I agree that it’s lazy copy editing. “Allegedly” is used in the newspaper business as a magic “get out of any libel suit” word.
However, I don’t think it’s necessarily safe for the news flat report that Trump “did” the thing. They can report on what Carroll says he did (those are the allegations). And they can report that a jury determined it’s more likely than not that he did the thing.
This is a situation where explaining it correctly requires several more words than the editors wanted to spare.
What’s wrong with “he likely did the thing?” To be accurate with the “allegedly,” you have to follow up with “oh but also a jury ruled against him multiple times.” That’s way longer! Leaving it completely unqualified, as the article does, is downright misleading
Either way, “allegedly” is the incorrect choice of words
I agree that it’s lazy copy editing. “Allegedly” is used in the newspaper business as a magic “get out of any libel suit” word.
However, I don’t think it’s necessarily safe for the news flat report that Trump “did” the thing. They can report on what Carroll says he did (those are the allegations). And they can report that a jury determined it’s more likely than not that he did the thing.
This is a situation where explaining it correctly requires several more words than the editors wanted to spare.
What’s wrong with “he likely did the thing?” To be accurate with the “allegedly,” you have to follow up with “oh but also a jury ruled against him multiple times.” That’s way longer! Leaving it completely unqualified, as the article does, is downright misleading