That word "carnage"

[vilakins]

Media Watch last night criticised the exaggeration of news reports about Christchurch, and particularly the misuse of the word "carnage" which I objected to; vindicated! Because there weren't any deaths, let alone slaughter, as Media Watch put it.

Petrol-head Greg thinks the misuse of "carnage" comes from Formula 1 where they call every crash carnage, and I'm wondering if the "car" part is to blame. The reporter who used it in Christchurch was standing near a flattened car, but I really don't think he was thinking about that when he said it. I'm wondering what the general perception of that word is. So, a poll.

[Poll #1615401]
[Edit] Since I can't change a poll, add "with horrible injuries" to the last option. I kept it too simple. :-P

Comments

[astrogirl2.livejournal.com]

I clicked "high death toll," but what it really makes me think is, "bits of horrible bloody flesh everywhere."

Mind you, it can certainly be used metaphorically, but I agree with you: that particular usage is just wrong. Or massively, ridiculously hyperbolic, at the very least.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I tend to think of that too because of the flash origins of the word. If there really was carnage, I wouldn't be watching the news reports.

[astrogirl2.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the etymology is definitely there in my head when I hear the word.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

Oh damn, I meant flesh. Stupid typos.

[astrogirl2.livejournal.com]

That's OK. I think I read "flesh" there, anyway. :)

[zoefruitcake.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the etymology is definitely there in my head when I hear the word.

ditto, it's definitely the raw meat everywhere in my head

[snowgrouse.livejournal.com]

Same. I definitely think of blood and bits of meat flying everywhere. They wouldn't call it a bloodbath or a massacre, damn it...

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

They do sometimes, but yeah, that's definitely what I think of. :-P