The original Dirac's concept was the annihilation in the literal meaning of that word.
According to that concept, anti-particle was a particle which has anti-energy, that is, negative energy.
But, after discovery of positron, and when collision of it and electron was performed, and showed that the result are two gamma-photons (when slow electron and slow positron collide), then the corrections of Dirac's concept were made, in order to theoretically allow that case, too.
And, the "true" annihilation, according to theory, still "does occur", but that is among "unobservable and undetectable" "virtual" particle and anti-particle pairs, that is, among particles which "spontaneously" emerge and "really annihilate", and are responsible for the, so called, "quantum fluctuations", and "vacuum energy".
So, the so called anti-matter (positrons, anti-quarks, ...) are actually matter, just the rarer kind (to use an analogy for descriptive purposes only: just like there are less left-handed men than there are right-handed men).
using terms "anti-matter" and "annihilation" as they are used in physics is wrong.
That has nothing to do with "sexier" wording, but with something else: you know, like when there is someone who has high reputation, and who claims something, and then it turns obviously out that he was wrong, and then him and his followers try to hide, to minimize that mistake, and say to others: "no, you do not understand, he used that word only figuratively, formally, because it is cumbersome to say 'sum zero of quantum numbers', because it is 'sexy',... ". So, they have hided the mistake in a very effective way: they kept the word, and when someone reasonably questions the justifiability of its use, they show him that there is the "deeper knowledge" behind that, and the one who "dared to doubt/criticize" retreats, being a bit ashamed, and/or even believing that he learned something "cool". And he will spread that "truth" further.