ticking time bomb vs. ticking bomb

I just wrote the phrase, “Ticking time bomb,” then I stopped. Isn’t the word “time” redundant? What other thing could “ticking” refer to?

Is the Phrase “Critically Important” Redundant?

“Critical” and “important” mean the same thing.

Therefore, to use the two terms together — “critically important,” as many people do — seems redundant.

Why not just say “critical” or “vital”?

I suspect the answer is because “critically important” is emphatic in a way that “critical” by itself is not. “Critically important” sounds more urgent and more serious than “critical.”

obviate the need for

In 2006, I asked Merriam-Webster the following question. Associate Editor, Jennifer N. Cislo, replied as follows.

Q: In June, former Time Inc. editor in chief Norman Pearlstine told CNN, “By turning over this information, we obviate the need for Matt to even testify.” In reporting the interview, the Washington Post wrote, “Pearlstine said he believes the documents will ‘obviate the need’ for any testimony from Cooper.”

But if “obviate” means to “make unnecessary,” isn’t “obviate the need for” redundant?

Perhaps many people are unfamiliar with “obviate,” so pairing it with “need” clarifies its meaning?

A: The phrase “obviate the need for” is idiomatic and in common use.

high quality. quality

While editing a report, I came across the adjective high-quality. I'm sure I've seen this word many times before, but I was on brevity patrol that day and so paused for reflection. Using track changes, I commented, "Doesn't high-quality mean the same thing as quality?"

The author of the document disagreed, as did another colleague, as did my Twitter friends. City Girl's reply was particularly insightful: "Acura makes quality cars, but Mercedes makes high-quality cars."

In other words, quality means "good," whereas high-quality means "great."

This was a plausible distinction, yet upon further reflection, I did what I should have done in the first place: consulted the dictionary. According to Merriam-Webster, quality means "high quality," while high-quality isn't even listed.

I'm not sure you can define a word using that word, but, in my book, Merriam-Webster is the gold standard. Therefore, high-quality is a tautology.

Is "News Media" Redundant?

As a stickler for tautologies, when I started hearing the term "news media" on a routine basis, my face crinkled and the gears in my head went to work. Isn't this redundant, I asked myself? If the media aren't news-based, what are they?, I asked a colleague.

His reply: "'News media' is a subset of media; other members include entertainment media and, say, opinion media." My reply is below.

I'd consider "entertainment" reporters to be part of the "news" media, since drawing the line between "entertainment" and "news" is so fuzzy: one man's "gossip" (say, John's Edwards's affair) rightfully is another's news.

On the other hand, the distinction between pundits, who deliver opinions, and reporters, who deliver facts, is a long-standing, crucial one. Yet here, too, the semantics trouble me.

To say that the "news media" excludes pundits seems like we're trying to force a concept upon a word ("media") which doesn't lend itself, semantically, to this distinction. "News media" consists of a noun followed by a noun, and "opinion media," or "opinion-based media," sounds even worse.

Better, I think, to let "media" encompass everyone, and use traditional terms like "reporters" and "pundits" when we need to be specific.

online Web site

According to the NYT,

PoliticalMoneyLine, [is] an online Web site that compiles finance data.

Of course, a Web site, by definition, is an online entity; hence, "online Web site" is risibly redundant.

obviate

obviate (v): to anticipate and prevent (as a situation) or make unnecessary (as an action)

In June, former Time Inc. editor in chief Norman Pearlstine told CNN

[B]y turning over this information, we obviate the need for Matt to even testify.

In reporting the interview, the Washington Post wrote,

Pearlstine said he believes the documents will "obviate the need" for any testimony from Cooper.

But if "obviate" means to "make unnecessary," isn't saying "obviate the need" redundant?

I realize that most people are unfamiliar with "obviate," so pairing it with "need" clarifies its meaning. Yet given the choice between being succinct at the risk of being misunderstood, and being redundant to be understood, I prefer the former.

Therefore, I would have said that the documents obviated testimony.

Postscript (1/20/06): I posed this question to Jennifer N. Cislo, an associate editor at Merriam-Webster. Her response, in part: “obviate the need for” is "idiomatic and in common use."

Postscript (2/2/06): Another example, from Chuck Schumer, as quoted in today's NYT:

If the president were to voluntarily institute the review and delay the contract, that would obviate the need for our legislation, but a simple cooling off period will not allay our concerns.

At least he gets the subjunctive right and says "were" instead of "was."

Tautologies

tautology (n): needless repetition of an idea, statement, or word

1. shrug one’s shoulders
2. Good Samaritan
3. safe haven
4. the sky is falling down
5. general consensus
6. free of charge

More (6/6/2009):

7. PIN number
8. ISBN number
9. from whence
10. wet water
11. migraine headache
12. reiterate
13. obviate the need for
14. Internet Web site

More (6/11/2009):

15. personally, I
16. ATM machine

More (6/15/2009):

17. so, therefore

More (7/30/2009):

18. and also

More (8/6/2009):

29. strategic communications
20. strategic partnership

More (8/17/2009):

21. but rather

More (9/5/2009):

22. later this week
23. future plans
24. past history
25. X-year anniversary
27. please RSVP
28. whether or not

More (9/8/2009):

29. general public

More (1/12/2009):

30. afternoon siesta

More (8/4/2010):

31. tuna fish
32. inkpen

More (8/5/2010):

33. at this point in time
34. period of time
35. CAC card

More (9/2/2010):

36. UPC code

More (10/18/2011):

37. focus attention on

More (1/20/2012):

38. close proximity

More (2/23/2012):

39. chai tea

More (9/2/2014):

30. nod your head
31. quietly whisper
32. complimentary gift
33. evolved over time
34. frozen tundra
35. bouquet of flowers

Another (9/28/2014):

36. vitally important

More (10/15/2014):

37. advance planning
38. basic necessities

More (5/26/2015):

39. 12 midnight
40. 12 noon
41. completely unanimous
42. cooperate together
43. each and every
44. end result
45. exactly the same
46. final completion

More (5/15/2017):

47. past experience
48. falling rain
49. depreciate in value
50. collaborate together

Another (8/17/2018):

51. close confidante

More (3/4/2019):

51. tin foil
52. aluminum foil

More (9/9/2019):

53. all-time record
54. blend together
55. closed fist

More (2/6/2020):

56. chai tea
57. Sahara desert
58. Tahoe lake
59. Panera bread

More (4/25/2023):

60. The defendant was accused of six illegal crimes.

61. The infinite cycle goes on and on.

62. You bad breath stinks!

63. The purpose of the report is to clarify and explain the treaty.