NY Times continues its abusive relationship with phrase “digital age”

Quoted source Sarah Brookover, left, who needs to stop snitching

The New York Times once again stretches its credulity to stretch ours with this article about student plagiarism, whose central thesis seems to be that kids today don’t understand the concept of authorship. Props to Mike Sebba for the link. The article contains the usual professorial stories about hilariously obvious student copying, including this classic font-shift tell:

The tip-off to one student’s copying was the purple shade of several paragraphs he had lifted from the Web; when confronted by a writing tutor his professor had sent him to, he was not defensive — he just wanted to know how to change purple text to black.

First of all, way to hand the problem off to the writing tutor, professor who does not want to have to go to academic court. Second, the article considers this and other anecdotal instances of egregious ripoff—plus the omnipresent recent surveys, in which the number of respondents who say that copying from websites constitutes “serious cheating” declined from 34% to 29%—and concludes that modern college students don’t understand the concept of plagiarism. Guess why? If you said “the Internet,” then congratulations—you’re ready to write trend pieces for the New York Times. Here’s your Zune.

Continue reading

Friday links! Hurriedly packing things into boxes edition

It’s 9am in Washington, DC, and I am looking at a lot of boxes next to things that should be in boxes. Combat! blog has temporarily relocated to the east coast to A) help my brother move and B) finally eat some good Mexican food again, and boy, are we busy. Don’t worry, though—there’s always time for a Friday link roundup. There’s just not time to make it good. This week, Combat! blog presents links that we found in our Write About It Later file just before we dismantled a coffee table. Will it prepare you for a weekend spent doing things at the last minute and therefore pausing to consider what, in a temporal universe governed by random subatomic interactions, a plan even is? Sure—why not?

Continue reading

Combat! blog flies through air, isn’t useful

Greetings from the middle seat of row 32 on a 737 to Reagan International Airport, the airport that everyone remembers as much better than it actually was. Very little of value can happen on Combat! blog from this position, since even the uploading of photographs doesn’t work here. We’ll back tomorrow, but in the meantime check out this fair and balanced article from Fox News, about a woman who was expelled from her graduate program in counseling for her refusal to counsel homosexuals. Two things are striking:

Continue reading

Tennessee Lt. Gov. suggests Islam is not really a religion

Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey of Tennessee, explaining to children "the other kind of book."

Republican senatorial candidate and Lieutenant Governor of Tennessee Ron Ramsey told a constituent in Chattanooga this month that it was arguable “whether being a Muslim is actually a religion or is it a nationality, way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it.” Hint: it’s not a nationality.* Ramsey, who is currently running third in his primary as the favored Tea Party candidate, made the statement in response to a question about “the threat that’s invading our country from the Muslims.” This atmosphere of sense and syntax seems to have coalesced around plans to build an Islamic center in nearby Murfreesboro—something you may have heard about on ABC. You know the country is upholding its stated ideal of religious tolerance when a plan to build  new mosque is national news.

Continue reading

Something d-o-o economics. Voo-doo economics

How young you were, Ben Stein. Also how ironically cast.

John Smick sent me this excellent column by Martin Wolf on the political genius of supply-side economics. For those of you who did not hire me to help you prepare for the US History SAT II, supply-side economics is the theory that the best way to foster economic growth is by making it easier for people to produce (supply, natch) goods and services—primarily through reducing taxes on the rich and deregulating industry. Ostensibly, the increased economic activity generated by these policies offsets the decrease in revenue caused by the tax cuts; one gets 17% of $8 trillion rather than 34% of $4 trillion, and everybody wins. In practice, that’s never happened. Proponents will tell you that’s because supply-side economic policies have never been consistently implemented for a long period of time, but it might also be that the whole thing is hooey. Still, while the economic value of supply-side economics has yet to be demonstrated, its political value to the Republican Party is so significant as to have made it an article of faith.

Continue reading