fishin' wrote:
Try "M.S.M".
Okay. I thried "M.S.M." in your New Yorker reference. It is used twice-here is the all important first reference.
Once again, my point is proved. If "MSM" is a term widely understood, then why did the article feel it necessary to
translate it for the reading public?
You people keep maintaining that this term is widely understood, which implies outside the Blogworld, and the only places you can produce where it appears outside the Blogworld have to contain translations so people know what the author is even writing about.
Sorry guys, but when you say something is widely known and understood outside the Blogworld, you have to produce numerous examples where the term is used
outside the realm of articles written about the Blogworld itself. Even Peggy Noonan's article is largely about the blogs.
Anytime an author writes about a tiny little community, he/she has to use the terminology of that community for the article to flow well. That doesn't mean the community's terminology is known in the world outside. For instance, the Mormons believe the Native Americans were descended from the Twelve Tribes of Israel, and therefore dub them the "Lammanites". Anyone writing an article on the Mormon belief for a general interest magazine-not a publication which caters to Mormons-would have to use the term Lammanites in the article. That doesn't mean the author believes, or expects you to believe, the Lammanites were descended from the tribes of Israel.
Such an author who intends to explain something-as opposed to endorse-will do things like write, "The Lammanites-what the Mormons call the Native Americans because they believe them to be descended from the tribes of Israel....."
Which is exactly what the references given here by fishin' do. The fact that the term "MSM" has to be translated for the general reading public is recognition that the term is
not widely understood. That's why it needs explanation when used. Just like the term Lammanites.
You would think that these things would be obvious to anyone.
PS: It is conceivable that a Mormon author, who writes on general interest topics, just might slip the term Lammanites into an article or two not associated with the Mormon faith, and an editor might let it go. That hardly means the word is widely known and understood by the general population!
