS

According to the article itself, a couple of kids got hold of some of one of their diabetic peers' disposable needles used for insulin self-injection and proceeded to prick some of their classmates with them. As a precaution, the school arranged for blood tests to be carried out on those affected. No mention of HIV or any other disease or condition was made at all.

Yes, but I imagine those tests were conducted.

No doubt. But why put HIV in the headline?

quote:

SCHOOL ORDERS DIABETIC TESTS ON STUDENTS

Would you bother reading that article based on that headline?

How about, "SCHOOL AUTHORITIES ALARMED BY UNAUTHORIZED STUDENT PRICKS?"

quote:

But why put HIV in the headline?

You know the saying: Dog bites man - not a good story. However, man bites dog? Now that's a story!

Not quite "journalese" but "advertising errors". link

Shu reminded me of this newspaper saying, "If it bleeds, it leads."