Discussion:
Emergence of a word
Add Reply
Tony Cooper
2017-05-14 16:04:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".

Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Dr. Jai Maharaj
2017-05-14 16:14:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
In article
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
"Perception" comes to mind.

Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti

http://bit.do/jaimaharaj
Peter T. Daniels
2017-05-14 17:35:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dr. Jai Maharaj
In article
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
"Perception" comes to mind.
Clearly Mr. Stevens doesn't know what "optics" means in this context.

"Optics" (or "the appearance of") is from exactly the opposite point of view as "perception."
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2017-05-14 17:36:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...zzzzzzzzzzzzz.

That use of "optics" is older than I thought.

OED:

orig. N. Amer. The way in which a situation, event, or course of
action is perceived by the public. Freq. in political contexts.

1973 Boston Globe (Nexis) 11 May 14, I knew the optics of the
situation look bad, but I kept after Bob Kuschner about the suit.
1993 Globe & Mail (Toronto) (Nexis) 23 June The reason to
streamline cabinets has everything to do with..a more realistic
relationship between the optics and reality of the exercise of
power.
2009 Vanity Fair Nov. 177/2 Paulson appreciated that the
‘optics’ of a waiver to engage with his former employer were
problematic, but he hoped it would remain a secret.

Let's keep our eyes open for "fake optics" and "alt optics".
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Pierre Jelenc
2017-05-14 17:58:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Let's keep our eyes open for "fake optics" and "alt optics".
"smoke and mirrors"

Pierre
--
Pierre Jelenc
The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
Tony Cooper
2017-05-14 18:55:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 14 May 2017 18:36:50 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
That use of "optics" is older than I thought.
orig. N. Amer. The way in which a situation, event, or course of
action is perceived by the public. Freq. in political contexts.
Well, there's an argument against the other post that claims it's
"exactly the opposite".

On the subject...In a Saturday Night Live sketch recreating the Lester
Holt interview of Donald Trump, "Lester Holt" (played by Michael Che)
uses "optics" twice.

(I record shows and watch them later than they air. I watched the
Sunday morning news shows before I watched Saturday Night Live.)
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2017-05-14 19:20:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 14 May 2017 18:36:50 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
That use of "optics" is older than I thought.
orig. N. Amer. The way in which a situation, event, or course of
action is perceived by the public. Freq. in political contexts.
Well, there's an argument against the other post that claims it's
"exactly the opposite".
No, there isn't. The audience perceives the event's optics.

The audience doesn't have/get optics of the event.
Rich Ulrich
2017-05-14 23:23:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
I noticed it getting a lot of use throughout the last campaigns, so,
it has been a year or two. [Google-ngram is swamped by things
related to optical devices.]

The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."

I liked the word, previously, for its use in describing how
science works, through the development of a narrative by
a research program. A single "discovery" is hard to use if it
does not fit with some theory. Then political advisors started
using the word as a sort of extended version of "spin" -- not
just a single deed, but part of a whole story.

About a year ago, I was impressed - for his knowing the jargon -
when then-governor Pence used the word when questioned about
why he had signed a state law to legalize bigotry against gays.
He said something like, "We had hoped to establish a different
narrative."

It seems to me that "narrative" should help to distinguish
between two types of "fake news" -- the invented fact, as
opposed to the invented or totally unsupported story. Now,
I suppose that "support" means, partly, that you can't think
of any other explanation, as opposed to being one story that
might exist among many.

When Trump complains about the media's "fake news about
Russia", there are numerous /facts/ on hand; the problem, to
him, is that the press is "spinning" a "false narrative." - In fact,
I can imagine an alternate narrative, which no one has mentioned...
that the Russian contacts, yes, are not accidental, but represent an
attempt by the Russians to "groom" some political contacts. And so on.
(Lying about all the contacts and payments is a bit more awkward,
but falls under "avoiding unpleasantness." Unfortunately for Trump's
allies, the refuted-denials do spread suspicion.)


On the other hand, when Trump spread Birtherism, that was
false-narrative with no facts. Trump on Hillary is distorted and
fake-fact, supporting false narrative.

Trump on Cruz's father was /dubious/ fact in support of false
narrative, which Trump tried to validate by calling The National
Inquirer a newspaper that should be believed.
--
Rich Ulrich
Tony Cooper
2017-05-14 23:33:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 14 May 2017 19:23:02 -0400, Rich Ulrich
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Sun, 14 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
I noticed it getting a lot of use throughout the last campaigns, so,
it has been a year or two. [Google-ngram is swamped by things
related to optical devices.]
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
That word jumped out at me this morning, but I can't remember who was
using it. Someone interviewed on one of the news shows used it
several times.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter Moylan
2017-05-15 00:59:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rich Ulrich
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
"Mummy, mummy, the cat's narrative is preserved in the door."
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Charles Bishop
2017-05-15 23:57:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Rich Ulrich
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
"Mummy, mummy, the cat's narrative is preserved in the door."
I'm all asea.
--
charles
Peter Moylan
2017-05-16 05:31:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Charles Bishop
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Rich Ulrich
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
"Mummy, mummy, the cat's narrative is preserved in the door."
I'm all asea.
This was a little girl who had been taught that "jam" was non-U and she
should say "preserves"; and also that "narrative" was a classier word
than "tale".
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2017-05-19 08:50:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Charles Bishop
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Rich Ulrich
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
"Mummy, mummy, the cat's narrative is preserved in the door."
I'm all asea.
This was a little girl who had been taught that "jam" was non-U and she
should say "preserves"
Probably taught by someone non-U. It was the other way round.
Post by Peter Moylan
; and also that "narrative" was a classier word
than "tale".
--
athel
Charles Bishop
2017-05-19 20:29:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Charles Bishop
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Rich Ulrich
The buzzword I've noticed coming on lately is "narrative."
"Mummy, mummy, the cat's narrative is preserved in the door."
I'm all asea.
This was a little girl who had been taught that "jam" was non-U and she
should say "preserves"; and also that "narrative" was a classier word
than "tale".
Thanks, I've found the shore once again.
--
charles
Don Phillipson
2017-05-15 13:53:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
bill van
2017-05-15 18:49:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
As often as not it is used redundantly, as in "The optics don't look
good".
--
bill
Lanarcam
2017-05-15 19:00:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bill van
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
As often as not it is used redundantly, as in "The optics don't look
good".
The optics don't look good-looking.
Quinn C
2017-05-17 14:26:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lanarcam
Post by bill van
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
As often as not it is used redundantly, as in "The optics don't look
good".
The optics don't look good-looking.
You're in trouble when people see the optics as not looking very
sightly.
--
Who would know aught of art must learn and then take his ease.
Quinn C
2017-05-17 14:20:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bill van
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
As often as not it is used redundantly, as in "The optics don't look
good".
Indeed that was the case in the oldest OED example, from 1973.
--
If you kill one person, you go to jail; if you kill 20, you go
to an institution for the insane; if you kill 20,000, you get
political asylum. -- Reed Brody, special counsel
for prosecutions at Human Rights Watch
Quinn C
2017-05-17 14:28:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bill van
Post by Don Phillipson
Post by Tony Cooper
At one time we used "the appearance of" to describe how things look.
Today, it seems to be "the optics".
Watching "Meet the Press" this morning, the word "optics" was used by
the host (Chuck Todd) and several panel members. The usage doesn't
particularly bother me, but it does seem buzzwordy.
This usage has been common in Canada for about 10 years, only by
public relations flacks and their clients (including many politicians
and pundits/commentators.)
As often as not it is used redundantly, as in "The optics don't look
good".
It also reminds me of the combination "optic white". As opposed to
what - acoustic white, as in white noise?
--
... their average size remains so much smaller; so that the sum
total of food converted into thought by women can never equal
[that of] men. It follows therefore, that men will always think
more than women. -- M.A. Hardaker in Popular Science (1881)
Loading...