Has anyone else noticed that "fundamentals" are everywhere these days?
It started with Sen. John McCain's Sept. 15 pronouncement that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." Even at the time I thought it was an odd way to phrase it. Not "the economy is strong." But essentially voicing a view that the basic principles of the economy - however you define them - are strong.
The statement seemed more of a philosophical one (about capitalism, free markets?) from the presidential candidate than an assessment of the actual experiences of Americans, not to mention present-day Wall Street.
However, not being an economist (recall that McCain said he's not an economy expert either), I don't intend to write an economic analysis. I'm just following a word.
It popped up again a few days later when U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said on Sept. 21, "I wouldn't bet against the long-term fundamentals of this country."
Speaking of his vice presidential candidate's experience to The Des Moines Register on Sept. 30, McCain got the word in twice:
Thank you, but I disagree with your fundamental principle that she doesn't have the experience. You and I just have a fundamental disagreement, and I am so happy the American people are siding with me.
The director of the University of Idaho's journalism school said through a spokeswoman on Oct. 1 that, "The fundamentals of ethical behavior are part of all our mass media courses," reacting to VP candidate Sarah Palin's comment that much had changed since she received her ethics training there.
At last night's vice presidential debate (Oct. 2), Sen. Joe Biden, responding to the first question asked, got variations of the word in twice in one sentence:
And so, as a consequence of that, it brings us back to maybe the fundamental disagreement between Gov. Palin and me and Sen. McCain and Barack Obama, and that is that the - we're going to fundamentally change the focus of the economic policy.
Between the two candidates, I counted "fundamentally" or "fundamental(s)" used 11 times during the debate. (I actually was surprised it wasn't used more). Check out these word clouds generated by the debate transcript. "Fundamental" made Biden's word cloud (look in the lower right).
Of course it's not the first time the word has been used, but in recent weeks it's taken up residence in both official and off-the-cuff speak. My concern is that it's just become the latest buzz word to roll off the tongue, fill space, sound authoritative and not mean much. For people so very interested in core principles, values and identity, we seem to use the word rather carelessly. It's often not clear what it means - which is perhaps why it's convenient - and its overuse diminishes its actual meanings.
Why is this interesting?
The media have gotten better about dissecting the intended meaning of the word's relative, the oft-used, abused and misused "fundamentalist" (which is how this post relates to religion).
Both the AP Stylebook and Religion Stylebook say to use the word cautiously:
fundamentalism, fundamentalist: A Christian religious movement that began in the U.S. in the late 19th century and early 20th century to counter liberalism and secularism. It emphasized the inerrancy of the Bible. In recent years, fundamentalist and fundamentalism have become associated with any religious reactionary movement, such as Islamic fundamentalism. The words also have been used as pejoratives. Journalists often, and erroneously, label all conservative Christians, including conservative evangelicals, as fundamentalist. It is best to avoid the words unless a group applies the terms to itself.
In recent years, we've gotten better about not using "fundamentalist" when it is not the best word to describe what we are describing. We are more sensitive to its inaccuracies and pitfalls. And when it is used, now it is often with more intention than assumption.
(Though, check out Mollie Hemingway's incisive post on GetReligion about at least one article that failed to abide by this guidance in its Palin coverage.)
That said, why not pay as close attention to "fundamental?" To not do so is, I think, fundamentally flawed.
Comments