Peevish about "spot-on"

Does "spot-on" bug anyone besides me?

From today's Washington Post(in an attention-getting context!):
"The hair comes from humans, but it is ethically sourced, of course," Potton said. He was presumably heading off any problems with People for the Ethical Treatment of Follicles. As for the eyeballs, Potton added, "they take individual silk strands to make the veins and get the eyes actually spot-on."

And from americanchronicle.com:
The current economic chaos and plight of average Americans prove Democrat Socialist George Orwell´s comments on the book offered decades ago ominously spot on. He said "[A] return to 'free' competition, means for the great mass of people a tyranny probably worse, because (it will be) more irresponsible, than that of the state." 

"Spot-on" is a Britishism that has begun cropping up a lot. In my experience, Americans don't like Britishisms from the mouths and keyboards of other Americans -- I get mail all the time complaining about "went missing."

I admit, among possible alternatives"right on" is dated, and "on target" probably strikes some people as undesirably warlike. So maybe "accurate"? "Just right"? 
Presented by

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register with Disqus.

Please note that The Atlantic's account system is separate from our commenting system. To log in or register with The Atlantic, use the Sign In button at the top of every page.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

A Stop-Motion Tour of New York City

A filmmaker animated hundreds of still photographs to create this Big Apple flip book

Video

The Absurd Psychology of Restaurant Menus

Would people eat healthier if celery was called "cool celery?"

Video

This Japanese Inn Has Been Open for 1,300 Years

It's one of the oldest family businesses in the world.

Video

What Happens Inside a Dying Mind?

Science cannot fully explain near-death experiences.

More in Entertainment

Just In