Ebola cliches

[Dan Goncharoff]

Seems to me that the CDC has failed to be absolutely clear in this case.
(Or is the issue that CNN has failed to be absolutely clear about something
the CDC was absolutely clear about?)

DanG

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Ebola cliches
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> CNN explains that "The CDC has been absolutely clear about one thing: you
> cannot necessarily catch ebola through the air."
>
> This "not necessarily" business drives me nuts.  For years it's become
> extremely difficult for TV newspeople to say simply "isn't": they seem to
> prefer "isn't necessarily." Even in a case like the above, where the
> knee-jerk "necessarily" pretty much undercuts the intended meaning of the
> sentence. (It seems to say, "It's unlikely, but you can.")
>
> Good news: CNN also reports that the CDC "has a lot of boots on the ground"
> tracking the disease.
>
> JL
>
> --
> "If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org