For the past six years, a newspaper called Carriage Towne News has arrived in my mailbox every week. The next one, scheduled to arrive on February 1, will be the last. The lead article in this week’s paper explains:
The Carriage Towne News — a free weekly newspaper dependent on small local ads and a wrapper for advertising circulars — will publish its final edition Thursday, Feb. 1. …
Financial support for the paper has seriously eroded in recent times as the critical revenue from advertising content dwindled while newsprint, production and mail distribution costs continued to increase.
Unfortunately, those factors combined to make it economically prohibitive to continue publication and direct marketing of the paper through mailed distribution to 26,000 southern New Hampshire households.
A few weeks ago, the New Hampshire Attorney General issued a cease and desist order to the National Democratic Committee, claiming that it had made “false, deceptive, and misleading” statements in violation of New Hampshire law. The statements in question noted that any delegates chosen in the New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary won’t be accepted at the party’s national convention, and therefore the primary is “meaningless.” Violation of the cited law is a felony.
This is disturbing in at least two ways. First, the Democratic National Committee isn’t a New Hampshire organization. It isn’t subject to New Hampshire law. The AG’s office seems to be saying it can enforce its law anywhere in the country, maybe anywhere in the world.
(more…)
The detailed statistics for the 2023 Hugo Awards voting are finally out, and they’ve triggered a controversy. A number of nominees were declared ineligible without explanation.
Kevin Standlee, who has played important roles in running many fan conventions, noted:
An overwhelming majority of the members of WSFS who voted on the site of the 2023 Worldcon (at the 2021 Worldcon in DC) selected Chengdu, China as the host of the 2023 Worldcon. That meant that the members of WSFS who expressed an opinion accepted that the convention would be held under Chinese legal conditions. Furthermore, those people (including me) who suggested that there might be election irregularities were overridden, shouted down, fired from their convention positions, and told that they were evil and probably racist for even suggesting such a thing.
Recently I replied to an online point that said that if the US enacts laws that enforce Christian views, the country will be a theocracy. I pointed out that all or nearly all European countries for most of history have met that criterion and that the USA itself was a “theocracy” by that measure until at least the 1960s. The person making the post rebuked me for being a “prescriptivist” and implied it’s consistent with being a libertarian.
First, it’s not a political issue. I don’t advocate laws requiring people to use words with standard meanings, except in legal documents. Aside from that, I’m not exactly a prescriptivist. I prefer to consider myself a “consistentist.” Whatever meaning you give to a word, stick with it and don’t conflate it with other definitions. If you want to use “glory” to mean “a nice knock-down argument,” don’t use it to mean “splendor” at the same time.
(more…)
Taking a principled approach means that sometimes you support a person in one respect while being severely critical in another. I supported Harvard president Claudine Gay when she said that calls for genocide don’t categorically qualify as harassment. But now there’s evidence that she’s a repeat plagiarist, and that demands strong criticism if she is.
Update: Claudine Gay has resigned as president of Harvard University. See also the new paragraph at the end of this post.
Plagiarism consists of using someone else’s words or ideas and passing them off as original work. If you cite the source, it isn’t plagiarism (though it might be a copyright violation if you use too much). Sometimes it’s tricky to identify. Two people can have the same idea independently. Words can stick in your mind, leading you to use them without being aware that you’re lifting them from another author. Sometimes there’s just one good way to say something.
(more…)
A lot of people have lately been complaining that Substack has only narrow restrictions on the content it allows. Some aren’t just complaining but are leaving the platform. The issue is “racist or bigoted speech”, and in some cases, “explicitly Nazi” material.
It wouldn’t bother me if Substack had somewhat broader restrictions on content, but it’s a dangerous path to go down, and I’m sure they know it. Deciding whether something violates content restrictions is often tricky, and sites with lots of user-generated content rely on software and people under time pressure to decide. They generate a lot of false positives. On pre-Musk Twitter, I was suspended for making a joke about the health hazards of Krispy Kreme, for recommending a sharp blade to separate uncut book pages, and for objecting to an endorsement of mass murder. The innocent were punished more severely than the guilty, since reinstatement required admitting to a violation of the rules.
(more…)
“One down. Two to go. This forced resignation of the president of @Penn is the bare minimum of what is required.”
That’s the kind of language you might expect from the Minister of Truth in a socialist dictatorship. It’s from Elise Stefanik, a Congresswoman from New York. The offense for which Stefanik and many others are seeking to remove three university presidents is the failure to regard advocacy of genocide unconditionally as harassment.
(more…)
According to a Des Moines Register article, fourteen state attorneys general have accused the New York Times, the Associated Press, CNN, and Reuters of serious crimes. The accusations appear highly dubious. The claim is that these news organizations have paid freelance reporters who have ties to Hamas and have thereby committed the crime of “material support for terrorism.”
A Fox News article corroborates the main points and adds some details. I don’t consider Fox News a very reliable source, but when a news outlet makes the people it generally supports look bad, it’s more credible, and the Fox News article has a bit more nuance than the Register article.
(more…)
The term “gaslighting” has become popular on social media. “To gaslight” means — or at least once meant — to manipulate people to make them think they’re insane. Today the word often serves as an all-purpose tool for attacking someone who says you’re wrong.
A Time article discusses the stretching of several psychological terms, including gaslighting:
Perhaps the most often misconstrued word of the past few years, “gaslighting” has been widely adopted as a way to describe any act that’s insensitive, a lie, or simply a difference of opinion.