|
Keeping it fair,
keeping it clean
|
Loaded words, coarse
language and imprecise descriptions
can slant the news and misinform or offend readers.
|
|
| Melissa McCoy said that seemingly innocuous words and phrases that crop up all
the time can be troublesome. (Photo by Michelle Brandon) |
|
By Michelle Brandon
How
many times has this happened to you? A story you’re editing contains loaded language
or vulgar phrases, and you want to change it. The reporter or assigning editor accuses
you of being "politically correct."
So, first, you groan, because you know this is going to be a long discussion. But
what else do you do?
Take the advice of Melissa McCoy, assistant managing editor/copy desks at the Los
Angeles Times: If someone pushes you, push back.
“I think when people use that phrase, usually they’re accusing us, or you, of being
a good editor,” she said. “ ‘Politically correct’ is just a lazy way of trying to
accuse you of tinkering with their prose.”
McCoy presided over a lively discussion about coarse or imprecise language and how
to address it.
Coarse language and profanity
“These are words and phrases that should start to set off alarm bells with us,”
McCoy said.
| ''FIGHTING WORDS: SENSITIVE ISSUES WITH LANGUAGE,'' presented by Melissa McCoy,
Los Angeles Times |
|
Newspapers vary on how they handle vulgarities. Some
have an outright ban; some have an list of words that require approval of top editors
before they appear in print.
Some other sections of a newspaper may have less stringent guidelines than what govern
1A.
Some newspapers are giving in on words like "sucks," acknowledging that
word now is part of common usage, in print and on TV.
But “think about what your audience is and what your paper is,” McCoy said. Are you
trying to raise the level of discourse or merely compete with television and magazines?
“If we printed everything that people tell use when we report stories, could you
imagine what the paper would look like?” McCoy said.
Yes, “everybody” may use the word “sucks,” she added, but “do you really want to
see it in a headline in your paper?”
That doesn’t mean a blanket policy banning all coarse language is best. The debate
takes on another dimension if a profanity or an ethnic slur is uttered by a politician
in a public meeting, for example.
But “if you don’t speak up, then you haven’t done your job,” McCoy said. You might
lose the argument, but “the conversation is what’s important.”
Imprecise language
“This is the most subtle and perhaps the most insidious category,” McCoy said.
Indeed, these phrases crop up all the time, seemingly innocuous. But consider:
• Social Security reform: Is it really reform, or just changes? When newspapers use
“reform,” are they endorsing a plan?
“All of us are using it, just drinking the Kool-Aid,” McCoy quipped.
Some other examples:
• Abortion clinic: Does the clinic offer an array of health services to women or
just abortions?
• Activist vs. protester
• Conceded vs. acknowledged
• Using “noted” or “pointed out”: Does that imply what’s being said is fact? Or did
the reporter merely want to use a word other than “said.”
• What do “conservative” and “liberal” mean anymore?
• Do you say “refused to comment” or “declined to comment”?
The continued use of such imprecise language in newspapers sends the wrong signal,
McCoy said, illustrating her point with an example that has found its way into a
particular ongoing court story:
“Witnesses said Jackson had sex with the boy, then 11, during a charity event.”
Eleven-year-olds don’t "have sex" with adults, she said. A better word
would be “abused” or “molested.”
Correcting such imprecise language isn’t an issue of being politically correct, McCoy
said; it’s about not providing accurate information to the reader.
Michelle Brandon is a senior copy editor at the Daily Herald in suburban Chicago
and a frequent ACES contributor. |
|
