“Former sports reporter William Davis, who has been in the Daily Bugle's business news department the last four years, has been named the sports content editor effective Monday. Williams will direct the sports department along with deputy sports content editor Bruce Randolph.”
So it's sports content editor now? Is there a city content editor too?
I understand (a little) that content has taken on new significance in the age of the Internet. But sports content editor sounds like a case of using jargon just to use jargon. A sports editor is a sports editor, whether his work is going into the paper or onto the web site. We should be looking for ways to avoid jargon, not increase its use. It usually hinders communication more than it helps.
I suppose the content in this instance is the sort defined by Merriam-Webster as “the principal substance (as written matter, illustrations, or music) offered by a World Wide Web site <Internet users have evolved an ethos of free content in the Internet — Ben Gerson>”
Get your modality out of my content:
“In what appeared to be a face-saving formula, Sharif told reporters that he and Zardari agreed in principle on restoration of the judges, but would leave it to parliament to sort out the details. ‘In principle there's no disagreement on restoration of the judiciary. We will work on the modalities in parliament,' he said.”
Nothing is clear about this statement except the speaker's pretension. Is modalities synonymous with details? If so, use details, and people will know what you mean.
You don't go to jail for ‘alleged assault':
“A neighbor told police Ratzio arrived at their condo complex appearing disheveled and apparently injured. The neighbor said Ratzio allegedly assaulted him, causing significant injuries, police Lt. Billy Clubb said.” No, the neighbor said “He assaulted me,” not “He allegedly assaulted me.” Newspapers have trouble with this, for some reason.