Pedantry-pourri

 Journalists work with words every day, so it's depressing to note how often they use them incorrectly.  Here are just a few example of poor English I have come across recently.

• "A new tact", to describe someone trying to change direction.  That should, of course, be "a new tack", a naval term for a change of course, going back to the age of sailing ships.

• "Unchartered waters", another corruption of a naval term. The correct usage is "uncharted waters", a reference to dangerous and unmapped areas where all manner of unknown perils might reside. By the way, "unchartered" is promptly flagged up by the spell-checker, which you'd think a journalist might notice.

• "Free reign", used to denote the liberty to choose your own course of action, is not some kind of reference to the powers of an absolute monarch. It should, of course, be "free rein", an equestrian term for giving a horse its head so as to coax it along.  

• "Amount" and "number" confused.  "Amount" is for things you measure; "number" is for things you count. So, there is "a large amount of careless journalism", but "a large number of careless journalists".

• Lastly, "fulsome". To be fair, Merriam-Webster now accepts that this can mean copious or abundant, but that's only because this sloppy usage has become commonplace in recent years. The original meaning of the word is "exaggerated", "insincere", or even "offensive". I actually quite enjoy this one, because when I read about a politician offering "a fulsome apology" for something, I know the writer is almost certainly using the word in its more recent meaning, when the older sense is so much more appropriate!