Do you have a hard time deciding which of the hundreds of stories and columns that are out there are worth reading? I don't mean which do you agree with, but, rather, which to take seriously. For example, although I don't always agree with David Brooks, I usually read his columns because they are thoughtful and respectful; and, they do not insult the reader.
Half in fun but half in seriousness, I have developed a list of phrases for which--if I come across in a story or column--I stop reading immediately, because by their use the writer has forfeited all credibility. Among them are the following:
1. The phrases "politically correct" or "politically incorrect". Resorting to either of these to "prove" a point is simply lazy writing. If you have a point to make, then make the point well, don't resort to something so ill-defined and nebulous, as if it ends the argument.
2. "Al Gore invented the internet". This should require no comment. If Jay Leno wants use it in a monologue, that's cool. But if a writer wants to be taken seriously, then please....
3. "Liberal bias". Stop your whining already....
1 comment:
I would add "Ground Zero Mosque" to the list - it's not a mosque and it's not at ground zero (albeit nearby). It's just sloppy journalism to use that phrase because it is a loaded term. (Nevermind that I would not have an issue if it were a mosque and/or located at ground zero...) Every time I see this phrase in a headline, I skip the article.
Post a Comment