Yeah, they all do it. The headline is "Business, Labor GroupsGird for Free-Trade Battle." Why couldn't they just call it a "trade battle?" I thought that headline writers tried to save words. The point is that the deal is not actually about "free trade." Many barriers to trade will still exist after the deal is in place, most importantly restrictions on trade in highly paid professional services that continue to make it difficult for Colombians in highly paid professions, like doctors and lawyers, from competing with their counterparts in the United States on an even footing. The deal also increases some forms of protection, most importantly by imposing stronger patent and copyright protection. So why is it so hard to drop the word "free" from the discussion of trade agreements? Are the reporters worried that we wouldn't know what they are talking about if they said the "Colombia Trade Agreement?" If the papers want to tell us how much they really like the trade agreement they have their editorials. They could even take out ads, but how about leaving the loaded words out of the reporting.
--Dean Baker