Abbreviations have GTG

In the March 1 editorial “An uncompetitive defense industry puts the nation at risk,” “M&A” appears in the third paragraph. In preceding sentences, nowhere is the meaning of this abbreviation. What does it mean?

In general, why does The Post continue to use abbreviations without identifying them when first used? The practice is distractive. Does M&A stand for molecules and atoms? Proper usage is “molecules and atoms (M&A).” Notice the letters within the parentheses. The practice is getting worse. Readers who reside or work within the Beltway are not strangers to many official abbreviations, but outside this viable interstate I suspect their numbers dwindle rapidly.

The Feb. 25 Federal Insider column, “‘Archaic’ IRS tech makes life more difficult for taxpaying public,” used 45 abbreviations, some repetitive and understandably universal. Aaarrrggghhh!!! Only one, individual master file (IMF), was clearly identified, but it was used only once.

I’m not a mind reader, nor are any other Post readers. The Post’s job is to communicate clearly, not obfuscate.

Edward J. Pastula, New Carrollton