Media’s Use of Passive Voice Raises Concerns in Police-Involved Shooting Reports

“The Use of Passive Voice by Media in Describing Incidents of Police Shootings: Questioning the Narrative”

Why do media use passive voice to describe incidents where it seems like police shot and killed a guy? Because the only available accounts of the incidents don’t *quiiiiite* confirm that police shot and killed someone even if that is the most likely course of events. pic.twitter.com/XJdwATMKDj

— Tyler Olsen (@ty_olsen) December 1, 2023

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Title: The Use of Passive Voice in Media Reporting of Police Shootings Raises Concerns

In recent years, the media’s coverage of incidents involving police shootings has come under scrutiny. One particular aspect that has drawn attention is the use of passive voice when describing these incidents. A recent tweet by Tyler Olsen, a journalist and media critic, shed light on this issue and sparked a debate on the reasons behind such language choices.

Olsen’s tweet questioned why the media often resorts to passive voice when reporting incidents where it appears that the police shot and killed someone. He argued that this linguistic approach allows news outlets to avoid explicitly stating that the police were responsible, even though it is highly likely based on available information.

The use of passive voice in journalism has long been a topic of discussion. It is often employed to create a sense of objectivity and impartiality. However, in cases like police shootings, where the facts and evidence overwhelmingly point to the involvement of law enforcement, passive voice can be seen as a means to downplay accountability.

Critics argue that this language choice can shape public perception and perpetuate a narrative that absolves the police of responsibility. By framing the incidents in a way that avoids naming the active agent (the police), the focus is shifted away from their actions and accountability.

While the use of passive voice may be a result of cautious reporting and the lack of definitive evidence at the time of initial coverage, it is crucial for the media to be transparent and accurate in their reporting. Journalists have a responsibility to provide the public with the most complete and factual information available.

This debate highlights the need for media organizations to critically evaluate their language choices when reporting on sensitive topics such as police shootings. By being mindful of the impact of passive voice, journalists can contribute to a more informed and accountable public discourse.

As public trust in the media continues to be a pressing concern, the ethical implications of language usage in reporting must be examined and addressed. Only through open and honest reporting can the media fulfill its role as a watchdog and provide the public with an accurate understanding of such incidents..