1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ike reporting question

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by joe_schmoe, Sep 14, 2008.

  1. joe_schmoe

    joe_schmoe Active Member

    This is on the AP this morning:

    Date: 9/14/2008 3:44 PM

    Eds: Moving on general news and financial services.
    Houston port, airports wait to reopen after Ike
    AP Business Writers

    As Hurricane Ike faded and rain clouds eased, business owners along the Texas Gulf Coast began returning to their shops and offices Sunday to size up their rebuilding job.

    The early betting line was that damage wasn't as bad as feared.>>>

    Early betting line? What the...?

    I mean seriously, is that a term anyone should use here?
    Is Ike now a sports thing? I can imagine there is a sick and morbid crowd that would bet on anything (probably including how many will be eventually be found dead), but even if they have such a line is that really what you want to base your story on? Vegas odds? I can see using that in say "The early line was that the Colts would come back to beat the Vikings" but not on a hurricane story.
  2. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    I don't have a problem with it. In this instance, it strikes me as another way to throw in a reference to the damage isnt as baad a feared with a reference.
  3. wretched

    very unfortunate
  4. zebracoy

    zebracoy Guest

    Whatever happened to...

    "Damage was not as bad as originally feared," said Texas Governor/Houston Mayor/Someone?
  5. trifectarich

    trifectarich Well-Known Member

    It's an awful usage and has no business in a story like this.
  6. I agree with the consensus. When it comes to disasters, you must choose your words even more carefully than normal.
  7. silentbob

    silentbob Member

    I'm guessing you havent covered a hurricane before.
    It's a little chaotic to say the least.
    If a reporter uses a phrase you dont happen to agree with, next time cut the person a break instead of trying to humiliate him on a message board.
  8. SF_Express

    SF_Express Active Member

    This bothers me exactly: zero.

    It's probably just an impression, but it's seeming to me that as the print business goes through this often wrenching transition, I'm seeing a lot more sensitivity, for some reason.

    Actually, something DOES bother me about it. It's kind of a bad metaphor that doesn't track very well in this case.
  9. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Doesn't bother me for a second.

    People are way too sensitive.
  10. Would you feel that way if you lived in an affected area?
    I'm just saying we shouldn't be careless with our words when tragedy is the topic.
  11. joe_schmoe

    joe_schmoe Active Member

    So which one are you? David Koenig or Stephen Manning?
  12. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    How do you know I don't?

    If the writer is guilty of anything, it's that he used a cliche. He wasn't trying to be cute or funny, he just used a cliche.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page