Guido draws attention to Simon Hoggart’s observation in the Guardian that the MPs Expenses Scandal is as yet unnamed.

Putting my communications hat on for a moment, the fact that this scandal does not have a name makes it significantly more powerful. Consider: Watergate. Watergate is the name of a hotel. It does not explain what the scandal was all about, who was involved or what crime was actually committed. In fact, “Watergate” obscures the details of the scandal, robbing people of understanding.

We call this scandal the ‘MP’s Expenses Scandal’ because that’s exactly what it is. People are left in no doubt as to what’s going on. We could give it a name: Bob? Charles? Who cares. All we’re doing is adding a layer of obfuscation between what’s happened and how we talk about it. So, no thanks, no clever name please: Let’s have reality and let’s concentrate on getting the matter resolved rather than try to find new, clever and witty ways to talk about it.