The beast of double meaning: Why ambiguity in language rattles the overly literal
Recently, in a courthouse near you, a very nice judge said about an accused that 'the entire projection is that he is anti-war, saying families of army people, civilian in border areas etc., suffer. But some words have double meaning also.'
That last sentence seems to hold an ominous secret – that of [sinister music] the Beast of Double Meaning.
For a significant set of humanity, the double entendre – a fancy way of calling a word or phrase that is open to two interpretations (its fanciness itself susceptible to cause further suspicion) – is a weapon of mass destruction.
To them, language must be as hygienically sterile as an operating room – free of nuance, purged of shades. The mere hint of ambiguity sends them into full existential crisis mode. 'What did he really mean?' 'Was that a jab at us?'
But it's not just the words themselves – it's also who says them. If you're on their list of approved individuals, your wink-nudge phrasing is delightful, sophisticated even. But if they don't trust you?
Well, then that phrasing morphs into a Machiavellian plot to topple civilisation as one knows it. Could the greeting, 'How are you?', for instance, insinuate doubts about one's well-being?
Double meanings hold trapdoors for the paranoid. Not to suggest that those uncomfortable with layered language suffer from a complicated complex, of course.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Mayor
21-05-2025
- Business Mayor
The beast of double meaning: Why ambiguity in language rattles the overly literal
Recently, in a courthouse near you, a very nice judge said about an accused that 'the entire projection is that he is anti-war, saying families of army people, civilian in border areas etc., suffer. But some words have double meaning also.' That last sentence seems to hold an ominous secret – that of [sinister music] the Beast of Double Meaning. For a significant set of humanity, the double entendre – a fancy way of calling a word or phrase that is open to two interpretations (its fanciness itself susceptible to cause further suspicion) – is a weapon of mass destruction. To them, language must be as hygienically sterile as an operating room – free of nuance, purged of shades. The mere hint of ambiguity sends them into full existential crisis mode. 'What did he really mean?' 'Was that a jab at us?' But it's not just the words themselves – it's also who says them. If you're on their list of approved individuals, your wink-nudge phrasing is delightful, sophisticated even. But if they don't trust you? Well, then that phrasing morphs into a Machiavellian plot to topple civilisation as one knows it. Could the greeting, 'How are you?', for instance, insinuate doubts about one's well-being? Double meanings hold trapdoors for the paranoid. Not to suggest that those uncomfortable with layered language suffer from a complicated complex, of course.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Yahoo
Reason Nominated for 17 Southern California Journalism Awards (opinion)
Reason has received 17 nominations for the 67th Southern California Journalism Awards, the Los Angeles Press Club announced Tuesday, including nine nods for the magazine, five for video, and three for podcasting. Editor in Chief Katherine Mangu-Ward is nominated for best magazine columnist for "The Bankruptcy of Nostalgianomics" from the March 2024 issue of Reason; "SWAT Goes to College" from the July 2024 issue of Reason; and "Double-Hater Dead-Enders" from the November 2024 issue of Reason: In election season, there's a certain dark freedom in policy nihilism. It allows candidates to campaign without accountability. If their policy proposals are flimsy and changeable, they reduce their own risk of being held to their promises. Knowing that the policy talk is meaningless allows voters to gloss over the difficult details of proposals, since the candidates are unlikely to pursue the policies they are discussing in a recognizable way once in office anyway. We're left with elections where the stakes feel apocalyptic, even as the substance hollows out. But policy nihilism is only tenable for as long as the campaign lasts. Someone will win, and that person must govern—at which point the double-haters will almost certainly be proven right. Reporter Eric Boehm is nominated for best long-form magazine feature on business/government for "How Inflation Breaks Our Brains," from the October 2024 issue of Reason, in which he surveys how history shows that rising prices make consumers—and voters—go insane: Inflation, it turns out, is also a psychological phenomenon. It makes us angry. It makes us irrational. In any democratic system, that anger and irrationality can be quickly translated into poor policies—unless elected and unelected officials are prepared to withstand it, and to recognize that combating inflation often requires unpopular actions. Now is not the time to indulge the wisdom of the mob. Reporter Billy Binion is nominated for best magazine commentary for "Trump Promises Police 'Immunity From Prosecution,'" from the August/September 2024 issue of Reason, in which he argues that pledging to inoculate law enforcement from accountability is both legally illiterate and unjust: But one thing is clear: Trump would like to see law enforcement held to a lesser standard than the public they serve. The former president has arguably never been a tried-and-true conservative, but he does need to court them. It is difficult to make a conservative case for ensuring that those who enforce the law are also above it. Science Correspondent Ronald Bailey is nominated for best science reporting in print and online for "Progress, Rediscovered," from the May 2024 issue of Reason, in which he profiles a burgeoning movement promoting scientific, technological, and economic solutions to humanity's problems: Jason Crawford, founder of the Roots of Progress project, is one of the leaders of a new pro-progress movement that is coalescing in a collection of think tanks, websites, and other intellectual incubators. It celebrates humanity's achievements so far. It judges progress not in technocratic terms but with an eye on outcomes for individual human beings. And it imagines, again in Crawford's words, an "ambitious technological future that we want to live in and are excited to build." Contributing Editor J.D. Tuccille is nominated for best medical/health reporting in print and online for "When Your Heart Becomes a Snitch," from the April 2024 issue of Reason, in which he explores how a lifesaving pacemaker can also be vulnerable to hacking and compromise privacy in surprising ways: I have a cardiologist who already told me he thinks I exercise too much. Is he going to review the data and second-guess my habits? Is my snitching medical device going to inspire nagging sessions with doctors, perhaps followed by nastygrams from my insurance company or government agencies about lifestyle choices and resulting costs? Technological capabilities are racing ahead, but conversations about the implications lag well behind. That's a thought to make my heart race. Deputy Managing Editor Fiona Harrigan is nominated for best immigration reporting in print for "Left in the Graveyard of Empires," from the August/September 2024 issue of Reason, in which she reports on the thousands of people who helped the U.S. in Afghanistan—and who are still desperately looking for an escape from the war-torn country: Things weren't supposed to go this way. In return for his service to the U.S., Baryalai was eligible for a sanctioned escape—a visa pathway specifically designed for allies like him, a reward for years of faithful military service. If that pathway wasn't backlogged and addled by bureaucracy, he might have gotten out of Afghanistan far earlier. Instead of cashing in on a promise made by the U.S. government, Baryalai and thousands of other Afghan allies were forced to fashion their own paths forward. Some now struggle to maintain legal status in neighboring countries. Others have become unwilling nomads in their own country, on the run to avoid detection. The burden has been on them to escape Taliban rule or become invisible in Afghanistan. Senior Editor Jacob Sullum is nominated for best race and society reporting in print for "'Smoking Opium Is Not Our Vice,'" from the May 2024 issue of Reason, in which he details how anti-Chinese xenophobia in San Francisco fueled America's first drug war: As politicians like [state Sen. Edward J.] Lewis saw it, the opium problem was inextricably intertwined with the Chinese problem. If the government could not forcibly remove these "filthy" foreigners, as Lewis seemed to prefer, it could at least make life as difficult as possible for them. As former congressman James Budd put it at an 1885 anti-Chinese meeting in Stockton, California, it was local authorities' "duty" to make conditions so "devilishly uncomfortable" that the Chinese would be "glad to leave." Associate Editor Emma Camp is nominated for best education reporting in print for "The Real Student Loan Crisis," from the March 2024 issue of Reason, in which she examines widespread misconceptions about student loan debt and delves into a little-known law at the root of the issue: This rapid rise in debt began after the 2005 Higher Education Reconciliation Act introduced a new offering called Graduate PLUS loans. Following the 1992 Higher Education Amendments, most individuals could borrow no more than $18,500 a year from the federal government to pay for a graduate degree. Now, graduate students could borrow up to the total cost of attendance for their program, including living expenses. Unsurprisingly, graduate student borrowing skyrocketed. While the inflation-adjusted amount owed by graduate borrowers rose just 7.8 percent from the 1999–2000 school year to the 2003–2004 school year (Education Department data are not available for every academic year), it rose 27 percent from 2007–2008 to 2011–2012. Contributing Editor Lenore Skenazy is nominated for best activism journalism in print for "Kids Should Be Blindfolded and Dropped in the Woods at Night," from the October 2024 issue of Reason, in which she explores the Dutch "dropping" rite of passage and argues the U.S. would benefit from adopting this tradition: Since most kids are afraid of the dark, afraid of the woods, and afraid of getting lost, a dropping sounds like a therapist's dream, accelerating exposure therapy in one wild night. Dropping may be one of the reasons kids in Holland are some of the happiest in the world. "I remember just feeling scared, but not scared to the point I'd never do it again," says Kimberly Humphreys, a Dutch mom of three now living in Brisbane, Australia. In fact, she went on droppings year after year, always "realizing I could do things that I thought I wasn't capable of." Senior Producer Austin Bragg, Director of Special Projects Meredith Bragg, and Producer John Carter are nominated for best humor/satire writing across TV, film, radio, and podcast for "Great Moments in Unintended Consequences: Doordash, Google AI, French Wikipedia (Vol. 16)," in which they examine (hilariously) how good intentions often lead to bad results: Producer Andrew Heaton, Senior Producer Austin Bragg, Director of Special Projects Meredith Bragg, and Producer John Carter are nominated again in best broadcast humor/satire writing for "Partisan Post-Game (Episode 2)," in which they satirize Republican and Democratic coaches taking questions from the press: Reporter Billy Binion, Video Art Director Adani Samat, and freelancers Qinling Li and Arthur Nazaryan are nominated for best activism journalism across TV, film, radio, and podcast for "This 'crazy fat lady' was arrested for her journalism," a documentary that tells the story of a citizen journalist who sparked a national First Amendment case after she was arrested for her reporting: Senior Producer Zach Weissmueller, Video Editor Danielle Thompson, Executive Editor of Video and Podcasts Jim Epstein, Producer Kevin Alexander, and Video Art Director Adani Samat are nominated for best environmental reporting across TV, film, radio, and podcast for "The political sabotage of nuclear power," a documentary that explores the backlash to a nuclear-powered future—which once promised abundant, emissions-free energy—and how the long nuclear power winter might finally be coming to an end in the U.S.: Senior Producer Zach Weissmueller, Video Editor Danielle Thompson, Producer César Báez, Video Art Director Adani Samat, and Executive Editor of Video and Podcasts Jim Epstein are nominated for best feature documentary for "Javier Milei: Madman? Or savior?" which profiles Argentina's first self-identified libertarian president and asks if his reforms are working: Editor at Large Nick Gillespie is nominated for best regular podcast for his The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie episode "Steven Pinker: What Went Wrong at Harvard," during which Pinker—the psychologist and best-selling author—argues that Harvard University's free speech policy was so "selectively prosecuted that it became a national joke." Reporter Billy Binion is nominated for best podcast profile/interview with nonentertainment personalities for his 2024 interview with exoneree Amanda Knox, in which they discuss Knox's views on true crime and media bias, her efforts to reform coercive interrogation practices, her relationship with the lead prosecutor on her case, and her response to those who still believe she's lying: Reporter Eric Boehm and former Podcast Producer Hunt Beaty are nominated for best limited series podcast for Season 2 of Why We Can't Have Nice Things, which explores how the government is making Americans poorer and sicker with its flawed approach to health care: Winners will be announced on Sunday, June 22, at the Millennium Biltmore Hotel in downtown Los Angeles. Thanks to the press club, as well as to our readers, subscribers, and supporters, who make it possible for us to produce meaningful journalism. You can subscribe to Reason here, find our video journalism here, and listen to all of our podcasts here. The post Reason Nominated for 17 Southern California Journalism Awards appeared first on
Miami Herald
13-05-2025
- Miami Herald
The 2025 elections offer a chance to change Miami politics
Rescuing Miami Miami's magic is dimming — not from natural disaster, but from something deeper: a culture of corruption and political favoritism that's taken hold at city hall. A city once defined by its promise now teeters on dysfunction. Trials involving elected officials, whispers of backroom deals, skyrocketing rents and crumbling infrastructure are pushing working families to the brink. We pay higher taxes, yet receive fewer basic services. Public employees are demoralized or pushed out for refusing to play politics. Contracts too often go to the well-connected, not the most qualified. Miamians are paying the price — with their wallets, their safety and their trust. This doesn't have to be our future. As Miami's former city manager, I led a government that worked for residents, not insiders. We hired based on merit, not connections. We empowered public employees, prioritized infrastructure, ran transparent operations, and cut taxes — and we got results. What Miami needs now isn't another smooth talker or recycled politician. It needs leadership rooted in integrity, fairness and accountability. It needs someone who doesn't flinch under pressure or owe anything to political machines. We must dismantle the culture of corruption and restore trust in city government. That means tackling affordability, rolling back taxes and making public safety a priority. It means rooting out cronyism and putting residents — not donors — at the center of every decision. The next election is a turning point. We either reclaim our city or watch it sink deeper into dysfunction. We either restore what makes Miami magic, or lose it to those who already abused it. Let's restore the Magic City. Emilio T. González, candidate for mayor, Miami Razing history Hard to take seriously the minority of people who have been misled into believing that tearing down a legendary regional theater and turning it into a measly 200-seat studio theater is the 'new dawn of Coconut Grove.' A regional theater requires a seating capacity larger than 200-300 seats; difficult to achieve when 70% of the property is being turned into retail and restaurants. Demolition of the Playhouse auditorium — where historically significant events happened and historic personages once stood — is (in the absence of a Florida Statute Chapter 267 review) in violation of the lease and state law. If the perpetrators and their supporters advocate breaking the law, then Machiavellian approaches, in which the ends justify the means at any cost, even violating the law and thinking they are above it, rule the future.. This creates a dangerous precedent. If they can get away with demolishing what even the court deemed historically designated, then nothing is sacred. We already are aware of attempts by the state to eliminate razing restrictions on the historic Art Deco District edifices on Ocean Drive. Allowing demolition of the most historic theater performance space is not a 'new dawn;' it is a continuation of the failed practice of destroying historic Coconut Grove in hopes that gentrification and a growing over-abundance of retail will bring different results. Max Pearl, Miami Sit still Our three Republican Congressional representatives literally need do nothing to preserve the legal status of thousands of their constituents. With the razor thin Republican majority in the U.S. House, our representatives merely need to announce they will be staying home until dismantling Temporary Protective Status is off the table. As the work of the House and the tax break for billionaires screeches to a halt, it would be remarkable to watch how quickly minds are changed. Our representatives should do the right thing: do nothing until justice is delivered to thousands of our friends and neighbors. Martin Motes, Redland Honored glory? The Miami Herald's May 11 special section, 'Remembering our Triumph,' was an accurate account capturing the events and feelings of soldiers who stood against tyranny. The photos of men going into battle were not pictures of victorious exaltation, but images telling the story of humbled citizens, facing their responsibility as participants in a democracy. Frightened, knowing the battle before them might cost them their lives, they marched forward anyway, believing their sacrifice affirmed their country's principles. Coming home, those who performed their duty were mostly silent, knowing they were the lucky ones. When victory did come, the cheering was a release of emotions, realizing the burden of facing death was removed by those who were forever silenced. History reflects the principles humanity is willing to die to preserve or advance. If values change and if sacrificing for others is mocked as trifling, those who died believing their sacrifice mattered may have forfeited their lives, according to their progeny, for little. Phil Beasley, Plantation Tally priorities Our Florida Legislature has mustered enough courage to tell firefighters and teachers: thank you for your important service. However, they continue to be shortsighted as to attracting and keeping them and other Florida public servants. In Tallahassee, only lip service about a cost of living adjustment is given. Meanwhile, the reality is that inflation eats up buying power annually. Thank yous are just not enough. Our legislators can't decide on taxes, insurance and the budget, but they passed a bill allowing chaplains for schools, again putting the cart before the horse. The line from the old Wendy's commercial is still true today, 'Where's the beef?' George Ellis, Miami Fault lies elsewhere With all due respect to the author of the May 11 letter, 'Biden's fault,' regarding the 'chaos' in our country, I would remind him that the 'massive problems caused by illegal immigrants' does not come close to the crimes committed in Donald Trump's name on Jan. 6, 2021 and Trump's total disregard for due process and flaunting of constitutional protections afforded to everyone in America. As a liberal Democrat, my heart does in fact bleed for those who have been marginalized, stripped of their legal TPS status and deported illegally. Peter M. Brooke, Doral Florida women Since 1982, the Florida Women's Hall of Fame has commemorated women's history by honoring and remembering those women whose lives and contributions have improved the quality of life for Florida and the nation. They are pioneers who have broken down barriers, created new opportunities and championed issues to create better paths for women and girls. Annually, the Florida Commission on the Status of Women facilitates the nomination and selection process and the Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony. The Commission receives and reviews all nominations and recommends 10 outstanding women to the governor, from whom up to three will be chosen for induction. Inductees will be recognized and honored at a special ceremony in the Fall and memorialized in the State Capitol. Who do you know that deserves this recognition? Nominations are now open on the Florida Women's Hall of Fame website: Mackenzie Rawlin, Tallahassee Staring at us In total disbelief and basically void of words, we try to comprehend, to digest, what's happening to our democracy! Yet all we seem to hear is: 'I never said that!' 'I don't know.' 'It's all his fault.' Meanwhile, by glancing in the mirror, there just might be some solutions. Diane Goodman Dolcourt, Pinecrest You shouldn't have! If the nation of Qatar were 'nice' enough to offer me a Rolls Royce (a poor man's 747 jet) with no strings attached, today, I would certainly accept it. Naturally, when a Qatari comes to me, tomorrow, with a 'small' request that challenges United States policy and best interests, I might just remember their generous gift and consider their wish. Of course, it also helps that my Justice Department said virtually anything I chose to do was legal and aboveboard. Bruce Shpiner, Miami
