It’s ridiculous to say agency providedus with ample FUNDING and SUPPORT
A hawkeyed adherent of this column took a shot of this one, a card that was probably meant to express the emotional commitment of two lovebirds as the world celebrated Saint Valentine’s Day. So what does it mean when you tell one you adore, “We’re Decide On Forever?” Our guess: “We’ve decided our love is forever.” Trust postcard scriptwriters! PHOTO | R MSANGI
Word economy is a key issue in journalese. You’re apt to hear this from your tutor in the field that prepares you to be a professional conveyor of truth: “Where one word can do, don’t use two.” Using words that somewhat repeat what has already stated is an act of wastefulness.
Many of us fall prey to this avoidable malaise as we strive to impress. The unfortunate thing is, we actually end up depressing our audiences! Our counsel: whatever you’re communicating, try hard to keep it short—KIS.
Having thus lectured (bah!), let’s proceed to dish out linguistic gems picked up over the week. Here we go…
We look at a story on Page 2 of Bongo’s senior-most broadsheet of Sunday, February 15, whose headline reads, ‘Drone unit to strengthen customs.’ Therein, the scribbler purports to quote what a customs official said and writes:
“Drone technology will strengthen our capacity to monitor entry points more efficiently and respond quickly to suspected smuggling ACTIVITIES.” Using the word “activities” to qualify “smuggling” is being wasteful. Our colleague should edit that and end his sentence with “smuggling,” for this act in itself entails activity/activities! So, why say it?
Page 18 of this broadsheet has a story entitled, ‘Ilemela launches Igombe Sports Centre to boost local talent.’ In Para 2, the scribbler writes:
“The centre, which includes a basketball court and fields for volleyball, football and netball was opened on FEBRUARY 13, 2026…” We’ve of another case of wastefulness here. As we note above, this broadsheet edition was sold on Sunday, February 15 (and needless to say, the year is 2026).
The said launch of the sports centre took place on Friday—a mere two days earlier. The broadsheet is a weekly edition of a daily (not an annual) publication and the article is a news story (it’s not about something that happened years ago), so why waste print paper space telling your reader the year an incident took place when that’s obvious?
We’re arguing here that the scribbler should’ve simply written: “The centre… was opened on Friday.” By the way, if our colleague was reporting for a Kiswahili newspaper, he’d have aptly written: “Kituo hicho cha michezo…kilizinduliwa JUZI.”
In the subsequent paragraph, the scribbler offers a backgrounder: “The project is collaboration (sic!) between the Ilemela Municipal Council and the (sic!) non-governmental organisation Sports Charity which provided significant FUNDING and SUPPORT for its construction.”
By saying the charity provided “funding and support,” he’s implying that when you donate funds you’re not necessarily giving support! That isn’t true. We aver the scribbler meant to say: “…the NGO provided significant FUNDING and OTHER FORMS OF SUPPORT…” And now, a look at Bongo’s huge and colourful broadsheet of Tuesday, February 17, whose Page 4 bears a story entitled, ‘Commission calls ON stringent action on data privacy breaches.’ Now the intro that should be supporting what’s hinted on the headline reads:
“The Personal Data Protection Commission has been strongly (sic!) advised to implement legal measures against individuals and institutions that violate the law by leaking private information.”
In Para 2, the scribbler reports further: “Mbeya Regional Commissioner Beno Malisa ISSUED this advice yesterday….
The reader will be forgiven to ask: If the Commission is the one that’s being ADVISED to implement measures to curb private information leaks, how come the headline says the same Commission is making calls? Meaning, it’s giving advice!
It appears, the headline boss meant to write: ‘Commission ADVISED ON stringent action on data privacy breaches.’ And, by the way, if it were true the Commission were the one making the calls, the preposition would be “for” and not “on”— ‘Commission calls FOR stringent action on data privacy breaches.’
