Is the word "target" unPC now?

United States
January 13, 2011 7:51pm CST
Just wondering due to the flap over it's use. Definition of TARGET transitive verb 1: to make a target of ie..targeted her for promotion; especially : to set as a goal 2 : to direct an action, message, etc., at someone or something. The commercial is targeted at children. government programs that are targeted at low-income areas The world is used a lot in the English language for a lot of reason...so in politics are people now NOT allowed to use the word? Tell me what you think. Hyperbole or real?
1 person likes this
4 responses
• Canada
14 Jan 11
Ok, I'm a liberal (albeit a Canadian one) so let me try to wade in here without being "targeted!" Do I think that the word "target" should never be used again? Of course not. Just as every other word in the English language, it has several meanings and uses. Should politicians be able to use it? Yes, of course! If Palin wants to let her voters know that they are "targetting" certain ridings that have a good chance of being Republican instead of Democrat after the next election, there's no problem with that. I think the reason people are upset is because the word target was combined with crosshairs, as well as the names of certain people...and then a nutjob shot one of them. Did Sarah Palin ask her loyal followers to murder Democrats? I don't recall hearing that... So really, as much as I can't stand her, I have a brain in my head that tells me she is not responsible for this. Since it happened, it is in good taste for her to discontinue using that particular crosshairs map, but I don't think her intent was to have people shot.
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
14 Jan 11
I would respectfully disagree for one reason: making words taboo is a first step on the road to censorship of free speech. This is the country where burning the flag has been upheld as an expression of free speech. We have always decided these things with the most care towards preserving liberty. Starting to regulate speech in the media, on the internet, or anywhere, is deciding to limit freedom. I think that the congressman who said that Rick Scott should be put up against the wall and shot should not have used that phrase, it's not how I think people should express their distaste for a politician. But I have to defend his right to be rude and use distasteful language. The first amendment is there to protect offensive speech. Pleasing speech needs no law to protect it, because no one will try to squelch it. Let's not act from fear, let's act from principles and the basic tenets of freedom. Freedom is worth it.
• United States
14 Jan 11
Thank you...I think you are right.
1 person likes this
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
14 Jan 11
Well the use or disuse of the word "target" depends on what political party you belong to. For one, it will continue to be ok to use the word. For the other party, expect outrage from the other party should you use it in any fashion. I think you can guess which is which. This whole thing is not real nor is it hyperbole. The guys spewing the cr*p expect you to take it literally...the truth so help me God. With hyperbole it's not expected to be taken literally. So it's cr*p, for lack of a better word.
• United States
14 Jan 11
I think you "targeted" your answer very nicely!!
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
14 Jan 11
Are you a member of the party where the use of the word "target" is ok? If not, I'm going to give you cr*p.
• United States
14 Jan 11
I am not a member of ANY party...so can I use it?
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
16 Jan 11
Let's see, isn't "Target" where Sarah Palin shops...only she calls it "Surveyors Symbols"? Seriously, I haven't heard anyone say the specific word "target" shouldn't be used because as you said, there are many different ways in which it's used. Heck, I doubt anyone has a real problem with it even being used in politics, as in "targeting the south", "targeting the female demographic" or something like that. However, there are those who don't think it's exactly "PC" to have a map with rifle cross hairs on certain "targeted" districts, identified not by the location of the district but by the name of the Representative. Some feel that pointing to the site where the map is posted and using words like "Don't retreat, reload" and "Bullseye" lends a more specific meaning to the word. Obviously, everyone is "allowed" to use that word or any other word that hasn't been deemed to be obscene in politics. As is so often the case, it comes to to what's our "right" as opposed to what's RIGHT. Annie
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
16 Jan 11
I don't think it was appropriate. I think lots of people from both parties and no party have used these types of metaphors and thought them to be rather benign and I think everyone should simply start giving more thought to what they say BEFORE they say it. As I said, I'm not calling for any new laws taking away our freedom of speech to be passed, I'm just saying people could and should on their own change their ways if only in the name of civility and mutual respect. Annie
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
14 Jan 11
I think a multi-Billion dollar company will have a serious issue if people take this to an extreme as well. This companies marketing has people wearing targets on themselves so they are most likely next to be strung into this maddness. I hope we don't go this far off the deep end but hey it could happen.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
14 Jan 11
Well the next time someone is shot I know who I'm suing! They put those freaking targets all over the country and someone's been shot! It's THEIR FAULT!
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
15 Jan 11
Yeah good marketing ;) ( I am so going to a very hot place when I die but from what I heard good music is there) I mean really if we are going to go after Sarah Palin for it why not the company that uses a target as there symbol.
• Canada
15 Jan 11
Oh I get it... the whole thing was a giant conspiracy to get people to shop at Target. Talk about branding!
1 person likes this