Halibut Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 Perhaps so- I was not expressing a view either way but trying to probe the subtext of journalists' reportage. For instance, today's "Times" let slip that one of them had been planning a Civil Partnership ceremony. Why was that at all relevant? The paper would probably say they're satisfying legitimate demand for the 'human interest/backgroundinformation/giving the victims a human face' angle on the story. The next issue of Private Eye may be worth a look at in regard to this story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Oh come on Mr Shaw you're never that naive. As I said, it was irrelevant to their deaths. This thread is an exploration of the wording used in reporting the sad events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upperthorpe Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Perhaps so- I was not expressing a view either way but trying to probe the subtext of journalists' reportage. For instance, today's "Times" let slip that one of them had been planning a Civil Partnership ceremony. Why was that at all relevant? Its clearly an attempt to make the public feel they know her to some degree. This way they are more likely to buy the next edition of the paper so they can read some more personal and irrelevant gossip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 The paper would probably say they're satisfying legitimate demand for the 'human interest/backgroundinformation/giving the victims a human face' angle on the story. No, that's a disingenuous standpoint. How is it relevant to the news item, a killing, and can people not bear in mind a point that I often make- the distinction between: a. in the public interest; and b. of interest to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 No, that's a disingenuous standpoint. How is it relevant to the news item, a killing, and can people not bear in mind a point that I often make- the distinction between: a. in the public interest; and b. of interest to the public. I agree with Halibut. It brings a sense of humanity to the continuation of the story so far. It's relevency to the killing is in itself irrelevent, it keeps interest going and invites readers to discover something of the people that died otherwise it's clinical and empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 "They gave their lives" is and only ever has been a figure of speech. It is nonsense to see it as anything other than that and create a non-thread accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 "They gave their lives" is and only ever has been a figure of speech. It is nonsense to see it as anything other than that and create a non-thread accordingly. Language and its usage are really very important. I know that's a view you neither share nor understand. Such is life. Perhaps you could find another thread to be uncomprehending of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Stolen definitely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alteredgemed Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Language is being manipulated in all walks of life, NLP is rife everywhere we look, I noticed the other day whilst visiting a friend in hospital that the screen on his tv gizmo that said 'you are enjoying channel 5', clear NLP. There is of course the use of softer words like 'conflict' instead of 'war' and the one that really grinds my gears 'heroes' for the young men and women who are killed in Afghanistan when clearly unless they did something heroic they are 'victims'. Problem is the general public are not bright enough to notice they are being manipulated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Language and its usage are really very important. I know that's a view you neither share nor understand. Such is life. Perhaps you could find another thread to uncomprehending of? I have done my best to correct the nonsense here , but it is obvious that pork cannot be educated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.