MEDIA NEEDS TO PICK A NEW WORD TO DESCRIBE ITS MOST ANNOYING REPORTERS
FITSNews – January 8, 2008 – We were annoyed enough when Gulf War reporters started referring to themselves as being “embedded” with particular military units, but apparently the expression is now being used to describe journalists covering the 2008 presidential campaigns. They’ve even termed these reporters “embeds,” which sounds a little too close to the geneological disposition of the average South Carolinian, if you ask us.
Anyway, when we hear the word “embedded” we think of chiggers. Or molars. Wait, that’s “impacted.” Never mind.
Of course,Â TV producers are going to continue using the term because they think it makes them sound edgy. Never mind that they could be covering a friggin’ lunch break or a potty stop, for some reason simply bestowing the term “embedded” on these ordinary acts turns them into gritty frontline dramas that people who also appreciate Brit Hume can relate to.
Personally, Brit Hume has always scared us. Something about his jowels … we’re not sure … it’s like thereÂ could actually be a couple of reporters embedded in there or something. See! It works … that actually sounds kinda cool now!