Words
Posted by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit
It’s interesting the power of words, especially in this digital age we’ve moved into as a culture. As I tell my kids, sometimes it’s not the words, but how you say them. Of course, with an e-mail, or even a blog, you can’t hear the inflection or tone the writer intended as he or she wrote them. Right now, can you tell if I am writing this slowly and meditatively or quickly and flared with emotion?
They say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but sometimes we need to remember that each one of those words can evocate an image in the mind of the reader — and often times, not the ones we intended.
Take for example the LIRR derailment that happened Thursday morning. Just pulling up the story on our newsfeed service I came up with three headlines for the same story:
- 2 LIRR Trains Bump in Queens; Eastbound Service Delayed
- 2 LIRR Trains Collide in Queens; Eastbound Service Delayed
- 2 LIRR Trains Collide in Queens; Eastbound Service Suspended
While all three of these headlines look the same, they couldn’t be more different. The first headline says the trains bumped into each other. The second and third headlines say the trains collided. That is a significant difference in most people’s minds. If you have ever backed into something with your car, you know what I am talking about.
A bump is when you can get out, look at what you hit, shrug your shoulders at the negligible mark (if any) and go about your business. A collision is when you put your head down on the steering wheel, cringing, while you psyche yourself up to get out and look at what happened.
Also take a look at the last word in those headlines. The first two say service is delayed, while the last one says suspended. OK, I don’t know about you, but delayed is vastly different in my mind than suspended. Delayed means I have to wait a little longer for my train. Suspended means I better find a different way home.
Comments with one of the stories I found online were already calling LIRR to task for describing a derailment and collision as two trains that had bumped into each other. Now, mind you, I don’t know if it was LIRR who actually used the term “bump,” but respondents were all over them about it.
This all comes back to the words we choose to use. While every picture evokes a litany of words, every word in turn evokes a myriad of images. We need to be aware of this and wary of how we describe anything that happens in the transit industry.
For the latest industry news, check out MassTransitMag.com’s Daily News section.
Thanks for reading the MT Position updated every Friday,
March 28th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Right on target, Fred. As one who sends many emails, memos, and letters throughout the day to give instructions, report on operational issues, and seek information I need to do my job, I have had experiences of different recipients of my messages perceiving what I stated or asked much differently than I intended. Words create a mental picture in the minds of the readers. We must be careful that our words accurately portray what we really want to say.
March 28th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Good point, Fred. I’ve noticed that reporters use “conductor” and “engineer” interchangeably. Mass transit leadership could build some “bridges” with the press, especially small outlets which do not have transportation speccialists, by providing fact sheets that contain proper definitions.
Responsible media—even blogs— really do want to “get it right.”
March 28th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Fred, this is a very good post - I couldn’t agree with you more. I’ll never forget the WMATA Metrorail accident at Woodley Park Zoo. The first article stated that the trains bumped into each other. So, imagine my surprise when I saw the photographs of the accident. Quite a bump, indeed!
It just goes to show how important correct word choices are in whatever you are writing, whether it is a news article, a blog, or a formal report.
March 31st, 2008 at 8:46 am
Some years ago, while painting the house and listening to the radio, there was a news story about how a train had hit a car at a crossing. It was spun as “the big bad train hit the poor defenseless car at this crossing it had every right to be on.” Truly annoyed, I went in the house, called the station, and because it was Sunday, I got the actual news reader on the phone. I explained to him how he had the story completely backwards, and, since I knew the crossing involved, that the driver had to have driven around the gates to be on the tracks at all, and how long it takes a train to stop. Everyone reading this knows the story. But to my amazement, the next reading of the news carried a completly different take on what had happened, blaming the car for interfering with the passage of the train. Yes, they DO care to get the news correctly.