I’m not one of those guys who writes letters to national newspapers complaining about the literacy of the nation. I have a life and there are more important issues. But as a long-time systematic news chaser on terrorist incidents I monitor pretty closely news reports on terrorism fairly constantly. Frankly I’m astounded how sloppy and idle some journalists can be when reporting on terrorism and incidents associated with it. Two short examples to illustrate my point.
1. Bombs or explosions ” rip through ” things. Always. If you google “bomb” or “explosion” and “rip through”, you’ll get a million results. Surely the english language has more ways than that of describing the effects of an explosion. Yesterday there was an explosion in a Minsk metro station. 8,840 news sites describe the explosion as “ripping through” the metro station. I think journalists just operate on autopilot sometimes.
2. Bombs are frequently reported as being “diffused”. Not defused, or even defuzed. But diffused. Really. Come on guys, sort your language out. Did the bomb just fade away?
Mind, I saw a documentary last night about an extortioner’s bombing campaign in Dorset, UK… and the dramatic reconstruction of the bomb disposal scene included the operator holding the x-ray generator as he x rayed the IED, and also, amusingly wearing a flash proof balaclava as he drove towards Dorset in a van to deal with the device. I wonder why? It doesn’t matter, but the highly professional operator who was actually interviewed elsewhere in the program will be (incorrectly) blamed for the inaccuracy and its going to cost him lots of beers. I won’t say which EOD equipment company provided the hardware for the shoot!
Journalists… Hah!