Good newspaper headlines are beguiling, amusing, intriguing: “Headless body in topless bar” – the work of Vincent Musetto of the New York Post always springs to mind. Sometimes, they are just plain bemusing, such as this offering – “Meggitt boss Sir Nigel Rudd in firing line for ‘overboarding’”. The Observer style guide is quite clear on firing line: “The people who do the firing; if they are aiming at you, you are in the line of fire.” Certain other newspapers claim the two are interchangeable, but with the aid of a trusty shotgun, I could prove that they are not.
No, it was “overboarding” that stumped me. Was this some sort of arcane nautical practice, involving being bunged in the oggin for some naval malpractice? Rudd’s “sin” was actually the number of board positions he held as a director. Not quite a capital offence and hardly a headline story.
Meanwhile, in the ever-fascinating world of public transport, I was delighted by the news that there could soon be a device to jam smartphones and prevent antisocial types causing a nuisance. Apparently, mobiles and other electronic devices “can be irritating to transit users, especially in designated quiet zones”. Transit user? Funny, I think of myself as a passenger.
Finally, I’m grateful to Dr Kenneth Smith, reader in criminology and sociology at Buckinghamshire New University, who responded to my mention of “crimed”. He writes: “The use of this word is a back formation from the police use of the expression ‘no-crimed’. When someone reports a crime to the police, the police make a decision on whether a crime has occurred. In a surprisingly high number of cases they decide that no crime has occurred and they record these reported offences as ‘no-crimed’.”
Thank you, Dr Smith, but if I thought crimed was vile, no-crimed offers little solace.
• This article was amended on 1 May 2019 to remove “found” and render “Headless body in topless bar” in all its original pithiness.
• Jonathan Bouquet is an Observer columnist
