frandroid: large crowd of indian women (south asia)
Dearest Star editors and proof-readers,

Can the Star stop using the term "East Indian"? There has never been a country named East India, and just two rapacious colonial empires bore this name, the British and Dutch East India companies. They definitely haven't been in business for over 100 years. Moreover, the people who live in your imaginary "East India" are actually located in real countries, such as India (no "East" here), Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and a couple more, depending on your liking. I understand that you may want to avoid confusion with the colonial term "Indian", referring to the original inhabitants of North America, but since you don't use the term in your pages anyway, and haven't for years, why should your readers be confused?

In general, the area described above is called "the Indian sub-continent" or "South Asia", the latter which provides for a nice adjective, "South Asian", which happens to be just as short as "East Indian". This adjective, which provides a vividly clear geographical cue as to the cultural origins of the noun it complements, is also impossible to confuse with "(North American) Indian" or even "West Indian".

Also, while I don't recall the
C.P. Style Guide making any recommendations in this matter, should it be so behind the times as to recommend the use of "East Indian", please, grow a spine in this case, and show C.P. how it's done.

There is actually one proper use of the term East Indian: that which relates to the eastern part of India, West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, and Orissa.

Chall dikra!
--François Villeneuve
frandroid: (conservatives)
So in a state of procrastination, I came across this article [thestar.com] by James Travers entitled "Harper trying to market alternative universe" about the Conservatives' Clean Air Act. Somewhere in there, Travers called Rona Ambrose Harper's minister of pollution.

There is a long tradition in leftist literature to disentangle ministry names from their doublespeak, such as calling the minister of defense the minister of war, but it's a rare sight to find such a literary device in a mainstream newspaper such as the Star. The title of the article is also quite striking.

I mean, the Star is almost as Liberal as the Toronto Sun is Conservative, but that's still quite impressive to see this from a newspaper that pretends to objectivity, unlike the Sun.
frandroid: YPG logo, Syrian Kurdish defense forces (Default)
In an article from the Toronto Star about James Loney and the CPT in Iraq:
"Despite the group's continual denunciation of the U.S. presence in Iraq, or "occupation" in its parlance, MacKay denies it demonizes the military: "We do talk to the soldiers, high and low; the kid at the gate, the commanders. A lot of them are unhappy. Our hearts go out to them."

"occupation" in its parlance? What kind of cowardly journalism is this? Foreign countries have over 75,000 soldiers on the ground, and you can't even say that it's an occupation?

Profile

frandroid: YPG logo, Syrian Kurdish defense forces (Default)
frandroid

July 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
1617 181920 2122
2324252627 2829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Active Entries

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 07:36 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios