[PREV - TERRORISM]    [TOP]

THE_AUTUMNAL_WEB

                                             November 14-19, 2006
                                             December 9, 2006

A quirk of internet
history is that the
bloggers have come up          Personally, I think
with a new word for            we need a name for
close-reading and              this tendency of
point-by-point refutation:     web nerds to invent
"fisking"; based on            new -- and usually        blogging
someone's treatment of         irritating --             podcasting
a Fisk article.                words for whatever        wiki
                               they're into at the
                               moment.                      nonsensical,
                                                            unmelifuous...
                                  Perhaps,
                                  "Neologging"             (Almost as bad
                                                           as "unmelifuous".)
                                  No, makes too
                                  much sense,              anti-idiotarian 
                                  doesn't sound            is another good 
                                  stupid enough.           one.

                                     "English 3.0"?

                                          Closer.

                                            It doesn't have
                                            that *bang* *splat*
                                            sound that they
                                            seem to like.

                                                Maybe:
                                                "bangsplats"



One thing that's odd about the
term "fisking" is that they
thought it deserved a name at
all.

We've been doing this on usenet            There are differences
for ages.                                  with the usenet
                                           practice, in that        "Fisking"
And many an academic paper uses a          the original author      does have
quotation and commentary format..          is expected to be        a shouting
                                           hanging around,          at the
                                           defending their work.    television
                                                                    quality
But then, one of the                       Also, usenet has         about it.
peculiarities of the                       quoted-reply features
bloggers is their deep                     that aren't broken,
conviction that it's                       so there are many
something new under                        examples of repeated
the sun... they're                         exchanges that go
pioneers of a new                          a dozen levels deep
technological era!                         or more.

They're beginners who               It's not unheard of
don't know that there               for "fiskers" to get
have been many others               "fisked", but these      But then in the
before them.                        exchanges aren't         blog world:
                                    a regular occurrence     perhaps they're
                                    as they are on usenet.   more likely to
  They're proud of the                                       write something
  "democratic" quality                                       closer to a
  that blogging                                              finished essay?
  software brings to
  the web, but that, is                                      They seem to be
  of course, a mixed                                         playing "op-ed"
  blessing, and the                                          columist more
  usenet world has been                                      often than
  through that and come                                      not... though
  out the other side --                                      without editors
                                                             telling them to
  Look up "the eternal                                       tighten it up.
  september" some time.         Consider the case of
                                the "original fisk":
                                To my eye, this Sullivan
                                piece is terrible.
                                "Fisking" is supposed     SMEAR_THE_MESSENGER
                                to be good for
                                deflating rhetoric,
                                but what about Sullivan's
                                own rhetoric?

                                In the usenet world,
                                he would've been
                                shouted down
                                immediately.


                                        In fact, the original
                                        author would probably
                                        handle the reply...

                                        Sullivan got in his
                                        attack against someone
                                        who doesn't bother
                                        with the web.




Whatever you call it, there
are difficulties with this            LIGHTING_WAR
style of commentary:

It's deeply reductionist: there
are indeed some things you can
highlight by breaking down an
essay into pieces, but those
pieces are not the whole essay,
and it's entirely possible for
the essay to have something
going for it that is not visible
in the pieces.

It can be a form of "out of context"
quotation, but only in a subtle way
because the original words may all 
be there:                         
                                  
    By choosing the right points to interrupt
    the original, you can throw off the flow --
    and the flow may be where the real meaning
    resides.     



Another issue that's sometimes raised:
"The is Fisking Bullying?"

This one seems misguided --
it's the old politeness                   I find the style of argument used
business again -- tis                     on wikpedia talk pages to be
better to be allowed to be                somewhat unnerving.  Almost
saracastic and insulting                  everyone goes through the motions
(even if it's not usually                 of being civil, consequently you
adviseable, exactly.)                     can't really tell what they're
                                          thinking -- often the civility
                                          seems to be a rote exercise,
                                          they're reciting what they need to
                                          say for legalistic reasons, so
                                          that if it goes to arbitration
                                          they won't seem grossly
                                          unreasonable.



   http://www.cloggie.org/books/pity-the-nation.html

     Wholly undeservedly, Robert Fisk has
     become something of a joke online, after
     socalled "warbloggers" back in 2001
     picked on a single incident in his long
     reporter career to ridicule him as an
     out of touch wet, even racist
     liberal. And this by people whose
     closest contact with the Middle East had
     been their local kebab shop. From there
     we got the nasty term fisking, which
     refers to any sort of unfair argument in
     which an article is not criticised on
     the merits of the whole, but rather is
     taken apart and attacked line by line,
     usually by putdown rather than logical
     argument.


--------
[NEXT - DAISY_CUTTER_DIPLOMACY]