LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 23, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

A Call to Action

Bizarre, Apparently Jihadist Slaying in London (Video)

Oklahoma Needs Help, Not Ideology

Hell on Earth for Greeks

Terracide and the Terrarists: Destroying the Planet for Record Profits

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * Fish Migration Reveals Ocean Warming

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
 * NEW! * A Call to Action
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar
Why Socrates Died

Why Socrates Died

By Robin Waterfield
$17.99

Hollywood

Hollywood

By Gore Vidal
$16.95

more items

 
Reports

Shed This Word, Now

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 2, 2010

By Ruth Marcus

Indulge me, please, while I rant about my new least favorite word: shed.

Not as in dog hair. As in jobs. As in, “The economy shed (fill in the blank) jobs last month.”

Brace yourself for another spate of shedding when the next unemployment report is released.

I don’t know how shed became the go-to journalistic verb to describe job loss, but I think my profession should stop this usage. Shedding implies something unnecessary or unwanted.

“To eject, slough off, or lose as part of the normal processes of life,” my Merriam-Webster’s instructs. “To rid oneself of temporarily or permanently as superfluous or unwanted.”

Advertisement

What a gruesome image when it comes to people losing jobs.

Shedding is bad. Soldiers shed blood. Snakes shed skin. Children shed tears. Infected people shed viruses. Shedding light is, I admit, good. God sheds His grace on thee. But that’s about it.

How did shedding migrate from shaggy dogs to job loss? The Oxford English Dictionary cites The Economist of March 1975, “the industry shed about 100,000 of its workforce.” In the last three months alone, a computer search of news reports shows 2,116 uses of the term in connection with jobs, from Ireland to Fiji.

You can imagine how the term took hold. Financial writers became bored with saying the economy lost jobs. Shed is evocative. Shed worked for copy editors trying to cram the news into a headline only a few columns wide.

But what might have been compactly colorful is now unnecessarily insensitive—not to mention trite. Lost is a better four-letter word.

Even the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the official tallier of the nation’s joblessness, stoops to shed.

“There is not a policy on when it’s used,” said Stacey Standish of the BLS. “We try to use those types of descriptive words consistently, but there’s no set time on when we use certain words.”

How about never? Perhaps shed does not rise to the level of an executive order, but if I were the head of the BLS, or secretary of labor, I’d put a stop to it. If the government can’t do a better job of stemming job losses, at least it could describe the disappointing results in a more sensitive way.

Ruth Marcus’ e-mail address is marcusr(at symbol)washpost.com.

© 2010, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Mike789's avatar

By Mike789, September 4, 2010 at 3:43 am Link to this comment

Take all economists to the woood “shed”. This should be done forthwith to forestall their next prognostication or rather proscription for maintaining the uppercrust’s orbit above the general populace which sustains such soothsayers in their ivory towers.  “For who would fardels bear?....”

Report this

By clipper, September 3, 2010 at 7:03 am Link to this comment

The wealthy own most big Businesses and will only offer jobs to a selective few, because the longer the people are unemployed and more in need, they will work for almost nothing when the Republicans get in office again. A much larger gap between the rich & poor as it was in the 30’s. Also, the wealthy can send their children to college, and the poor will go to war. So the college kids will get the better jobs.

Report this

By schwerblech, September 3, 2010 at 5:41 am Link to this comment

That’s a rather high level of precision you’re asking of the Ami-English press,
don’t you think….?

Report this

By ofersince72, September 2, 2010 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment

Senator Patrick Leahy is trying to start a truth
commission

Please visit his website and sign the petitions or go to

bushtruthcommission.com

it is what we have been waiting for…............
lend your name…

Report this

By taikan, September 2, 2010 at 6:38 pm Link to this comment

The dictionary definition cited by Marcus explains why a conservative publication such as the Economist started using the term “shed” when related to job losses, and why it is used so often today. 

As the dictionary notes, shedding is a normal part of life.  Thus, saying that 150,000 jobs have been “shed” implies that 150,000 people have become unemployed due to a natural process for which nobody in particular is responsible. 

In contrast, saying that 150,000 people have been laid off does not imply that those 150,000 people have become unemployed due to a natural process.  Thus, if the media were to report on a regular basis that X number of people had been laid off during the prior week (or month), that might cause the public to wonder who was responsible for those layoffs, and who made the decision to lay those workers off.

Report this
Queenie's avatar

By Queenie, September 2, 2010 at 5:55 pm Link to this comment

Shedding can cause hairballs if one licks oneself. Not pleasant. But, IQ-wise hairballs are smarter than members of this administration.

Report this

By gerard, September 2, 2010 at 12:25 pm Link to this comment

Shed shed.  At the same time how about dropping:

  collateral damage     reliable sources
  suspected of being   unintended consequences
  make no mistake about it  
  and about 50,000 other journalistic cliches that mask the truth while pretending to reveal it.

Report this
kerryrose's avatar

By kerryrose, September 2, 2010 at 11:43 am Link to this comment

‘Sensitive’ is not a word that I thought Marcus would value.

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.