Talk:Insight (magazine)/Archive 2

message: The word "Madrassa" is not one-dimensional - it has negative connotations. (Which are even connected to the story too).
I had previouly edited the intro to this section, to indicate that it simply meant 'school' - but that sentence has been re-written. Why? Nothing at all was added - only taken away. At various points the 'definition' issue has been there - at the moment it's confusing - which is very frustrating. 
I'm simply not going to have Madrassa look like a radical word - at the moment it does (becuase the connecting Obama details have been moved down, and the defining word "religious" (relating to the Insight version) has simply been removed.
Please take the word "Madrassa" into account when re-writing prose. And why re-write decent prose if nothing is being added? We are not going to be able to just 'simplify' all this - we have to get the valid and relevant detail and balance right. 
I'm going to try and blend it in from the better version here --Matt Lewis (talk) 15:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried a new title in here too - please revise not revert!--Matt Lewis (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed, the use of "madrassa" should be referenced back to this, specifically:
===Negative connotations applied to the word===
The Yale Center for the Study of Globalization examined bias in United States newspaper coverage of Pakistan since the September 11, 2001 attacks, and found the term has come to contain a loaded political meaning:
"When articles mentioned 'madrassas,' readers were led to infer that all schools so-named are anti-American, anti-Western, pro-terrorist centers having less to do with teaching basic literacy and more to do with political indoctrination."
In recent times, various American public figures have used the word in a negative context, including Newt Gingrich, 
Donald Rumsfeld, 
and Colin Powell.
The word madrasah literally means "school" and does not imply a political or religious affiliation.
===Feb 08 AM edits, comment here please===
(new subsection for discussion WNDL42 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, I liked the direction you went in this edit of yours, but I think my recent changes go further in the same direction and add some clarity around this, I think that with all the damage that's been done using the word 'madrassa' (which only means "school") we really need to be strong here. Look forward to comments. WNDL42 (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: "The story is familiar: A distorted claim is fed into the echo chamber, where it is increasingly twisted as it is repeated over and over until it becomes conventional wisdom."
The use of 'Echo Chamber' in academic and media research is found extensively in Google's Scholar archives here 
If anyone has a critique of exactly what might be WP:OR in the changes I made this morning, please see diffs I provided above and post anything that looks like OR here and at the BLP noticeboard. WNDL42 (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  We must always get  "Madrassa" right - it's not radical in itself. 

message: (new subsection for discussion WNDL42 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Matt, I liked the direction you went in this edit of yours, but I think my recent changes go further in the same direction and add some clarity around this, I think that with all the damage that's been done using the word 'madrassa' (which only means "school") we really need to be strong here. Look forward to comments. WNDL42 (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

text: "The story is familiar: A distorted claim is fed into the echo chamber, where it is increasingly twisted as it is repeated over and over until it becomes conventional wisdom."
The use of 'Echo Chamber' in academic and media research is found extensively in Google's Scholar archives here 
If anyone has a critique of exactly what might be WP:OR in the changes I made this morning, please see diffs I provided above and post anything that looks like OR here and at the BLP noticeboard. WNDL42 (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Feb 08 AM edits, comment here please

message: The idea that neoconservative www.humanevents.com published a scandalous new report attacking Sen. Obama, a report that is still parroting the Insight innuendo is not surprising. What I thought was cute is that "Human Events" have a paid advertisement for their latest Obama hit job posted on...you guessed it...the archived copy of the "Insight madrassa smear" report by Kirkpatrick. The ad was found this morning at the bottom of "Feeding Frenzy for a Big Story, Even if It's false" as I was reviewing our presentation of that reference. Here's the little paid ad that popped up here (note I've obscured the url, intentionally).
:"Barack Obama Exposed" 
:A Free special report on the real Barack Obama - get your copy today! 
:www.H***nE***ts.com 
Sadly, the "echo chamber" just continues to reverberate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wndl42 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story ''still'' being used to harm Obama...this time by neoconservative "human events" 

message: A fundamental official policy. 
I can't work with somebody who repeatedly demonstrates he has no regard for the basic rules, works for only himself, and ignores all discussion, so like someone else unfortunately said a couple of days ago - this is now going 'off my watchlist'. (Sanity and my time are no.1!). If the Insight/Clinton/Obama section fundamentally changes regarding the word "Madrassa" being fairly represented, maybe someone could let me know - I'll help put it right. 
All I can say now is: WP:No Original Research!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Matt Lewis (talk) 16:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH!