“274” takes up a lot less space and is far more informative than “scores of”. I hate the word phrase “scores of”. When media outlets want to manipulate public sentiment they use to make the number in question seem a lot (if not vastly) smaller.
I think when the average American hears the word “scores” they very roughly imagine something like 50 to 100. That sounds a hell of a lot better than the first media reports that indicated the estimated number was - at the time - probably ~200.
And even now when the number is 274 - they still use it!
if only there was a word for like a multiple of a hundred…hmm maybe “hundreds”!
Am curious what the US media will do in following situation - god forbid it happens. Israel launches an monstrous attack in Gaza on a UN school. An Al Jazeera reporter eye witness watches the attack unfold and she’s nearly killed herself. In the immediate aftermath she says that it appears that the IDF killed at least several hundred people. It’s clearly a bloodbath.
It’s obvious the US media will avoid the word “school” and it will use passive grammatical constructions. But they will want to avoid “hundreds” if they can. Will they still use “scores of”?
My first thought is the go-to hasbara phrase that becomes their copypasta is “large scale operation”. Hours later when the number of dead is estimated at least 500 - they use euphemisms like “There was an unfortunate large scale loss of life”.
-–
What do you (person reading this) think?
Whats with the new phrase “scores of” - seems like it is repeated everywhere among supposedly independent news institution, this one from NYT
It’s almost if someone is “manufacturing consent”
It’s a copy-and-paste from Hasbara American Media Enterprises which includes: HCNN (Hasbara CNN), HNYT, hWaPo , HMSNBC, HWSJ, etc.
Maybe I am wrong here, but last I heard, all these “hostages” were actually POWs as in they were active Israeli “Defense” Force members captured by militants belonging to Hamas or other allied armed resistance groups. Military members who are captured are prisoners of war, not “hostages” under the Geneva convention. I mostly just bring this up constantly to forcefully remind the Nazis online that these weren’t just happy little innocent kids captured (these specific people). And also to remind them that KHamas could have, and by many people’s logic should have, simply executed the IOF soldiers for all the war crimes they participated in upon Palestinians. And yet they chose to abide by the laws of war as far as that goes. Just little sprinkles of “hmm, interesting… the barbarians had the perfect opportunity to do horrible barbaric things, yet did not… hmm…” to enrage dying, lead-poisoned boomer brains online. Even the light suggestion that everyone in the IOF deserves their own tribunal at this point is enough to send many off into incoherent racist rants.
Israel is allowed to invent any word it wants to describe anything it does. And American media will happily parrot it. Hamas is the government and took illegal settlers and their military cadre prisoner? No that sounds too legitimate. Hamas are terrorists and they took civilians hostage. There we go. Print it, ship it, air it, no questions asked.
four score and seven dead arabs ago
