Back when I was studying (Man, I sound old, don't I?)...
Ahem.
A fair while back, there seemed to be fairly stringent requirements on newspaper reporters regarding their language. When a crime was committed, the actions of the supposed perpetrator were to be given the presumption of innocence. So the word "alleged" was widely used, and headlines were kept fairly circumspect. It wasn't any good to have a trial tainted by potentially libellous statements which allowed a perpetrator to succesfully appeal.
I've noticed a bit of a trend lately, where the word "alleged" has been dropped in favour of inverted commas. So headlines now read Uncle "shot nephew in the back", rather than Uncle arrested on suspicion... Certainly it sounds more sensational, doesn't it?
I guess you could then say that you were just reporting what a source said, and not necessarily circumventing the required presumption of innocence. But then, how often do readers assume that the "inverted commas" means it really happened?
I know it's a small thing, but it's getting closer to gossip and further from news all the time...
No comments:
Post a Comment