4 ms·

The BBC's common practice is to put quotes around headline elements that are, in fact, quotes. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee are the on

The BBC's common practice is to put quotes around headline elements that are, in fact, quotes. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee are the ones making the claim that said the money is wasted, and the headline title is quoting them. It took me a while to get used to that practice, myself. After years of reading American headlines, a lot of BBC headlines look like they are trying to be ironic or something.

eli 17y ago
Right, they're called "scare quotes." It's not meant to convey irony, just that the accusation that the money was wasted is not an objectively verifiable fact and, anyway, that the BBC itself does not necessarily agree with that characterization.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- timthorn 17y ago
  No, this isn't saying that the accusation is not an objectively verifiable fact, simply that it's not the BBC stating it. These are quotes being used as they are meant to be.
  - eli 17y ago
    Right, and the BBC isn't stating it because it isn't a fact. It's almost the same thing. And of course they're being used properly. Scare quotes can be used to quote a person and to provide distance from their words Look at another example off the homepage: Hope over peanut allergy 'cure' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7899383.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7899383.stm Cure is in quotes because it's not yet proven that the technique is indeed a cure. Not because the BBC wants to give proper credit to whichever person called it a cure.
    - timthorn 17y ago
      It's not news that money spent on homeopathy is wasted (saving for placebo effects, etc). It's news because the Select Committee has said so, and the quotes are needed to attribute the claim to a third party.
    - acg 17y ago
      In your example they give credit through the article. Bad example? Sure you can call them scare quotes but these quotes can be used for various reasons, I'm pretty sure as a news organisation the BBC intended use–mention distinction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction They occasionally be used for other reasons like jargon.

eli 17y ago

Right, they're called "scare quotes." It's not meant to convey irony, just that the accusation that the money was wasted is not an objectively verifiable fact and, anyway, that the BBC itself does not necessarily agree with that characterization.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
timthorn 17y ago
No, this isn't saying that the accusation is not an objectively verifiable fact, simply that it's not the BBC stating it. These are quotes being used as they are meant to be.
- eli 17y ago
  Right, and the BBC isn't stating it because it isn't a fact. It's almost the same thing. And of course they're being used properly. Scare quotes can be used to quote a person and to provide distance from their words Look at another example off the homepage: Hope over peanut allergy 'cure' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7899383.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7899383.stm Cure is in quotes because it's not yet proven that the technique is indeed a cure. Not because the BBC wants to give proper credit to whichever person called it a cure.
  - timthorn 17y ago
    It's not news that money spent on homeopathy is wasted (saving for placebo effects, etc). It's news because the Select Committee has said so, and the quotes are needed to attribute the claim to a third party.
  - acg 17y ago
    In your example they give credit through the article. Bad example? Sure you can call them scare quotes but these quotes can be used for various reasons, I'm pretty sure as a news organisation the BBC intended use–mention distinction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction They occasionally be used for other reasons like jargon.