My picky, overly pedantic dig at the last few days of news #media #language

Picky, picky, picky. Sometimes I can't help myself.

Today, from Cyclingnews.com, and yes it could be a translation problem, but for the record:

Quick Step has announced it will extend Tom Boonen’s suspension but not fire the rider who has tested positive for cocaine for the third time. The reigning Paris-Roubaix champion will undergo a psychiatric treatment plan and be subject to strict testing by Quick Step over the next 12 months.

Psychiatric treatment? Have they gone mad? I think they need a behaviour management plan written by a psychologist. There is a difference, guys.

Yesterday, from the Australian, reportedly the "online newspaper of the year":

Qantas to retain Brisbane hangar for maintainting Airbus 330 fleet

I was going to let "maintainting" through to the keeper but then...

Qantas' large hangar at Brisbane Airport is currently used to service its Boeing 767 fleet, but over the next five years this work will progressivly be taken overseas.

I thought "progressivly" less inclined to let them off the hook. Busy day, too busy to run the old eye over the copy? Ahhh, it's only online, it doesn't matter! No wonder they are the "online newspaper" of choice!

And from Carsguide, this gem:

It's been 20 years since the birth of the Mazda MX-5 but time has hurried and the car remains almost unmistakable from its ancestor.

'Almost unmistakable' from its ancestor? So the writer is saying that it's not mistakable, almost. So in fact it is 'mistakable'? Now I could be mistaken but I think they meant to say 'almost indistinguishable'. Perhaps it was translated into English from a Japanese press release, although attribution is to a Neil Dowling of the Mercury. I thought that would do me until I read the very next para:

It is becoming the Galapagos turtle of the motoring world — fascinating in its ability to look its age when born and exactly the same a century later.

Oh dear, this is just priceless... a car - purportedly a sports car - that is not only akin to a giant turtle that takes 40 years to grow to maturity but "fascinating in its ability to look its age when born"! As Wikipedia attests, it hatched from an egg and looks like a baby turtle... the mind boggles with thoughts of what animals, vegetables or manufactured goods do not look their age when born... and boggles again when said creature (or car) doesn't change appearance in 100 years. I think Neil meant to say that it it hasn't changed much in overall shape, just gotten somewhat bigger. There, that's not hard, is it?

Fairfax 'Drive' redefines 'rational' in context of emotional car purchase #car #language

Obviously this is a new way to define the word rational - in the context of 'improved fuel consumption' for a $Aus155K car this motoring journo states that "in the case of the CaymanS... its emotional appeal remains overwhelming, its improved economy rationally pleasing."

Exactly how a rational person can be pleased about a slightly improved rate of gas guzzling when they have shelled out a small hill of cash is beyond me. OK, it's laudable that they have done something positive about the fuel consumption, but (as the writer noted) this is a self-indulgent, emotional purchase, not a rational one.

'Undersized' car boom in Germany? We can only hope #autos #language

Apparently there's a bonus on offer in Germany to junk your old car and update to a new one - and it's favouring small cars over larger ones. (We can only hope this is a continuing downsizing trend, not a flash in the pan. German cars may be well engineered but tend to the porky rather than trim side).

Interesting use of the language here: A sharp fall in demand from overseas is compounding premium carmakers' problem as makers of undersized vehicles rejoice.. Apparently small cars are 'undersized', rather than right-sized or appropriate. Does that mean that large cars are by definition over-sized?

ABC, SBS vanish in "Tectonic shift" in Aussie TV #language #media

Let me unravel the meaning behind the Sydney Daily Telegraph's statement today that "Network Ten’s launch of the digital-only free-to-air sports channel One is a tectonic shift in Australian television". This  is taking a geological term (the agonisingly slow, grinding movement of huge plates that comprise the Earth's crust) and applying it (very accurately) to the agonisingly slow, grinding progress that represents "change" in the Australian TV broadcasting industry.

It's a bit like a "quantum leap", which is of course a very, very small - almost undetectable - change in state (and one that will not exist if observed). But good on Channel 10 - or perhaps One - for making a move that the public broadcasters made a few years ago. Not that the public broadcasters matter - for as the Tele explained, "After years of an industry comprising just the Seven, Nine and Ten channels, since last Thursday night we now have a fourth – One." Hmmm. What's missing there? ABC 1 and 2, and SBS 1 and 2 perhaps? At least they are in good company - apparently "pay TV" is also not part of the "industry". 

Admittedly the Tele favourably mentioned the ABC a bit later when it said that "While the digitally savvy ABC has broadcast its unique digital channel ABC2 since 2005, it's taken the full eight years since free-to-air digital TV started in Australia for a commercial TV network to follow suit". Which is a good point, taking us back to "tectonic" for a moment; but leaving the ABC out of the industry remains a bit rich. Just because they don't show traditional, paid-for advertising. Let alone ignoring SBS completely (which, ahem, does accept money for adverts).

As always, go figure. It is the Tele, after all.  

"Wallah" in lieu of "Voila".. is it just me? #language

I keep reading the word "wallah" in a context that suggests that the English word (procured from the French) "voila" was actually meant. As in "Look there!" Is this a simple mistake, where people have heard a word and taken a best guess at the spelling? Or is it a deliberate attempt to rid the English language of a French invader? Perhaps they are being funny, but it comes across as simply sad. Maybe it's me.

Here's an example: All I had to do was connect an Ethernet cable to my office network, turn it on, and wallah we were into the land of smart storage management.

Dollar 'plummets' - doesn't just fall #media #economics #language

This is about language, especially the language used by the traditional media, but we'll open up with some simple economics: the Australian dollar is traded on an open marketplace and moves up and down in response to demand. (Long ago it was fixed by successive governments, mostly notably the conservative ones, but a Labor federal government reformed our currency system and floated the dollar.)

By floating or trading the currency the value of the dollar adjusts itself to the realities of, for example, importers wishing to exchange Aussie dollars for other currencies. These importers need to do this in order to buy goods and bring them into the country. Now as the dollar falls in value against any particular currency that means more Aussie dollars are needed to buy that foreign currency. This raises the local cost for the importer which will be reflected either in lessened profit for the importer or (more likely) an increased price to the consumer. The upshot of that is a fall in demand for price-sensitive imported products and more cash available to buy locally-produced products, or to invest locally. Is this good or bad? Or neutral?

To read the local Aussie press you'd think it bad, by default: Australian dollar plummets on weak US data. Note that it didn't fall - by about a cent, mind - rather it plummeted. Doesn't sound good, does it? I can imagine many readers assuming the worst.

However the flipside to a falling dollar is that exporters will be selling Aussie goods at local Aussie prices to importers in other countries, and they will receive payment in a foreign currency. As the Aussie dollar falls in value against those currencies (and it may not, as each is traded individually), they get more Aussie dollars in return for a stronger overseas currency. For example an exporter may have signed a contract in $US and will expect to get a certain number of Aussie dollars when those gratefully received US dollars arrive. However a falling Aussie dollar means they will get more Aussie dollars than they originally expected. It's a bonus, it adds value and profit to the exporter's bottom line and encourages further investment. So now, is that good, bad or neutral?

Media-speak is a wonderful thing, but it does distort the news by adding colour and flavour where none is needed. Rather than report an event, they re-write it to suit what they want to portray. Whilst some traditional media play a straight bat most of the time, all succumb to temptation over time and manipulate stories to their advantage. We know this, and put up with it. After all, we know the game-plan of each media outlet is to sell their product - or do we?