I have a gripe with journalists who do not know their military terminologies yet who write articles as if they are some sort of professional on the subject or who sensationalize articles by using more tabloid-type terminologies for the average viewer. These people in combination with their degrees that I assumed they earned in journalism also get their articles checked by others who also supposedly don’t know military terminologies.
So, you are asking yourself which article, from which journalist do I have a gripe with about. Well, it’s this article, here.
Firstly, it is the term “battleship” that bothers me the most. Battleships were invented a long time ago, they were called battleships considering they had very large guns on them, thus large and were equipped to take on most combat situations. They were soon phased out during WW2 as they were considered obsolete at the arrival of the aircraft carrier.
However, in this article, the author mentions battleship twice. I can assure you that no navy in the world now operates battleships, the US Navy was the last to use battleships in a combat role. That has now ceased.
What the author of this article wrongly labels as “battleships” are mere destroyers, missile cruisers, mine sweepers, aircraft carriers etc, which he does mention and I’ll give him credit on that. But this sensationalist type of journalism where they mention the word “battleship”, let’s just say it makes the article seem more prominent and seems as if something is going to happen. The key word “battle” is that sensationalist word. It makes his article seem so ridiculous when he mentions the word, and to someone who enjoys the history of the military it just seems stupid that he would be using that terminology altogether.
There has even been the same reaction on Reddit by some users who also believe this is sensationalist writing on the authors part. But, perhaps it’s due to the authors ineptitude.
And perhaps I’m overreacting, but these people are supposed to be professionals.
It seems that the Telegraph has changed the title of their article. It no longer features “battleship”.