Ever since 9/11 we (by “we” I’m using shorthand that includes both myself and about half of the Blogosphere) have wondered why Reuters has refused to use the T-word when referring to, you know, terrorists. Instead, Reuters refers to them as militants, insurgents, dissidents (as they frequently labeled Osama bin Laden) and other euphemisms that imply that they’re more misunderstood James Dean-type loners, than bloodthirsty men with a penchant for killing innocent civilians, and the larger the number, the better.
A 2003 article explains how Reuters’ Newspeak works:
Reuters, the influential news agency headquartered in London, whose wire service stories appear in print, broadcast and web media outlets, routinely uses partisan, distorted terminology in its Middle East news reports. It not only bans the word