Words that should be banned from professional writing

Words that should be banned from professional writing

Has a public official been “probed” lately? Or has one executive been “tipped” to replace another in an organization? Have political opponents “blasted” each other recently in the media? Journalists – like other professionals – can develop routines or habits to add speed or ease to the performance of their job. But while some routines are good – like getting a second source for serious revelations or carefully re-reading your work for errors of grammar or clarity - some routines are bad but continue because so many people practise them and so few question them. Bad habits abound in journalists’ use of language, particularly the use of words and phrases in ways that are imprecise, exaggerated or just plain worn out. David Randall, author of The Universal Journalist, calls these words or phrases “journalese”. There is a list of them in the excellent book “English for Journalists” by Wynford Hicks. I’ll start a list of my own by first borrowing from his, then adding from other sources over time. Feel free to criticize or make suggestions in the comments section.

aim (to mean intend)

axe (to mean sack)

battle (dispute)

bid (try, attempt)

blast (criticize)

blaze (fire)

clampdown (control)

clash (dispute)

dash (hurry)

don (put on)

drama (event)

dub (describe)

launch (start)

loom (threaten)

oust (replace)

pledge (promise)

poised (ready)

probe (inquiry)

rock (shock)

row (dispute)

scrap (cancel)

slam (criticize)

soar (increase)

unveil (announce)

vigil (patrol)

vow (promise)