• MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    3 hours ago

    I get it, but there’s legitimate journalism code/jargon to slammed and castrated and all those words they like to use. It tells you the severity, extent, and ultimate uselessness of their actions. It is a dialect of its own.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    9·
    7 hours ago

    I hate the “maybe news”.

    “New laws may mean the end of the Salmon industry”

    “New findings may mean the end of arterial sclerosis”

    “Peace talks in Iran could end inflation for good”

    Then reading people in the comments arguing about why something will or won’t happen… When it’s all just hypothetical. I don’t think hypotheticals are news.

    • Aniki@feddit.orgOP
      1·
      6 hours ago

      ugh yeah the “maybe news” are annoying. i mean, it’s good that reporters report about things before they happen, i.e. new laws that parlament could pass, because otherwise people might get outraged against the law after it had passed, at which point it is useless. because it can’t be changed anymore.

      but what i do hate is when newspapers refuse to give actual numbers or any sort of clarity. such as this chemical may increase your [disease] risk and then you look it up (have to search for an actual scientific publication) and the risk increase is by 0.000001% percent … so, pretty much useless. could be a measurement error. but then they leave out any reporting on actually big things, such as tax laws. which could benefit millions of people quite substantially. i feel like it’s all a distraction scheme to keep people occupied with insignificant/unimportant things. to distract from economic literacy, because that requires an actual understanding of scale and proportionality and numbers.

  • lime!@feddit.nu
    20·
    11 hours ago

    local comic artist SLAMS “slamming”! end for beloved journo cheapout?

    • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldMEnglish
      8·
      11 hours ago

      I’m not even sure it’s (usually) editorializing as much as it is looking for a word that strongly conveys “lambasting” or “deriding” but is a) at least somewhat neutral, b) understandable to most audiences, and c) not overly informal.

      “Slam” doesn’t imply some kind of bias toward one party; it literally just means “To speak badly of; to criticize forcefully.” Arguably the reason you’re more likely to see it in editorializing isn’t because it’s an editorializing word but because “someone said some mean-ass shit” as a class of story is ripe for (but not inherently) editorializing.

      “Slams” has the benefit of being very short over something like “strongly criticizes”, and something like “attacks” could be more easily misconstrued as “physical assaults”. Like it’s kind of just the ideal word for this even though it’s goofy if you’re like me and imagine them body slamming the other party.

      (Edit: Replied to wrong comment at first. Also, I see now you were responding to the scenario in the comic, not the use of “slams” generally.)

      • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.world
        5·
        10 hours ago

        I also wouldn’t attribute language like “slams” as a bias to one party, but it’s often used in a sensationalized way like in the comic. To me, it immediately brings to mind TMZ trying to start drama and farm clicks.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    10·
    10 hours ago

    This happens all the bloody time in science. It’s like every headline is some click bait title that goes like:

    SCIENTISTS COMPLETELY BAFFLED BY SOMETHING THAT ISN’T POSSIBLE

    THIS BASIC THEORY COMPLETELY DESTROYED BY LATEST FINDINGS

    SCIENTISTS CLUELESS AS LONG STANDING MODEL GETS UTTERLY UPTURNED

  • Valsa@mander.xyz
    3·
    9 hours ago

    The word ‘quietly’ seems to be in every other headline lately, it really bugs me.

    Government / company x quietly does y.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    2·
    8 hours ago

    Seems to me language has been hit with serious devaluation, and we now have runaway inflation.