4 ms·

>calling them ISIS I think you can fairly reliably tell the quality of news source based on what they call this organization. You should just ignore anyone ca

>calling them ISIS I think you can fairly reliably tell the quality of news source based on what they call this organization. You should just ignore anyone calling them ISIS. At least listen to anyone who calls them ISIL. Anyone who still calls them IS, or the Islamic State, needs to get with the times. Finally, you can probably trust that anyone referring to them as Daesh knows what they are talking about. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/09/words-matter-isis-war-use-daesh/V85GYEuasEEJgrUun0dMUP/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/09/words-matter-...

rglullis 11y ago
Come on, really? This seems like a lot you want to place trust to whomever presents some kind of posturing than anything. Discouraging others to people to even hear other sources based on the name seem like a perfect recipe for indoctrination. I'd rather read whatever I can and form my own opinion on the matter.
- dublinben 11y ago
  That was not intended as a serious comment. It was poking light fun at all the media hemming and hawing that goes into terminology like this. I could have expressed the point more sarcastically, so that it was more clear.
Nadya 11y ago
Why would you give filth a name at all [0]? I would not trust any news source that gives a name to filth, especially one still based on a name it calls itself. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization
- dublinben 11y ago
  If you read the article, you'll see that Daesh is itself an insulting name. If you have to refer to them somehow, it might as well be a way that upsets them.
  - Nadya 11y ago
    Since we're playing the "if you read" game, I did. I also bothered to research the claim [0]. The article's explanation for why Daesh is insulting is wrong (has nothing to do with conjugation) and the reason the filth gets so upset by the name could just as easily occur by calling filth "filth" as it would by calling filth "Daesh". [0] https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media-alice-guthrie/ https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media...
_nedR 11y ago
Really? IMHO, I found the article quite level-headed and analytical and the author seemed to have actual knowledge of the situation at the ground level.

rglullis 11y ago

Come on, really? This seems like a lot you want to place trust to whomever presents some kind of posturing than anything. Discouraging others to people to even hear other sources based on the name seem like a perfect recipe for indoctrination. I'd rather read whatever I can and form my own opinion on the matter.

dublinben 11y ago
That was not intended as a serious comment. It was poking light fun at all the media hemming and hawing that goes into terminology like this. I could have expressed the point more sarcastically, so that it was more clear.

Nadya 11y ago

Why would you give filth a name at all [0]? I would not trust any news source that gives a name to filth, especially one still based on a name it calls itself. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization

dublinben 11y ago
If you read the article, you'll see that Daesh is itself an insulting name. If you have to refer to them somehow, it might as well be a way that upsets them.
- Nadya 11y ago
  Since we're playing the "if you read" game, I did. I also bothered to research the claim [0]. The article's explanation for why Daesh is insulting is wrong (has nothing to do with conjugation) and the reason the filth gets so upset by the name could just as easily occur by calling filth "filth" as it would by calling filth "Daesh". [0] https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media-alice-guthrie/ https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media...

_nedR 11y ago

Really? IMHO, I found the article quite level-headed and analytical and the author seemed to have actual knowledge of the situation at the ground level.