where science and ethics intersect with politics
Words like “harvest” and “processing” are not neutral descriptors—they are carefully chosen euphemisms that sanitize violence and erase victims from public consciousness. By examining the language used to describe animal exploitation, this piece explores how softened terminology shields harm from scrutiny and why precision in language is an ethical act, not a rhetorical one.
When headlines remove the actor from the sentence, harm begins to look like an accident rather than a choice. This installment of Language, Examined explores how passive phrasing and abstract language quietly erase responsibility—and why that matters.
News headlines often appear neutral—but neutrality achieved through abstraction can obscure harm. This first installment of Language, Examined explores how common headline constructions soften impact, shift attention, and quietly shape public perception.
The Humane Herald 