9 Comments
User's avatar
Jim Bernau's avatar

Thank you very much Tom. Exposing this for what it is will help the public and policy makers focus on effective solutions.

Expand full comment
Eveline Chartier's avatar

I wholeheartedly agree with you Tom! You are hitting so many concerning topics in this article... None of them pedantic!

Expand full comment
Joe Fattorini's avatar

This is such a good article, and picks up on a nefarious development. “Alcohol” is dangerous in the same way “speed” in a car is dangerous. It’s when it’s excessive that it’s dangerous. A 5mph speed limit or total ban on driving will drive down “car” deaths. But life will be miserable

Expand full comment
Skip Bertrand's avatar

You are an unbelievably good writer.

Expand full comment
Donald Haberek's avatar

Words matter, whether on a printed page, courtroom, or government agency. It's not nit-picking, it's getting it right. Plus, all the editors and proofreaders have probably been laid off.

Expand full comment
William Shoemaker's avatar

Words do matter. That is why we say they have meanings. Misuse of words to imply something without having to be responsible for the meaning of the implication is called dishonesty. The example you've shown us is pretty clear, in my opinion. Thanks for highlighting it, and please, keep any eye on these folks.

Expand full comment
Stacie Hunt's avatar

Tom, excellent and wry writing. You've exposed how language can be twisted to serve a specific audience. We all need editors & sadly their positions are being eliminated. Did Mr. Stringer respond to you?

Proud of your efforts on behalf of our industry and language!

Expand full comment
Tom Wark's avatar

Mr. Stringer, his editor and the editor of another paper all failed to respond.

Expand full comment
Dave Baxter's avatar

You know we often disagree on the topic of changing language for sociological purposes, Tom, but when it comes to statistics, it's never pedantic to point out inaccuracies. Statistics are FACTS, usually numerical facts, and shifting the language around those numbers changes the fact entirely - it's lying, and not even just by omission, but outright allowing a statement to be false and betting no one important enough calls you on it. It's a terribly unethical human trick because if a statement can be stated for just long enough, it'll stick like a zombie idea, for decades or more, truth be damned. Please keep pointing out the outright inaccuracies/lies. I don't think anyone with an honest purpose would even claim that to be "pedantic". (Also sorry for the waaaay belated comment, I'm doing a mass catch-up on your posts!) tonight!)

Expand full comment