May 6, 2008
The New Media Lingo (Ronald Goldfarb)
The ongoing political campaign has been a boon to the media, especially the cable punditry. One interesting feature of its current coverage is the new lingo I’ve noticed seeping into the commentary. These are some of my favorite clichés.
“Throw him under the bus …” This one is used by all the commentators in questioning why Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) did not divorce himself sooner from the provocative rhetoric of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Not only should the senator have criticized his former pastor, he should have “thrown him under the bus.” What’s that supposed to mean? A metaphor, no doubt, but surely not what the picture connotes.
“At the end of the day …” This is how pundits sum up. Not “considering all these points, I conclude …” or something like that. It is invariably, “At the end of the day …” Since the political vicissitudes change daily, why use this inapt reference? At the end of the day comes tomorrow.
Another, similar time-related cliché, arises when the punditry pauses for a commercial break. “At the other end of this break …” the audience is told, they will be returned to the conversation about to be interrupted.
Regular references to news clips is a device commentators use to open a discussion. “Let’s give a look …” is the lead-in commonly used. Not “here is his or her remark” or “here is what Sen. So-and-So said; let’s listen and comment.” How exactly does one “give a look”? Why not take a look? Is this just the give and take of media commentary?
And while we’re on the subject of looking, have you noticed how the pundits regularly begin their answers to all questions? “Look …” they start, and then go. Not “Listen”; always, “Look …”
The sister of “Let’s give a look …” is “Let’s take a listen …” How does one take a listen? Where did this phrase come from? How do we get rid of it?
When the in-studio host goes to the field reporter with an opening remark or question, the answer invariably starts with, “Absolutely …” Thus, the questioners are confirmed in their lead-in remarks, as the “on the ground” (another cliché) reporter seems to add nothing new.
And how in this time of political correctness, when every panel has a combination of men and women, do the show hosts get away with, “Thanks, guys” when bidding farewell to a panel of men and women — and sometimes all women? Saying “Thanks, guys” to a panel of women seems silly.
We can’t blame the media for all the tortured language. The pols, too, have added their eyebrow-raising phrases, like the character who praised Hillary Clinton for her “testicular fortitude.” I’m staying away from that one. Look, it should be thrown under the bus at the end of the day, absolutely! So long, guys.
6 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
“Throw him under the bus …” originated with Obama calling his grandma a "typical white person", except of course it was "her", not "him". As soon as Obama announced his press conference to distance himself from Wright, the "bus" metaphor re-arose spontaneously from multiple sources, mostly on the net and strangely has become the most common way to refer to Obama's treatment of Wright as if some order went out to do it.
Comment by Igor R. — May 6, 2008 @ 1:35 pm
Ah my favorite Media Lingo phrase is…
"Some people say" and then they go on to talk about some rumor they heard someone say.
Real journalism, huh?
Comment by tinat — May 6, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Obama himself may have started the metaphors when he accused Bush of "driving the country into a ditch." The statements are usually simple to understand, and Obama has thrown several people under the bus. I think everyone understands that, except for those who live to be purposely obtuse. In that case those types of individuals have driven their brains into a ditch or thrown their brains under a bus. Your choice.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 6, 2008 @ 3:37 pm
'I think everyone understands that, except for those who live to be purposely obtuse.'
I like that line: 'who live to be….
But what brains?
Comment by james d granata — May 6, 2008 @ 6:18 pm
Journalism RIP. http://acropolisreview.com/2008/04/stephen-colbert-on-media-vs-facts-truth.html
Comment by Jake — May 6, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
Well Ron, as of Tuesday night, I don't think the media has a lingo any longer. The had put Hillary up to the inevitable candidate status only to be shot down. This country is about the american people and their contributions to make this a great country, not about the Clintons. Every time Obama won something(by way of people voting for him) She tried to drown out their voices and the media helped her do it. But look what happened. It wasn't just a blow the Hillary, it wasa blow to the main streamed media and americans aren't taking it anymore.
Comment by Yvonne — May 7, 2008 @ 9:55 am