"The victim, 18-year-old tree surgeon Cameron Brooksbank,This total incorrect use of the word "diffuse" has appeared in several other news articles of late that I have read. It seems clear from the context that this verb carries the meaning of "intervening to remove the elements of an adversarial confrontation that might lead to violent actions."
was among his other colleagues who were set upon by the mob
and attacked as he tried to diffuse the escalating volatility."
The proper verb employed for this intercessory role is "to defuse" the volatile situation, which in the figurative-literal sense would mean having the same effect as plainly literally quenching a lit fuse or separating it from its connection to the explosive substance it is meant to activate.
It may be that the writer has used a voice-to-text application to create the article, which could mistranslate the desired verb into a phonetically and grammatically equivalent verb "diffuse" which is what appears in the above quote.
Or perhaps it results from the author's misunderstanding of the use of the proper word for the victim's intervening role in the event being reported.
But for sure, the verb "to diffuse" is not the correct word to describe the action that failed to achieve the desired result.
he bottom line is that a journalist or editor ought to examine the contents resulting from the use of a voice-to-text application for its accuracy in producing the material that is to be printed and widely distributed.
You are right.
Also from the headline, “reigned terror.”
Shouldn’t that be “rained?”