At the end of each year Lake Superior State University publishes its annual “List of Words Banished from the Queen’s English for Misuse, Overuse and General Uselessness“. The 2008 version includes such classics as:
Perfect Storm-“Overused by the pundits on evening TV shows to mean just about any coincidence.”
Webinar-“Yet another non-word trying to worm its way into the English language due to the Internet. It belongs in the same school of non-thought that brought us e-anything and i-anything.”
‘BLANK’ is the new ‘BLANK’ or ‘X’ is the new ‘Y’-“The idea behind such comparisons was originally good, but we’ve all watched them spiral out of reasonable uses into ludicrous ones and it’s now time to banish them from use.”
I suggest the 2009 list should include “Agent of Change”, “Change agent”, or any other term that tries to make a candidate for office sound special because they want to [ahem] “CHANGE THINGS”.
Why is it silly? Has there ever been a candidate for office who wasn’t running to change something, if only the holder of that office?
The term is silly, pretentious, and not needed.
You want to be a real “change agent”? Go change a messy diaper-as the father of three I can assure that THEN you are truly a change agent worthy of mention!