[eDebate] The Harrison '06 Court = Politics Link Card

Harris, Scott L sharris
Sun Mar 4 00:26:40 CST 2007


 
While I respect the fact that Lindsay would prefer that her blog not be quoted in debate rounds it seems rather silly to call this an "out of context" issue.  Out of context generally refers to using evidence in a manner that changes the meaning of the evidence.  The meaning of the quotes in Lindsay's blog are fairly clear and she has said nothing to indicate that she doesn't still believe that court decisions have political ramifications.  The fact that the evidence was not written to be used in debate rounds or peer reviewed does not make it "out of context."  Very little evidence read in a debate round was written with the intent to be read in a debate round.  I am positive that many authors would be appalled to know what their quotes have been  used to support or oppose in debate rounds.   It may be wrong to use evidence when the author has requested that it not be used.  It to me is analagous to when you say something to a reporter and then ask them not to use it in print.  When they use it they are not generally quoting you out of context but are using quotes that should not have been used.  The fact that it was said off the record is something that should generally be honored but you can't really accuse the reporter of taking you out of context just because you didn't want people to read the quote in the paper.   Is Lindsey's new quote of "out of context" intended to be read in a debate round to prove that a team who read her first opinion should get zero points and a loss?  I agree with J.P. that we should find other evidence to support the link story.  I also think we should be careful; about throwing the phrase "out of context" around even if Lindsey thinks this is a context issue.



More information about the Mailman mailing list