Clear99 Today's Best Country

We media types sometimes forget that the language we use on the air (or in print) shapes not only the coverage of a story but also the way the story is framed.

An ideal example of this is Columbia’s current debate over putting cameras downtown.

Proponents insist on calling them “security cameras” or “safety cameras” and want the media to refer to them in this way. Opponents say they are “surveillance cameras” and want us to use that terminology.

Is that a big deal? Probably not – most people are smart enough to not have their opinion changed because a news reporter or commentator selects a specific word to describe the issue.

That does not relieve us in media, especially those in a news role, of the obligation to write our stories in a way that avoids influencing the way someone learns about a story.

Everyone wants to be “secure” and we’re all for “safety”, but few people like to be under ”surveillance”…see where I’m going with this?

So, I offer to my media bretheren and sistren the suggestion of calling the objects in question simply “police cameras” or “downtown cameras”.

While the vote on the issue on April 6th has no binding legal authority over City Hall, the issue has become a heated debate in town.

It’s become a big issue in the races for City Council and Mayor, who ultimately have the final say on whether or not to place cameras around the downtown area (or anywhere else in town, for that matter).

Later this afternoon, I’ll have Dan Viets from the ACLU in studio with me to talk about the downtown camera issue. He’s opposed to them and will make his case for a “no” vote on Proposition 1.

Dan will be on the show around 4:30.