A terrible beauty is born

You have to hand it to the wordsmiths at the Fair 'n' Balanced Network. When they repurpose a word, they really, really mean it.

The view at top right was on offer when I got up today; somebody didn't get the word that heds of the form "Let the N begin" are on the forbidden list, but otherwise it appears to be shutdown business as usual.

The change in attitude appears to have come in this story, which showed up (I think*) sometime around noon:

What the Obama administration is portraying as a "shutdown" of the federal government -- complete with signs posted at the entrances to government buildings, parks and monuments -- is turning out to be more of a "slimdown," as all but non-essential workers reported to their jobs Tuesday.

Read more »

Slimdown update: Both sides

There's too much slimdown news to cover in one post, but a few points are worth noting here. One is the first refer -- "Fed partial shutdown," a reminder of how hard it is to enforce language change even when your intentions are pure.

More fun, though, is the third: "Two views of the budget impasse," which provides exactly as many views as you'd expect.

Annotated 'Ask the Editor'

Today's helpful suggestion for confused readers of the Stylebook's "Ask the Editor" feature:

Q. Should we refer to the government shutdown as a "partial" government shutdown? Are they interchangeable? Is "slim down" a biased word? – from San Diego on Mon, Oct 07, 2013
A. In AP stories, partial government shutdown in initial references, thereafter shutdown. The other term doesn't seem accurate for this standoff.

A: No. "Slim down" would be two biased words, except that nobody's using it for the nouns "slimdown," "SlimFast" or "Slimghazi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Those are interchangeable with "Kenyan death stare."

Slimdown update: Personalization

In case you missed it during Syriagate last month, the pronouns are back! Here's Cal Thomas:

In his nationally televised address Tuesday night, President Obama said little that was not already known. By my count he used the words "I," "me" and "my" 30 times in his 15-minute address. He personalizes everything, but delivers little, except uncertainty in his foreign policy.
Read more »

That'll teach you, liberal media!

Well! Clearly somebody's not having any more of this "so-called 'caravan'":

As the so-called US-bound “caravan” traveling through Mexico continues to swell, some questions arise that the media will not ask. Who is funding these efforts?* How has it grown so quickly and what did the Democrats have to offer besides a bunch of cliches and bromides, and of course grandstanding?

That's Laura Ingraham, in the No. 3 spot on the Fair 'n' Balanced homepage, laying out where the liberal media go wrong with their language:

If you have been watching other networks, you have been treated to sympathetic, overwrought coverage of this invading horde, which is anything but a “caravan.” Mainstream news networks have dispatched teams of embedded reporters who are not so much covering the migrant mob as covering for it.

Nor is Ingraham the only right-wing columnist banging their rattle on the crib about the terminology. Funny, here's John Kass of the Chicago Tribune** earlier in the day:

It’s not really a “caravan,” is it?

Those thousands of desperate migrants walking across Mexico, a massive crowd that grows by the day, are intent on forcing a confrontation at the U.S. border.

This crowd can be called many things, but “caravan” isn’t one of them.

Having grown weary of Fox's coverage of the matter this past week, I was sort of holding out for "caravanserai," myself. Or maybe requiring Fox hosts to actually sing the bridge (oh, go ahead and enjoy some Ella). But the problem seems to be more that the opinionators are getting out in front of the boss, who's fine with "caravan":

Likewise the Department of Homeland Security, which Drudge seems not to be placing in scare quotes for the nonce:

... and, of course, Fox itself (Oct. 18. 19 and 22):

Indeed, although the current homepage hed says "March of Misery," Fox still manages to get "caravan" in the second graf:

HUIXTLA, Mexico – They have been walking for 15 days, some only in flip-flops or crocs. The walks have been long and excruciatingly hot.

“I feel very, bad. All my body is hurting,” said Juan Ramon Hernandez, who is part of a growing caravan in Mexico slowly making its way to the U.S. border. “I can’t stand it.”

Credit where due, now. Kudos to Fox for going down Mexico way to cover the event, but ... could that be "sympathetic, overwrought coverage" sneaking in?

As the world’s eyes remain on the migrant caravan, which has become the new rallying cry in the country’s explosive immigration debate, the members of the caravan are starting to feel the effects of the grueling journey – but they vow to march on.

“I have asked for a cream but they don't have any,” said Wendy Arrelano, another member of the caravan who sprained her ankle a few days ago. “So they just wrapped my foot.”

Looks like we got ourselves a convoy nice old-fashioned framing fight going on. Meanwhile, let's flash back in time five years and recall the gummint "slimdown."

* Even Fox seems to be temporarily shamed out of blaming Soros.
** Quoting your barber is not substantively different than quoting a Beirut taxi driver, if you're scoring along at home.

Slimdown update: Dunno. Is they?

The short answer is "no, but thanks for asking." A more specific version is "we have no idea, but none of the evidence in this story suggests that they is, and to the extent it suggests anything, they isn't."

This is actually a fairly interesting bit of news practice, in that the story's gone from the lead position (this afternoon) to oblivion -- not that it's vanished, but it's no longer findable from the home page, and it hasn't picked up a comment in four hours (comments are showing up every few seconds on the current lead story at this writing). And it's largely contradicted by the usual story Fox writes to accompany a Fox poll.

Anyway, here's the now-oblivionated "Throw the bums out? Budget deadlock portends 2014 backlash" tale:

While the House and Senate point fingers at each other over the budget impasse, new polling suggests the only thing they might accomplish is getting thrown out of office.

Hold that thought.

Read more »