Former press baron Conrad Black once famously said of journalists “that a very large number of them are ignorant, lazy, opinionated, intellectually dishonest, and inadequately supervised.”
They have, he added, “huge power, and many of them are extremely reckless.”
Lord Black’s words certainly stung—so much so that one would think that those offended by them might pause to reflect upon the language they employ in the execution of their craft. Words—a journalist’s stock in trade—shape opinions, outline their spectrum, and inspire a range of emotions.
Those feelings may include fear, which often fuels anger that, in turn, can lead to a range of behaviours from protests to cancel culture or celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk. They most certainly can influence people’s political behaviour.
So it has been dispiriting to watch over the years while so many newshounds, enraged by Black’s assault on their egos, instead doubled down to reaffirm the pattern of behaviour that led to the criticism in the first place.
For instance, the use of “controversial” is wildly popular even though, like most adjectives, it is rarely necessary and often used just to “juice up” a story. It is also frequently engaged without attribution. Indeed, its application is so common that columnists such as Andrew Coyne recently complained—when others objected to the CBC’s use of it—that “it is now controversial to say that [Charlie] Kirk was controversial.”
The CBC story about which people were complaining was a collection of “Some of Charlie Kirk’s most controversial takes.” For Kirk’s supporters, those might have just as easily been labelled “Some of Charlie Kirk’s most popular takes.” (Although it would be surprising to find a newsroom within legacy, subsidized media inclined to take that approach.)
This is why journalists should at all times avoid using adjectives such as “controversial” without attribution—at least if they wish to avoid being accused of inserting their own views into news stories and/or leading readers/viewers/listeners to a conclusion. This is particularly important as the word or its synonyms are more likely to be applied to activists or performers (Christian troubadour Sean Feucht comes to mind) from the Right side of the ideological spectrum than from the Left.
