How are these not synonyms? The difference is time. Judges are impartial, but they are not neutral: the whole point of judge's role is to become non-neutral. B

How are these not synonyms? The difference is time. Judges are impartial, but they are not neutral: the whole point of judge's role is to become non-neutral. By the time a journalist has conducted interviews, done research, assembled their notes, and started writing a story, they should not be neutral either: they should have come to some conclusions about the world that a completely ignorant (read: neutral) reader would not share precisely because they've done research. Ditto with Godwin's Law - go and look at the Wikipedia entry You are misrepresenting the article. Read the first sentence: Godwin's law is a humorous observation... That's it. An observation. That is funny. Observations are not normative. Your insistence that they are is a category error. You have one unattributed example (involving Nazis!) First of all, the example involves Holocaust deniers, not Nazis. There's actually a pretty spectacular difference between the two: Holocaust deniers, vile that they may be, have generally not killed anyone. Secondly, if you want a cite, feel free to read http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/national/18holocaust.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/national/18holocaust.html