Why is the word 'terrorist' in quotes?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Well, there you go - we have our answer.

a reply to: Jamie1

Instead they use to grammatical quotes around the word to express disagreement. That's what quotes around a word in this context means. These are journalism majors. Believe it or not, this is taught in grammar class.

To express disagreement? Because someone (a journalist?) would honestly try to minimize this event?

Check out these headlines:
"12 Dead in 'Terrorist' Attack on Paris Satirical Magazine ABC News"
"Obama condemns 'horrific' attack on French newspaper AFP"

“I strongly condemn the horrific shooting at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine ... of this terrorist attack and the people of France at this difficult time,” he said. ... that will endure well beyond the hateful vision of these killers.”

It's a partial quote from the source - in a headline. Are you confused?

Lame... and, golly - it's not even a slow news day :-)

Keep watching for it. It's common.

We will keep watching for it - something's common. For sure, for sure

Edit - because you did make your point clear after all

a reply to: Jamie1

... When quoting someone in indirect speech, care must be taken with sentence structure to ensure it is entirely clear that they are the source’s words and not a label.

a reply to: Jamie1

Take it from a proofer, most media outlets have crap for proofing/editing these days. Yahoo is one of the worst that I've seen.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: masqua
Perfect French, eh? No Middle Eastern accent even?

One can speak the language perfectly and still have an accent. But I'm not sure these were Islamic terrorists. And what does the word "terrorist" actually mean, anyway? I think this group, whomever they are, are terrorizing people, and could therefore be called terrorists.

As I said, this is making a mountain out of a mole hole. The OP saw the quote marks and was offended, so made a thread about it.

lol stop projecting.

Not everybody makes threads because they're offended.

Use of the word "terrorism" is a political hot button issue in the media. You might want to do some research. Many people are offended by it's use because they believe it negatively affects perceptions of Muslims.

originally posted by: Jamie1
"12 dead in 'terrorist' attack at Paris paper"



That's Yahoo's headline for the terror attack in Paris here.



Anybody understand the grammatical reason to highlight certain words in quotes? It's used when the author doesn't agree with the characterization of that word.



Ex: My husband was "working late" last night. Get it?

Be aware of the microaggression in the media as they begin the narrative that the killers were justified in being "offended" and the the victims got what they deserved for saying things that might "offend" the killers.

Exactly. Yahoo is a left of left site and they want to distance themselves from being politically incorrect in saying it was Muslims attacking. You know, especially now, since they print stories and think they could be attacked. Dollars to donuts they would never publish a satirical cartoon lampooning Mohommad, even from another source.

the BBC news website seems to have purged the word terrorist from all the news storys relating to todays terrorist attack. its now a Islamist attack

Gunmen have attacked the Paris office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people and injuring 11, in an apparent Islamist attack.

a reply to: Jamie1

Terrorism is any act intended to instill terror in the civilian population. In other words, it's a technique. Perhaps they used quotes because they were not sure if that was the objective. Killing people, even for political or religious reasons, is not technically terrorism unless the object is instilling terror in the civilian population separate from the victims. Just a quess as to why they used quotes.

originally posted by: kamatty
the BBC news website seems to have purged the word terrorist from all the news storys relating to todays terrorist attack. its now a Islamist attack

Gunmen have attacked the Paris office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people and injuring 11, in an apparent Islamist attack.

The headline for Yahoo's most recent update on the story has purged the word "terrorist" and now focuses the attention on the "satirical" newspaper.

This would be like having a headline, "2 Provocatively Dressed Women Raped In Paris."

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

But I'm not sure these were Islamic terrorists.

.......They have audio of them yelling "for the Profit" and other extremist islamic crap.......

how can you even say that.......

It amazes me that people can say this sort of thing when theres VIDEO and AUDIO of them .....

jesus christ the disconnect.......is it painful to be in that much denial?

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I said I'm not sure. I haven't seen the video or heard the audio. I'm not defending whoever did this. I'm not in denial, just mildly uninterested.

If they claim to be Muslims, they're lying, just like any terrorists who use a religion (regardless of which religion) to commit atrocities. Real Muslims are condemning the attack.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I said I'm not sure. I haven't seen the video or heard the audio. I'm not defending whoever did this. I'm not in denial, just mildly uninterested.

If they claim to be Muslims, they're lying, just like any terrorists who use a religion (regardless of which religion) to commit atrocities. Real Muslims are condemning the attack.

Well if you havent watched and heard the audio and video I can see where you would be unsure........

However I supposed you had since you were active in the thread........

My appologies.......

However , that being said, whether you consider them "legit" muslims or not is splitting hairs.......

if they come in guns blazing killing a bunch of people in the name of Allah , they are still muslim terrorist.......
I dont partake in the semantics.....

The game of playing subjectivity on whether or not "theyre real muslims" is just a method to confuse the issue

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

All two of them?

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
I dont partake in the semantics.....

The game of playing subjectivity on whether or not "theyre real muslims" is just a method to confuse the issue

I recently had a heated discussion with someone and he insisted on calling the power elite "The Jews". I think words are important. IMO, it's lazy to call a group of people by a label when it doesn't necessarily fit, like calling Fred Phelps' group "Christians".

I don't have to know the details about the situation to speak to the use of the word "terrorist" being in quotes...

a reply to: Jamie1

Nelson Mandalla was once labelled as a Terrorist as was at least half of N Irelands current Government.
I think the grammar Is used to signify that to some they are terrorists to others they could be considered freedom fighters.

PS I don't know much about grammar so Im probably wrong.
I doubt if using punctuation would save any journos whom anger any future world wide sharia law ruled planet from execution .
pps off course that will never happen.

a reply to: Jamie1

'Terrorist' is apostrophized (If that's a word. If not, well I just made it one).

The beginning and end of that sentence is Quotated!! (Just made another new word). he! he!

You put Apostrophe to emphasize or highlight a word. You should know that.

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: Jamie1

'Terrorist' is apostrophized (If that's a word. If not, well I just made it one).

The beginning and end of that sentence is Quotated!! (Just made another new word). he! he!

You put Apostrophe to emphasize or highlight a word. You should know that.

Not really. You use single quotes inside double quotes when they would otherwise be double quotes themselves, and you only use double quotes around a word in a sentence when it is a technical term, a word used in an unusual way or in some other way varies from the standard usage.

For example, you wouldn't want to put quotes around the word friend in a sentence unless that person likely wasn't really your friend. So putting quotes around terrorist implies that they are possibly using it sarcastically in a similar way.

Terrorist or Terrorism Differs from Criminal or Criminal Act.... that's what the punctuation is for

the speaker, was 'quoted' which indicates they know the difference between political/religious 'Terrorism'
and just plain hateful, but exacting Criminal acts upon targeted Prey...for gain or profit or Revenge as examples

originally posted by: sn0rch
It was a terrorist attack regardless of who did it. Terrorist doesn't mean Islamic.

This

It wasn't some random act of kindness that's for damn sure.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Not really. You use single quotes inside double quotes when they would otherwise be double quotes themselves

There are several applications for single quotes.

Source