One person shot at Texas Tech university, campus on lockdown

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Of course you can.

Can i not criticize the media for inventing new terms?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

In the press there are a couple of accepted stylebooks that establish standards for referring to different things like "shooters" - I think there may be two or three major ones: NYT Style, Chicago Style, AP Style - generally, most major media outlets pick one of them and follow the guidelines found within.

Where I work, we use the AP Style Guide. Style guides on top of the plain old dictionary create a standardized system of language that all the writers follow so that your in-house content looks like it was produced/written as much as possible by just one author. It avoids things like FBI in one story and Federal Bureau of Investigation in another and mixed references in a third for example.

The AP Style Guides and others like it are where we get changes like calling a suspect a shooter or not referring to a suspect's ethnicity in a story across all media platforms. It's where illegal immigrant became undocumented worker, for example.

Those decisions trickle down through all kinds of layers into all kinds of places. I don't even work for a newsroom, but simply an electronic publishing company, but we follow AP Style, so those decisions affect how I must conduct myself and what language I use at work when on the clock and editing professionally.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Of course you can. But calling someone who shoots a police officer in the head a "shooter" isn't a new term.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

As a middle aged man who has observed the vernacular used within news and media in general (including entertainment) since reading 1984 as a child, I cannot say that I recall hearing the term "shooter" used before the last 10 years or so. In fact, the most obvious reference for "shooter" that has been used in my experience refers to a shot glass of liquor. But that digression aside, my personal memory doesn't seem to support what you say.

Ketsuko above seems to support what I am saying here: that media picks terms and makes them cliche. These terms are likely used due to psychology and how well they will create repeat customers wanting to follow up on the story (or whatever action the authors want to see happen). I would also suspect that there is some bias included, with the desire to create political opinion rather than simply report on it being in there somewhere. We are talking about humans, afterall.

What im asserting here isn't far flung. Its right at the core of the political conspiracies discussed here on ATS: that, as per Orwell, words are used to create opinion, and those words are generally controlled by someone outside of media despite being broadcast through media.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Wait, how did you conclude that he wasn't a shooter when it literally says "When Daniels was brought into the department for questioning, he reportedly pulled a gun and shot an officer in the head before fleeing on foot"? If I'm reading that correctly, he literally shot and killed a campus police officer. Does "shooter" have a different definition in this context?

What most people would call a "shooter" is someone who shows up someplace to deliberately shoot people, as in, that's their goal, not just a crook with a gun who uses it to try and get away, or something of that nature. Calling every crook with a gun a "shooter" makes it seem as though we have crazy people running around all the time just to shoot others. It pushes an anti-gun agenda, and isn't honest.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: enlightenedservant

As a middle aged man who has observed the vernacular used within news and media in general (including entertainment) since reading 1984 as a child, I cannot say that I recall hearing the term "shooter" used before the last 10 years or so. In fact, the most obvious reference for "shooter" that has been used in my experience refers to a shot glass of liquor. But that digression aside, my personal memory doesn't seem to support what you say.

Ketsuko above seems to support what I am saying here: that media picks terms and makes them cliche. These terms are likely used due to psychology and how well they will create repeat customers wanting to follow up on the story (or whatever action the authors want to see happen). I would also suspect that there is some bias included, with the desire to create political opinion rather than simply report on it being in there somewhere. We are talking about humans, afterall.

What im asserting here isn't far flung. Its right at the core of the political conspiracies discussed here on ATS: that, as per Orwell, words are used to create opinion, and those words are generally controlled by someone outside of media despite being broadcast through media.

Yes and no. When writing for a news org you have a 'house style' which are terms that the media use to accurately depict things, but they are often abused as bias (i.e saying General Pinochet/Colonel Gaddafi but not applying the same military terms to a US president or UK monarch is a subliminal way of making it seem like Western Democracy is far superior to 'military juntas' despite head of state having the exact same head of armed forces title and power).

They're also used in a positive way to try and ensure fair and accurate reporting, to stop bias and PR, where political groups have coined new terms to try and hide their sinister aims behind fluffy, nice sounding language.

A good example is here: blog.ap.org...

At AP, we have taken the position that the term “alt-right” should be avoided because it is meant as a euphemism to disguise racist aims. So use it only when quoting someone or when describing what the movement says about itself. Enclose the term “alt-right” in quotation marks or use phrasing such as the so-called alt-right (no quote marks when using the term so-called) or the self-described “alt-right.”
...
"“alt-right”
A political grouping or tendency mixing racism, white nationalism, anti-Semitism and populism; a name currently embraced by some white supremacists and white nationalists to refer to themselves and their ideology, which emphasizes preserving and protecting the white race in the United States.

"Avoid using the term generically and without definition, because it is not well-known globally and the term may exist primarily as a public relations device to make its supporters’ actual beliefs less clear and more acceptable to a broader audience.

In AP stories discussing what the movement says about itself, the term “alt-right” (quotation marks, hyphen and lowercase) may be used in quotes or modified as in the self-described “alt-right” or so-called alt-right.

""Depending on the specifics of the situation, such beliefs might be termed racist, white supremacist or neo-Nazi; be sure to describe the specifics. Whenever “alt-right” is used in a story, include a definition: an offshoot of conservatism mixing racism, white nationalism, anti-Semitism and populism, or, more simply, a white nationalist movement.

""When writing on extreme groups, be precise and provide evidence to support the characterization. Report their actions, associations, history and positions to reveal their actual beliefs and philosophy, as well as how others see them.

""Some related definitions:

""racism The broad term for asserting racial or ethnic discrimination or superiority based solely on race, ethnic or religious origins; it can be by any group against any other group.

""white nationalism A subset of racist beliefs that calls for a separate territory and/or enhanced legal rights and protections for white people. Critics accuse white nationalists of being white supremacists in disguise.

""white separatism A term sometimes used as a synonym for white nationalism but differs in that it advocates a form of segregation in which races would live apart but in the same general geographic area.

""white supremacy The racist belief that whites are superior to justify political, economic and social suppression of nonwhite people and other minority groups.

""neo-Nazism Combines racist and white supremacist beliefs with admiration for an authoritarian, totalitarian style of government such as the German Third Reich to enforce its beliefs.

""antifa Shorthand for anti-fascists, an umbrella description for the far-left-leaning militant groups that resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations and other events. Until the term becomes better known, include a definition in close proximity to first use of the word.

""“alt-left” A term that some use to describe far-left factions. See “alt-right” for usage guidelines."

I'm trying to find 'shooter' at the moment (as a journalist I have access to databases of all worldwide newspapers in the last 150 odd years - off the top of my head I think you're correct in a sense that 'shooter' stemmed from 'school shooter' and is meant to be used to refer to/emote a sense of random acts of violence with a presumably mentally ill person killing innocents/cops but doesn't meet the criteria for terrorism/terrorist.

While the other posters are right that shooter is simply someone who shoots, you're also wise to be aware of how language is used to manipulate opinion plus I think you have a good point - shooter is simply not a word I would ever associate or could remember reading in a news release to refer to a gangland shooting, domestic shooting or any other where the perpetrator knows their victim(s). The word conjours a very specific type of shooting for myself (i.e Columbine or Dunblane Massacre).

You are heavily constrained by word count/page space limits when writing the news. Every word matters, I can spend four or five hours fretting over a single word, trying to make sure it's in there for the right. Terms as shooter would be deliberately chosen as the most effective, accurate and most likely to fit in with a preconceived narrative of the target audience. Readers should be equally aware of this fact and conduct critical discourse analysis to minimise the effect bias can have and to understand why that particular word was chosen.