The term 'fetal heartbeat bill' certainly has that vibe, which is why The Guardian is opting to use different more neutral (and certainly scientifically more palatable) terms.
> I am thinking you've drastically missed the point of the comment you're replying to.
Nope, youre the one missing his point. The commentor above is accusing the newspapers of Orwellian newspeak, where really they are just responding to the orwellain newspeak in use by the people naming the bill to begin with.
The newspaper is seeking to clarifly the misleading actions of others. Doing so is not newspeak. Its their role in soceity.
And here I thought I was supposed to trust what's in the newspaper because their job is to report the facts, unlike those biased websites that are often run by agents of a foreign government (or, so I read in several newspapers).
