Dear Dr. Ink:
Seeing as how you seem to be the best arbiter of usage I know, how should the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks be referred to in print? My newsroom is split between 9/11 and “the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.”
The thinking goes that since 9/11 is not typical style for a date, it obviously stands out in copy as a specific point in time, while Sept. 11 could be referring to any 11th of September of any year, and adding the whole phrase “terrorist attacks” would just be too unwieldy.
I have chosen to buck the trend and have taken to calling the event the “Sept. 11 terrorist attacks,” because I hate it when people refer to the event during conversation as “Nine-Eleven.” But I was wondering if you had any input on the matter.
Mike Giusti
Associate Editor
New Orleans CityBusiness
Answer: It should be clear to Dr. Ink’s readers that, in most matters, he is a “both/and” rather than an “either/or” kind of Doc.
Let’s remember that the events of September 11, 2001, are still fresh — some might say raw — in the hearts and minds of many Americans. The passage of time will convert journalism to history, and traditions of usage will follow.
Doc has heard or read “9/11,” “Nine-Eleven,” “Sept. 11,” “the terrorist attacks of 9/11,” and more evocative descriptions such as “the day the Twin Towers came down,” “the destruction of the World Trade Center,” and many, many more. The first goal for the journalist is accuracy, then clarity, and then finding the language that best fits the content of the message.
Why not just place all such usages on our workbench? Use each when it comes in handy. Invite new ones.
Doc makes this easy prediction: With time will come change.
Let’s not forget that from 1918 until 1954, the country recognized November 11 as Armistice Day. For the last 50 years, it has been known as Veterans’ Day. If that day is remembered at all, how many will recognize its origins as the anniversary of the end of World War I?
