I\u2019ve commented on bad, misleading, attention-grabbing headlines before, and this one compounds it with the use of the passive voice in a misleading way:
\n\u201cCoach Jim Boeheim was involved in a fatal car crash last night.\u201d
\nUntil you hear the story (it was on the radio), it makes you wonder: involved in a fatal car crash? Was he killed?
\nNo. He was the driver of a car that struck and killed someone.
\nSecond: since when do we refer to a car hitting someone as being \u201cin a car crash\u201d? Technically, I guess, it\u2019s accurate, but it\u2019s misleading.
\nThird, the passive voice: \u201cwas involved in\u201d? He was driving the car that hit and killed someone, so sure, he was \u201cinvolved.\u201d The car didn\u2019t do it all on its own.
\nMy sympathies go out to the man who was killed, and his friends and family, and to Coach Boeheim and HIS friends and family. From all accounts, this was a tragic accident. Roads were slippery\/icy; I was out on them myself a little more than an hour earlier. Coach Boeheim was apparently trying to avoid a car that has spun out and was in the road in front of him and in that effort, he struck someone on the shoulder of the road. But for the radio to word things this way is irresponsible, the audio equivalent of clickbait, and it brings discredit on those who would do this for the purpose of sensationalizing a tragic situation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I\u2019ve commented on bad, misleading, attention-grabbing headlines before, and this one compounds it with the use of the passive voice in a misleading way: \u201cCoach Jim Boeheim was involved in a fatal car crash last night.\u201d Until you hear the story (it was on the radio), it makes you wonder: involved in a fatal car … <\/p>\n