« more voices | Main | KERRY, KERRY, THAT'S OUR MAN! IF HE CAN'T SCREW US, NOBODY CAN! »
So come on, tell us. Were the Kurds "killed" or were they, you know, killed?
Stupid media.
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference I take back that headline of the day award:
» A new low in scare quotes from Inoperable Terran
From the BBC, of course.... [Read More]
» Scare quote contempt from Sheila Astray's Redheaded Ramblings
Michele points out the mother of all ridiculous scare quotes. Infuriating. Ah, what a nice way to start the morning.... [Read More]
» Scare Quote of the Month from Randal Robinson
(via A Small Victory)... [Read More]
Comments
Maybe they were trying out for a Battle of the Bands kind of thing?
Man, those Kurds totally killed!
Posted by: Laurence Simon | March 16, 2004 11:13 PM
This definitely gets the WTF of the day.
WTF?
Posted by: Tom | March 16, 2004 11:22 PM
Or was it "Syrians killing their Kurds in [the] way?"
All Rights Reserved for Miss Muffet
Posted by: Aravis | March 16, 2004 11:40 PM
Aravis-
Yes, way.
Posted by: ScottC | March 16, 2004 11:48 PM
The silly BBC quotes have come up before. They replied that are merely, but precisely, quoting a source. It's shorthand for "reported killed."
It looks odd to us, but I've seen it in enough non-ironic uses to give them a pass.
Posted by: The Commissar | March 16, 2004 11:55 PM
Perhaps they're pining for the fjords.
Posted by: Oddly Normal | March 16, 2004 11:58 PM
Im not sure why your confused, they were killed except when they weren't, in that case they were "killed" which is only marginaly better, except when it isn't.
This moment of clarity brought to you by Kerry for President. Remember a vote for Kerry means you can have it both ways.
Posted by: Defense Guy | March 17, 2004 12:22 AM
This is borderline criminal
By the way, thanks for aiding in the effort to get the word out.
Posted by: Oubai | March 17, 2004 12:29 AM
Oddly Normal (giggle)
Posted by: Joshua Scholar | March 17, 2004 01:00 AM
Look man, the Syrians were just so godawful funny, the Kurds were slayed.
Posted by: Dean Esmay | March 17, 2004 05:28 AM
On the off chance that you genuinly don't understand why the quotes are there, and this isn't just an opportunity to have a dig at the BBC, this is a technique often used in the UK to indicate that the information is from a third party source. Presumably it isn't a technique used in the US which is why it looks funny to you. What's your next post going to be, BTW? "Look, the BBC spelled Center Centre!!!111 WTF?"
Posted by: chill | March 17, 2004 07:16 AM
Those quote marks are causing me to have totally inappropriate Dead Parrot Sketch flashbacks. "no, no, they're just sleeping! See?"
stoopid bbc. they should just stick to the comedy and mystery movies and back away from the news altogether.
Posted by: perletwo | March 17, 2004 09:43 AM
"Chill",
This technique is not normally used on single words unless there is something dubious about the word. Under such circumstances, it is also normal to include the rest of the quote in the body of the article, which the BBC have not done in this case.
Posted by: Simon Jester | March 17, 2004 09:59 AM
Maybe the Kurds 'killed' turned into brain-eating zombies and are currently terrorizing the countryside in Syria?
Or maybe BBC is using quotation marks in a cynically stupid manner.
Posted by: Patrick Chester | March 17, 2004 10:21 AM
For some reason, I don't truly understand the Beeb is rather anti-Kurd. They don't seem to 'rate' them as a minority worth worrying about.
Posted by: Andrew Ian Dodge | March 17, 2004 11:09 AM
Just another day of BBC "objectivity".
Posted by: bob | March 17, 2004 01:00 PM
Simon Chester - Actually if you check out Fox News, CNN, The Guardian, telegraph.co.uk, and probably every other news source other than the 4 I just checked, they all have single words in quotation marks as I type.
Posted by: chill | March 17, 2004 01:14 PM
Oddly,
and Llamas!
Posted by: Dave in Texas | March 17, 2004 05:27 PM
Another fine title for BBC "News".
Posted by: Bird Dog | March 17, 2004 07:55 PM
"Chill",
I have just checked out CNN, Fox News, the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph's web sites, and none of them have a single word in quotes in a headline.
Perhaps next time you could include links to support what you claim?
Posted by: Simon Jester | March 18, 2004 08:01 AM
I love picking on the BBC as much as the next guy, but their scare quotes are so over the top that it's almost like they have a weird way of indicating they are quoting sources inside the headline, so instead of saying:
Reports Indicate Kurds Killed In Syria Clashes
they say
Kurds 'Killed' In Syria Clashes
It's stupid either way, of course, but I find it too hard to believe they actually are saying that the act of killing is a matter your own relative viewpoint or something.
A long time ago, I was driven batty by the sight of a truck carrying snack foods with the following written on it in large letters:
The 'Great' Name in Fun Foods!
Posted by: Ash | March 19, 2004 05:02 PM
Even if CNN, Fox, The Guardian, and the Daily Telegraph all put "killed" in scare quotes, one cannot deduce that the practice is "correct." In the university where I work in the English department, the journalism students follow the most bizarre grammatical "rules," which we mock regularly in the daily paper.
It's not as if the press can be looked to as the great bastion of all that is perfect in anything else. Why does anyone think they can take their grammar lessons from the press?
My favorite scare quote misuse (until the 'Great' snack food truck) was ABSOLUTELY "NO" SMOKING IN THE LOUNGE!
What is the literal interpretation of "NO"?
Posted by: Bubbleofearth | April 6, 2004 11:09 AM