Stephen Gately
Posted: Sat 17 Oct, 2009 16.54
why are so many news organisations insisting on referring to his body as 'remains'?
this article is an example i pulled out of google - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/musi ... ublin.html there are many others.
i was always under the impression that the distinction between a 'body' and 'remains' was whether it had decomposed? even the day after gately died there was speculation about what would happen his 'remains'.
this seemed odd. i don't recall michael jackson's body being referred to as 'remains' and he was unburied for some time. anybody else notice this?
this article is an example i pulled out of google - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/musi ... ublin.html there are many others.
i was always under the impression that the distinction between a 'body' and 'remains' was whether it had decomposed? even the day after gately died there was speculation about what would happen his 'remains'.
this seemed odd. i don't recall michael jackson's body being referred to as 'remains' and he was unburied for some time. anybody else notice this?