Doublespeak
Another geek thing about me is I think the English language is fun. I got no ear or talent for any other (believe me, I tried), so this article from the Los Angeles Times tickles and alarms me. It explains how a “liberal” use of keywords can change one’s perception of a situation, policy, or program. The danger is the dust kicked up by these obscure cliches is clouding and minimizing the importance and severity of the problems being described.
Here’s a partial list. The “old” is followed by the “new”:
“Retreating in Iraq” vs. “Redeploying”
“Enemy Combatant” vs. “Imperative Security Internee”
“Suicides by Enemy Combatant” vs. “Self-injurious Behavior Incidents”
And maybe the worst offender: the Agriculture Department replacing the word “hunger” in their reports with the phrase, “an individual-level physiological condition that may result from food insecurity.”
Crossposted at my blog at http://blog.bbkld.com
Similar Posts:
- Reno Sgt Christopher Dugger On The Faceless Enemy in Iraq
- Most Hated Men of Rock
- New Renderings of urban market and new name: West Street Market
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
The wonder and power of discourse….
George Lakoff’s more recent work has focused a lot on this phenomena. Of course, it has been the subject of many writers/thinkers over the ages as well. Not least of which is Orwell who is brought up in the article.
I wish, just for one day, whomever is responsible for the term “food insecurity” could truly experience hunger. Maybe then he or she would not deploy “politcially correct” language to patronize the less fortunate among us.
Lakoff is awesome–a great essay writer too.