The New Media Lingo

The ongoing political campaign has been a boon to the media, especially the cable punditry. One interesting feature of its current coverage is the new lingo I’ve noticed seeping into the commentary. These are some of my favorite clichés.

“Throw him under the bus …” This one is used by all the commentators in questioning why Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) did not divorce himself sooner from the provocative rhetoric of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Not only should the senator have criticized his former pastor, he should have “thrown him under the bus.” What’s that supposed to mean? A metaphor, no doubt, but surely not what the picture connotes.

“At the end of the day …” This is how pundits sum up. Not “considering all these points, I conclude …” or something like that. It is invariably, “At the end of the day …” Since the political vicissitudes change daily, why use this inapt reference? At the end of the day comes tomorrow.

Another, similar time-related cliché, arises when the punditry pauses for a commercial break. “At the other end of this break …” the audience is told, they will be returned to the conversation about to be interrupted.

Regular references to news clips is a device commentators use to open a discussion. “Let’s give a look …” is the lead-in commonly used. Not “here is his or her remark” or “here is what Sen. So-and-So said; let’s listen and comment.” How exactly does one “give a look”? Why not take a look? Is this just the give and take of media commentary?

And while we’re on the subject of looking, have you noticed how the pundits regularly begin their answers to all questions? “Look …” they start, and then go. Not “Listen”; always, “Look …”

The sister of “Let’s give a look …” is “Let’s take a listen …” How does one take a listen? Where did this phrase come from? How do we get rid of it?

When the in-studio host goes to the field reporter with an opening remark or question, the answer invariably starts with, “Absolutely …” Thus, the questioners are confirmed in their lead-in remarks, as the “on the ground” (another cliché) reporter seems to add nothing new.

And how in this time of political correctness, when every panel has a combination of men and women, do the show hosts get away with, “Thanks, guys” when bidding farewell to a panel of men and women — and sometimes all women? Saying “Thanks, guys” to a panel of women seems silly.

We can’t blame the media for all the tortured language. The pols, too, have added their eyebrow-raising phrases, like the character who praised Hillary Clinton for her “testicular fortitude.” I’m staying away from that one. Look, it should be thrown under the bus at the end of the day, absolutely! So long, guys.