Newspeak Lesson of the Day

Today's lesson comes to us from the Washington Post, which originally posted a characterization of the proposed Social Security plan written in English. After complaints from anonymous sources, they revised the article in Newspeak.

English:

If a worker sets aside $1,000 a year for 40 years, and earns 4 percent annually on investments, the account would grow to $99,800 in today's dollars, but the government would keep $78,700 -- or about 80 percent of the account. The remainder, $21,100, would be the worker's ...

Now, in Newspeak:

All of that money would be the worker's upon retirement. But guaranteed benefits over the worker's lifetime would be reduced by approximately $78,700 -- the amount the worker would have contributed to Social Security but instead contributed to his private account, plus 3 percent interest above inflation. The remainder, $21,100, would be the increase in benefit the worker would receive over his lifetime above the level he would have received if he stayed in the traditional system.

Notice how the English version incorrectly suggests that the government will "keep $78,700." Notice that the Newspeak version correctly shows that the government will give the worker all of his money in his account. It just won't pay him $78,700 from the rest of his Social Security benefits.

I'm happy that the editors at the Washington Post agree that this isn't something that could be characterized as "keeping $78,700." It has already been corrected on the website; even now, operatives of the Ministry of Truth are tracking down print copies to be thrown into the Memory Hole.