He says he is not a 'crypto-communist'. But of course he does! What else could he say? A pickpocket does not go to the races wearing a label 'pickpocket' on his coat-lapel, and a propagandist does not describe himself as a propagandist.Orwell on Konni Zilliacus in Tribune, 17 January 1947.
27 May 2006
THE GUARDIAN VERSUS AARONOVITCH, KAMM AND WHEEN
So the boys lost, but apropos Chomsky's apologist stance on Srebrenica I was reminded of this:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Yup. I don't think the finding could not have gone against them, on the basis of what was printed in the Guardian, but it's galling nonetheless. Something about the way Chomsky writes seems to reduce the most coherent and well-founded critiques to a state of Statham-like gibbering - "Ah but no, you see, if you look here you will plainly see that the, ah, claims that he claims to have advanced are in fact at odds with the, ah..." (BT,DT.)
As someone who teaches journalism - I'm suprised you seem to support a jounalist who makes up quotes and then 'accidently' tapes over the record of the interview.
Is Brockes an ex-pupil?
As someone who teaches journalism, I am particularly concerned that many students can't recognise a dangling modifier. In my experience, this is a telling sign of intellectual laziness. Another is the belief that Noam Chomsky is never wrong about anything.
There's a difference between criticising Chomsky and inventing quotes. Kamm Aaronovitch and Wheen have made even bigger fools of themselves defending a dishonest journalist.
As we know Wheen and Kamm have Chomsky obsessions. Did they feed Brovkes with the false allegations against Chomsky?
ps a dangling modifier can be edited out before publication, but not after posting on a blog
Post a Comment