Journalists’ code words

During my years as a corporate spokesman, I enjoyed many a chuckle at the code words (insinuations, evasions and excuses) used by many journalists.

I was recently reminded of this topic by a Thomas Pynchon quotation that appeared in a February 1 article about famous literary “recluses” remaining after the death of J.D. Salinger:

‘Recluse’ is a codeword generated by journalists, meaning: ‘doesn’t like to talk to reporters.’

Here are my four favorite code words:

“Unclear” is code for “we couldn’t figure it out, and by press time we couldn’t find a source who could figure it out for us and who was willing to talk to us and who was politically correct.”

“Controversial” is code for “we disapprove of this fact, and so we’d like to just ignore it, but the wires and the European papers have covered it, and by press time we couldn’t find a source who could rationalize it away and who was willing to talk to us and who was politically correct.”

“Ironic” is code for “we think the result should have been different.” (Sometimes used when a government program produces the opposite of what it was ostensibly intended to produce; for example, when a poverty program increases poverty. But these kinds of results are not ironic; they would be expected by anyone who understands economics.)

“No one could have predicted [x]” is code for “neither we nor the politically correct sources we favor predicted it.” Naturally, these same journalists diligently ignore anyone who did in fact predict [x]; for example, the U.S. Government’s defeat in Vietnam, the disintegration of the Challenger, the Crash of 1987, the collapse of the USSR, 9-11, the Great Crash of 2008, and gold above $1,000 per ounce.

Yes, it is also possible to use these words and phrases accurately and honestly (and the better journalists do). For example, if a retired sea captain drowned in his bathtub, it would be accurate and honest to call that event “ironic.”

The Takeaway: Don’t emulate dishonest reporters. The habitual use of dishonest diction promotes unclear writing and moral decay.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this blog is to show and explain examples of clear and unclear writing and speech. Accordingly, I select examples for the diction they contain, not the ideas they express. I promote no political position – unless you consider clarity a political position.