Larky Masher Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I thought phart was saying as he's used to having his work peer reviewed, that writing style becomes a habit. So this piece will be written as if it was going to be peer reviewed even though it's unlikely to be. I hand't thought of that but I'd argue that this isn't written in the style that would be submitted to an academic journal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I hand't thought of that but I'd argue that this isn't written in the style that would be submitted to an academic journal. Well let's hear the argument then. What examples in their would you say isn't the style and give examples of what the style would be if it was going to be submitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 correct, that was what i meant, i may not have been successful at communicating it though. Should've used a longer sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 You wrote it, didn't you. I was kinda hoping somebody would notice that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Well let's hear the argument then. What examples in their would you say isn't the style and give examples of what the style would be if it was going to be submitted. The content would be better referenced with the bibliography being much more extensive and the data analysis would have a more advanced statistical treatment and it would be around 7000 words (roughly 28 pages of double spaced 12 point font) in length. This is a book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Should've used a longer sentence. Nah i care nothing for my readers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 The content would be better referenced with the bibliography being much more extensive and the data analysis would have a more advanced statistical treatment and it would be around 7000 words (roughly 28 pages of double spaced 12 point font) in length. This is a book. Ah right so you're argument is basically, he could have written it better, referenced it better used better statistics and made it 7000 words and it would be spot on. That's me convinced. I'll remember that next time i'm playing golf, just swing the club better, hit the ball better and aim better and you'll make the tour. Also where is this 7000 word thing coming from, in physics at least you can go from one page (fermi famous paper) or hundreds of pages. The subject and explanation defined length not some arbitrary number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Ah right so you're argument is basically, he could have written it better, referenced it better used better statistics and made it 7000 words and it would be spot on. That's me convinced. I'll remember that next time i'm playing golf, just swing the club better, hit the ball better and aim better and you'll make the tour. Also where is this 7000 word thing coming from, in physics at least you can go from one page (fermi famous paper) or hundreds of pages. The subject and explanation defined length not some arbitrary number. I'd suggest you're getting confused between a thesis which could be hundreds of pages long (bit would still be constrained by a word count) and a journal article the length of which is constrained by the guidance given by the editorial board of the journal e.g. the word count limit for the Journal of Applied Physics in 3500 - 6000 words depending on the type of article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) I'd suggest you're getting confused between a thesis which could be hundreds of pages long (bit would still be constrained by a word count) and a journal article the length of which is constrained by the guidance given by the editorial board of the journal e.g. the word count limit for the Journal of Applied Physics in 3500 - 6000 words depending on the type of article. No you're confused, it was my sentence we were talking about, you introduced the concept of a journal into the argument, then seem to have grafted it onto me. I haven't used Journal on here this month at all. Probably an erroneous association in your mind between peer-reviewed and journal or some such. I'll reproduce the sentence since it's contents have clearly morphed into something else in your mind. "Just finished this, much more accessible but then his work will be peer-reviewed as an academic which will have made him cut all the window dressing from his prose." I've attempted to gain an understanding of what you mean over the course of the last few posts, however i still don't understand. I doubt it is of any great insight so i'll probably just abandon understanding your point now. "Scholarly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal or as a book." Edited December 21, 2015 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 . I doubt it is of any great insight so i'll probably just abandon understanding your point now. My, my aren't we a bit petulant today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 My, my aren't we a bit petulant today. Don't shoot the messenger ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 My, my aren't we a bit petulant today. Classic propaganda tactics. Divert the discussion onto something totally irrelevant then resort to discussing the person instead of the subject. Respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Classic propaganda tactics. Divert the discussion onto something totally irrelevant then resort to discussing the person instead of the subject. Respect. I bow to you to greater knowledge of irrelevance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Classic propaganda tactics. Divert the discussion onto something totally irrelevant then resort to discussing the person instead of the subject. Respect. I'd like to discuss the bella article but i genuinely have trouble parsing it's meaning. So all was left to me is mocking it(well i could just walk away but i don't do that) as i couldn't understand it. I suspect Larky reached his comprehension limit as well and went down the same road. At least i asked for a translation as there are claims it's perfectly understandable, but as of yet no one has been able to demonstrate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Whose news? A bit wordy, but... http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2015/12/20/whose-news/ I think this is sort of along the same lines but a bit more readable IMO. http://derekbateman.co.uk/2015/12/16/party-time-2/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I think this is sort of along the same lines but a bit more readable IMO. http://derekbateman.co.uk/2015/12/16/party-time-2/ It's a novel idea not listening to the MSM and using new independent media as sources. I wish i had thought of it years ago. Seriously though, i agree for me it's preaching to the choir, i've been on about the BBC and MSM as enablers for authority (as well as courts, police etc) for over a decade now. Glad that knowledge is becoming more prevalent now, everyone being better informed will lead eventually to better politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWalka Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 It's a novel idea not listening to the MSM and using new independent media as sources. I wish i had thought of it years ago. Seriously though, i agree for me it's preaching to the choir, i've been on about the BBC and MSM as enablers for authority (as well as courts, police etc) for over a decade now. Glad that knowledge is becoming more prevalent now, everyone being better informed will lead eventually to better politics. I'm all for using independent sources over the media but only if those independent sources are still actual trained journalists and not crowd/citizen journalism that tends towards poor sources, poor corroboration and rushed conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I'm all for using independent sources over the media but only if those independent sources are still actual trained journalists and not crowd/citizen journalism that tends towards poor sources, poor corroboration and rushed conclusions. I don't think training in journalism is needed, for instance all the information about the patriot missle defense system being a propaganda machine was provided by an MIT professor in the appropriate field. They do have to know how to evidence things though. Some trained journalists are a shambles they do little more than read out loud. While some layman uncover great things, a certain blog won the orwell prize a couple of years back. In lots of countries there is no independent media so you have to rely on "citizen journalism". I know what you're saying though, i just case to case it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Every time I need to be reminded that I'm no as clever as I think I am, I just come onto the TAMB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Journalism is the biggest of whores. They suck the most diseased kocks on the planet as a profession. They are worse than the politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWalka Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I don't think training in journalism is needed, for instance all the information about the patriot missle defense system being a propaganda machine was provided by an MIT professor in the appropriate field. They do have to know how to evidence things though. Some trained journalists are a shambles they do little more than read out loud. While some layman uncover great things, a certain blog won the orwell prize a couple of years back. In lots of countries there is no independent media so you have to rely on "citizen journalism". I know what you're saying though, i just case to case it. I think we're after the same thing. I'm just always wary of instances like the Reddit Boston Marathon Bomber manhunt debacle when ordinary people get involved in investigative journalism without applying the traditional requirements of journalism. I also agree that many journalists are nothing more than PR voices though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 I'd like to discuss the bella article but i genuinely have trouble parsing it's meaning. So all was left to me is mocking it(well i could just walk away but i don't do that) as i couldn't understand it. I suspect Larky reached his comprehension limit as well and went down the same road. At least i asked for a translation as there are claims it's perfectly understandable, but as of yet no one has been able to demonstrate it. Have you ever made a video for youtube using an accordion, by any chance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 It's a novel idea not listening to the MSM and using new independent media as sources. I wish i had thought of it years ago. Seriously though, i agree for me it's preaching to the choir, i've been on about the BBC and MSM as enablers for authority (as well as courts, police etc) for over a decade now. Glad that knowledge is becoming more prevalent now, everyone being better informed will lead eventually to better politics. Aye, it takes time and a lot of patience to get through to folk. I meet loads of intelligent folk who still believe most of what they read in the Scotsman and Daily Mail. They think the BBC is the bastion of unbiased news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Journalism is the biggest of whores. They suck the most diseased kocks on the planet as a profession. They are worse than the politicians. I would still like to work as one though, although i imagine i wouldn't get near anything, even if i had the necessary competency. BBC journalism is report uncritically anything the government said, the war for power during the Kelly debacle saw to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 21, 2015 Share Posted December 21, 2015 Look up the meaning of shibboleth if you don't know. You can cut out far more than that. Shibboleths by definition are no longer seen as prevailing wisdom. or that is my understanding of the meaning in this context. "an old idea, principle or phrase that is no longer accepted by many people as important or appropriate to modern life" So why would a characteristic of one be "...is never allowed to be exposed to critical examination outside the context of the established convention," when it is meaning means it is seen as no longer accepted. How can a shibboleth escape "unscathed" when it is by definition it "is no longer accepted by many people as important or appropriate to modern life" Doesn't make sense to me, can all those saying it is easy to understand explain it to me please, i'm not understanding. Plug the example he gives of newspapers and journalism into the opening description and it makes sense. It's mildly tautological. There are more forgiving definintions of shibboleth, contextually, than the one you've focussed on. Wiki, citing the following dictionaries -^ Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th ed, (Oxford University Press, 1990), 1117. ^ Merriam-Webster Dictionary, shibboleth, accessed online 22 September 2015, [1]. ^ Collins English Dictionary, shibboleth, accessed online 22 September 2015, [2]. ^ Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, shibboleth, accessed online 22 September 2015, [3] - gives this broader definition: 'an old belief or saying which is cited repetitively or unreflectively but which is, or may be, fallacious or untrue.[3][4][5][6]' E.g. (my take on the authors meaning in the article) - MSM (newspapers) are a bastion of authoritative and credibile reporting, representative of a free press and liberty. Any clearer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.