The Impact of Word Choice in the Media

Dear Readers,

Following is a letter to the editor received in January via email and the editor’s reply. The author has given permission to publish this correspondence.

Dear Ms. Karchmer,

Today I read your article regarding red light cameras in red light and school zones (“Whatcom Watch, Vol. 20, Number 1, Front Page: “Red Light Cameras Arrive in Spring, Bellingham Joins 24 Other Cities in Washington With Cameras”). I thought it was a very balanced, thoughtful article that presented the issue fairly. It is refreshing to read a news story written to present the facts and not to stir up controversy, as unfortunately seems to be the purpose of some media outlets in our community. As the mother of the two year old girl, Anna, who was killed on September 30, and someone who spoke out in favor of the cameras, I have to be nit-picky about a term you used in the article; accident. An accident was not what killed my daughter, poor judgment and deadly decision-making was. A crash is different than an accident.

In the late 1900’s, The United States Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration started a campaign entitled “Crashes Aren’t Accidents.”  While it is no longer in force, the DOT has successfully changed their vocabulary at this point when reporting traffic safety statistics. The idea behind this campaign was that changing the way we think about events, and the words we use to describe them, will effect the way we behave. The Department of Transportation recognized that vehicle crashes and the injuries that result from them are predictable and preventable events. It was felt that the continued use of the word “accident” promoted the concept that these events are outside human influence or control when they are, in fact, the predictable results of specific actions. It was also felt that the continued use of the term “accident” fosters the perception that the resulting injuries are an unavoidable part of life rather than predictable results of the law of physics. The Department of Transportation encouraged the use of appropriate terms such as “crash,” “collision,” “incident” and “injury.” (http://www.caraccidentattorneys.com/resources/auto-accident/auto-accident-causes/crashes-not-accident.htm) I have read the full text of that decision but can’t find it right now.

I want you to know that this is no way intended to berate you, I am just hoping that by spreading this idea around to those who have the public’s ear, more people will change their behavior when they drive a car. In fact, my family is starting an organization to help shape people’s perceptions of driving, and my mission as Anna’s mother is to help change driver behavior and help drivers take more responsibility in being proactive in preventing crashes and death. Thank you for taking the time to read my email, and I look forward to your continued reports on traffic safety.

This is the editor response, which was sent in a typed letter on Whatcom Watch stationery to Ms. Brulotte’s mailing address.

Dear Ms. Brulotte,

Thank you for your email. First, please accept my condolences regarding your daughter’s death. I appreciate you taking the time to read Whatcom Watch and to write a letter bringing an important issue to my attention.

I understand the point you make regarding the usage of “accident” versus “crash,” “collision” or “incident” and don’t find this nit-picky at all. In fact, as a journalist with 20 years of experience who is now taking over the role as editor of a monthly community newspaper, I take your perspective seriously knowing the power and influence the media have in our everyday lives especially through our word choice. Please accept my apologies for this oversight and know that your point is well taken on this story and for future articles.

I hope you continue to read Whatcom Watch and will consider contacting us again with story ideas, submissions, critique or kudos. Thank you for reaching out.