Where are you when we need you, Red?
Mary Henkel Judson

Mary Henkel Judson is editor and copublisher of the South Jetty. Contact her at southjetty@centurytel.net.

"Clearly" the first Gulf War led us to "embed" reporters in the second Gulf War that continues even as the "presumptive" Democratic and Republican nominees for President wage their campaigns to occupy the White House.

Clearly, embed and presumptive are "in" words in the media these days (have you heard anyone who is not in the media use them?). It's next to impossible to watch a national news broadcast without hearing one or all three.

Clearly is the only one of the "in" words that has any real value.

Embed, in fact, has specific meaning. Contrary to previous conflicts, some reporters are now assigned a specific military unit that they stay with, rather than roving from one unit to the next. The military term for that is embed. If you're not connected with the military in some way, who would know that? The term has been unexplained and overused.

And what's up with presumptive? It's the hottest thing going. What's wrong with "presumed" or "apparent" or "obvious" or "likely?" -- good, basic words used on a daily basis by average Americans.

I'm sorry Dr. Martin L. "Red" Gibson has gone on to the great newsroom in the sky. He'd be having a blast with this.

Red was one of the finest journalism professors in the country. It was my privilege and good fortune to be in several of his classes at The University of Texas.

One of those classes was a reporting course in which I enjoyed hearing the gospel of news writing according to Red.

Among his many memorable parables was on the use of the word "very." Red advised his students to replace "very" with "damn," and if "damn" was necessary to the sentence, then it would be acceptable to use "very."

It was a damn good lesson.

I can see Red taking a deep breath, looking at the ceiling through his bushy eyebrows, putting his hands on his hips and saying, "Embedded? Embedded?"

Red encouraged his students to write like we talked, as long as we spoke well. He didn't want to turn out students who put on airs in print. He wanted his students to communicate (to use one of the "in" words) clearly and concisely.

I think about Red every week when we write about fish biting off the south jetty in the fishing report. I have an image of a giant fish taking a bite off the granite rocks at the end of the jetty.

As long as we're talking about language, how can we criticize the younger generation for their language (whatever, you know, what up, actually, like, random, etc.) when we're stuffing our language with our own "in" words?

So, how did we get along without "embedded" in Vietnam? How did we get through the 2004 presidential campaign without "presumptive?" Clearly, we did.

I wonder what the next "in" word will be for the next long-term news story, which I suppose will be the first 100 days of the next presidency.

I'm taking nominations.