Clichés you may want to dump
Seema Singh -
Monday, July 20, 2009 3:09 PM
Here's a must-read from the science section of Wired- 5 "atrocious science clichés to throw down a black hole". I think they are not only used in science but elsewhere as well, with equal triteness and hit discerning readers with annoying banality.
For those who don't have the time on hand, here's a summary of what sucks in science (according to Wired):
- Holy grail
- Silver bullet
- Shedding light
- Missing link
- Paradigm shift
What is equally interesting is the readers' own selection of clichés in the comments section - quantum leap, at the end of the day, tip of the iceberg, possibilities are endless...
Anyway, I have my own small list, which incidentally applies more to information and communication technology than to science:
- 1. Solutions (if it's software, pls say so, if something else, be specific)
- 2. Platform technology (uhh...explain)
- 3. Web 2.0, or even 3.0 (come on, don't be lazy; specify which precise tech/tool/apps you'd like to refer to)
- 4. Innovative (who says he isn't?)
- 5. Citing the number of hits/trends from Google as if it were the last word... (some Wired readers find this hackneyed as well)
- 6. Global warming (it's blanket use gives a wrong message, climate change is better since every place is not getting warmer)
- 7. ‘Peer-reviewed' journal (science writers should know that all academic journals are peer-reviewed [of course with varying standards] and they have to know this fact, not pass on to the readers)
Which clichés would you like to chuck?