OT: journalistic contradictions

[SackAttack]

Military force is not the only solution, Schroeder said. "One needs to look at the roots of it," including lack of development in the developing world.

Explain something to me. If there's no development...how can it be considered "the developing world"? Is this just a politically correct substitution for 'Third World,' and if so, why didn't they choose one that wasn't inherently self-contradictory?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Is this just a politically correct substitution for 'Third World,'
Yep.

... and if so, why didn't they choose one that wasn't inherently self-contradictory?
Some might suggest that those coming up with the politically correct euphemisms simply aren't all that bright.http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif

[yabanci]

If there's no development...how can it be considered "the developing world"?

Nobody said there is no development.

[SackAttack]

then what would you suggest a "lack of development" implies?

[Crapshoot]

A "lack of development" implies that base level being unsatisfactory- a lack of "current" development, so to speak. Thus, these countries are in the process of "developing."

[yabanci]

underdeveloped would also include so-called second world countries.

[Bad-example]

underdeveloped would also include so-called second world countries.

And the Dodgers' offense :)

[SackAttack]

A "lack of development" implies that base level being unsatisfactory- a lack of "current" development, so to speak. Thus, these countries are in the process of "developing."

but that's still not a lack of development. that's a lack of suitable progress.

if your child is reading Dick and Jane books at the age of 10, and is slowly struggling his or her way towards reading material that's more appropriate, that's not a 'lack' of development. that may be stunted development, retarded progress, whatever you want to call it, but the development is still taking place, however slowly.

maybe I'm just getting hung up on semantics, but that still seems like a contradictory turn of phrase.

[Yossarian]

No, your misinterpreting the phrase.

You can have a lack of development and still have some development.

Like in a car you can have a lack of speed and still have some speed.

"Sorry captin, she's got a lack of speed" (scottie)

[albionmoonlight]

Yep.


Some might suggest that those coming up with the politically correct euphemisms simply aren't all that bright.http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif
My favorite example of euphemisims gone awry:

One of my friends was commenting about a special child.

My other friend (not trying to make a political statement or anything, but simply wanting to know whether the kid was developmentally disabled, or whether he, in fact, exceeded the mean in some important way) asked, "Special good, or special bad?"

In some cases, I think that euphamisms are better than the alternatives. What we should not do, in my opinion, is pretend that there are no differences in the world, or that the differences that do exist do not grant some advantages to some people. In the world in which we live, you have a better chance to achieve what we consider to be the trappings of a successful, comfortable life if you grow up in London instead of Monrovia. It's just true. Maybe it should not be true, but it is. Trying to alter our language to change that reality may show that we do not value certain people and places less because of their disadvantages--but it also can hide the truth and obfuscate communication (i.e. the post that started this thread).

[Maple Leafs]

Explain something to me. If there's no development...how can it be considered "the developing world"? Is this just a politically correct substitution for 'Third World,' and if so, why didn't they choose one that wasn't inherently self-contradictory?Without seeing the whole article, it sounds like the contradiction is being used intentionally for effect.

[sachmo71]

Journalistic integrity is also a contradiction.

[Rizon]

Yeah, "lack" doesn't just mean "to not have", it also means "to not have enough of".

[rkmsuf]

I'm interested enough to be apathetic regarding this issue...

[NoMyths]

It's got nothing to do with so-called "political correctness" and more to do with being linguistically accurate. "Developing" is a way of indicating that a country is still in the process of developing infrastructures and services that "developed" countries now take for granted (e.g. public services, city works, etc.). They are "developing" those structures.

"Third world", on the other hand, is a plainly perjorative term that has no linguistic accuracy. It's only a phrase that assigns (historically) subjective terms for a broader range of categories--including culture--than the term "developing" does.

[Butter]

Why don't they just make the plane out of the stuff they use for the black box?

[sachmo71]

Why don't they just make the plane out of the stuff they use for the black box?

Because it wouldn't have windows?

[Crapshoot]

No, your misinterpreting the phrase.

You can have a lack of development and still have some development.

Like in a car you can have a lack of speed and still have some speed.

"Sorry captin, she's got a lack of speed" (scottie)

Exactly.

[rkmsuf]

I think it's because the black box people continue to block this project. If you make the plane out of black box stuff you really don't need a black box.

It's a very complex issue...