But it pretends to be fair, democratic, pluralistic and intellectual.
Well, here's an exchange betweeon someone wishing his article to be published and an editor:
In response to the article's submission:
Thank you for thinking of The Nation. Your proposed article is diametrically opposed to our opinion on this blockade, so we will be unable to take you up on your offer of this article.
--jl
Submissions
Author's response to the editor:
Hi Jl,
That is a very interesting email. Never before have I ever been told that a news website or publication wouldn't publish an article of mine because they oppose my point of view. How does your response and refusal to publish my article, based on political reasoning, fall in line with The Nation's founding prospectus?
"The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred."
It seems to me you are diametrically opposing your own prospectus?
All the best,
Jacob Shrybman
The Nation editor's response to that:
We are a journal of opinion--usually dissenting opinion. You espouse the run-of-the-mill mainstream views that we are here to correct, as they are based on misinformation/propaganda. It doesn't need repeating.
Jacob's response:
The funny thing about opinion is, if you ask me I would say your view is "run-of-the-mill" and that is the one I am here to influence. That's how opinions work, everyone has one. So you should be ashamed that you call your site a "journal of opinion" when you don't allow for opinions other than the decided upon stance to be represented.
If you believe Osher and Rami Twito's rocket maimed legs are misinformation, I invite you to Israel to come and see them for yourself.
JL would seem to be Copy Chief Judith Long.
And here are "5 Questions with Judith Long" who has been a copy editor for The Nation for more than twenty years.
Q: What is your preferred environment for writing?
A: Home, either out in the yard (weather permitting) or inside by a crackling fire.
Q: What punctuation mark are you fondest of?
A: Em dash (you didn't ask, but my least favorite punctuation mark is the semicolon—although it has its uses).
Q: What punctuation, spelling, grammar, style, or usage error annoys you the most?
A: When "I" is used instead of the correct "me," as in "They slid the secret file to Boris and I." Also, when people are over-sticklerish, as when they freak out at "Who did you vote for?" I also hate the incorrect "chaise lounge" for the correct "chaise longue" and the incorrect pronunciation of "forte" (basketball is not my forte) as "for-tay" instead of "fort." Also, it's "different from" not "different than," and never, ever say "the reason why ___ is because . . ."
Q: If you weren't in your current line of work, what would you be doing instead?
A: Teaching English (which I spent many years doing before my current incarnation as a copy editor).
Q: What drove you to become a writer?
A: Love of words, writing, language, publishing, and making a silk purse out of a sow's ear—which is what editing is.
Not a word about ideological fanaticism. Hmmmm.
She thinks that there were "terrorists occupying the White House".
Thinks? Is that the correct term?
- - -
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment