As I wrote a few days back, I've become a bit of a fan of FactCheck.org . Every morning, before I read the news I take a look at FactCheck to see what's going on in the world of heinous campaign lies.
Today's entry was not about the lies of either campaign, but about a so called academic who has broken one of the first rules of academic writing. This author has been called out by the Annenberg Political Fact Checkers for using sources that are not credible. Among these sources are unsourced websites, himself, and opinion columns that are presented as facts. If the author was a student of mine he'd be facing an F, but this fella is on the NYTimes bestseller list instead...go figure.
2 comments:
Obviously. We love egomaniacs, liars and finks in our country. LOL.
this is the kind of thing that makes me crazy. You and I both know that to the uninitiated, or to those who have never had a reason to really understand an academic discourse, what does or does not make something "academic" is entirely opaque.
So when the publisher just says it is, even though it's a book that this same publisher probably wouldn't have touched in the past, how are most people going to make that call? And yet, no one who really knows what academic means has ever considered this book in that category.
Are we supposed to take comfort from the idea that a lot of people will consider "academic" a sign that the book is *not* to be trusted? In the abstract, it seems not but ...
Post a Comment