• PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is probably just a use of different words to not sound repetitive.

    Then the BBC could have said something like “More than 500 people were slain in Gaza.” They should have used a word that implies that the more than 500 people were actively put to death somehow, like killed or slain.

    Keep in mind that the BBC are journalists; they literally do this for a living. Even if it was an innocent mistake, which I 1000% do not believe it is, it would still be an egregious fuck-up. But we know it’s not a fuck-up…

    • 520@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Then the argument would have been about died/slain.

      No one is imagining 500 deaths in a string of events is people peacefully passing away in the night.

      • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It would have been killed/slain, which are pretty equivalent.

        Passive vs active language does make a difference in emotion reaction to things.