Does Anyone In The Media Have An Original Thought

1. 85

   GA Andersonposted 4 years ago

   It has to stop! I can't take it anymore . .
   
   Remember when 'efforting' was the cool media buzzword of the day? They couldn't say "We are trying . . . ," nay, nay. They had to show how smart they were; they were "efforting."
   
   Now, it is 'abundance of caution.' Geez Loise . . . Every single voice that gets media time says "abundance of caution." From NPR radio to the various news outlets I have listened to, I don't think a single voice has not said, "out of an abundance of caution."
   
   Come on folks, there has to be a brain, somewhere out there, that is capable of forming their own thoughts. Maybe I could channel George Carlin and offer then some ideas.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Something we agree on! Though, I don't recall ever gearing the word "efforting." Is that a real word?

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         It is not a real word in my vocabulary. At it's most grating time, (I think during the 2015-16 election lead-up), both Fox and CNN must have made it the mandatory phrase of the day.
         
         GA

         replyreport
   2. 67

      lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Aren't they just trying to prevent any future lawsuits against them? It's a rhetorical question, I won't be back to read any replies.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Well, since you won't be back to see this response, why did you bother to post your comment?
         
         But, as an answer for others, (because for sure you can be believed that you won't be back to see it), the use of the term " an abundance of caution" is not in the same sphere as being sure to use the would "alledged" when speaking of crimes. There is no lawsuit liability in the use of the first-mentioned grating phrase.
         
         Geesh, lobo, I wish I could be as confident in my superior reasoning as you are yours.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 67

            lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            I got this in my status thing so I saw the response. I thought that you would be able to distinguish a statement from a question. I was asking (I used: aren't) and I even went on to say it is a rhetorical QUESTION.
            
            You make a lot of assumptions at times, not always.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               The one assumption, (that I can see), I made wasn't about the content of your "statement."
               
               "Aren't they just trying to prevent any future lawsuits against them?"
               
               I did understand that to be a statement, and since rhetorical questions are generally understood to be statements rather than real questions, my response wasn't to answer your rhetorical question but to disagree with its statement.
               
               I suppose the burr under my saddle was the implication, (as I understood it), of your statement that you wouldn't be back to read any responses. Why would you say that? Why would you interject something into a conversation if you aren't going to participate?
               
               GA

               replyreport