I’ve noticed recently a rhetorical device employed by “news analysts,” like Patrick Tyler of the New York Times, to spin the news their way. That’s the use of the term “many.” Take this sentence in Tyler’s “news analysis” of the British government’s damning dossier of Saddam’s evasion of U.N. resolutions aimed at restricting his nuclear, chemical and biological offensive capability:
Although many Americans, and far more Europeans, will not see this as adequate cause to go to war – if President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair choose that option – the report appears clearly intended to make a strong case for the urgent return of inspectors to Iraq and for the necessary pressure to force Iraqi cooperation with their work.
This is clearly factually accurate, but it’s also misleading. According to current polls, around 70 percent of Americans find Saddam’s weaponry a threat to themselves and to the region – enough to support a war if necessary to disarm him. Does 30 percent constitute “many”? Sure. But wouldn’t it be more accurate to say: “Although a minority of Americans – but a majority of Europeans – will not see this as adequate cause to go to war …”? Nice try, Tyler. But we’re onto you.
The Dish 