An article I was struck by is this one, about how tourists are getting tribeswomen in the Andaman islands to dance for the cameras in exchange for food, in collusion with the local police/military. At first glance it appears to be a lot of fuss about nothing. A group of people have discovered that exhibition of their normal behaviour is worth something to others and so they sell it. There is a lot of nonsense about them being half-naked, which they are, but because that's how they dress- they haven't been forced to strip or anything like that. The dance is clearly a simplified version of some ceremonial moves, and nothing they wouldn't be doing anyway. On the other hand, the Indian press has made a lot of this too, as though the girls were being exploited. Presumably they have a better understanding of the cultural relations involved than the Guardian, or me.
This one is about a possible change in the marking of GCSE's to include an assessment of the candidate's spelling and 'grammar', which I hope means the ability to form in the mind of the reader the idea that they had formed in their own mind, to communicate successful through written language, though I suspect it will literally be a count of misspelt words and broken rules, because it's much easier to get a number that way. The headline suggests that marking on spelling and grammar will penalize those who don't know how to do it, which is not only obvious but is rather the point of the exercise. The rest of the article is a bit more intelligent, fortunately. The comments aren't, but I don't expect much from the Guardian commenters. The comments on the first article are also spectacularly crass and ignorant, in the main.
And one from the Independent (which I sometimes believe is the best paper in Britain, perhaps with the exception of the FT, not that there is much competition. I tend to get my news from agencies and specialized sources who actually know what they're talking about).
The writer of the article has been told to rehash something which is very old news and which he quite clearly has not understood. To hide his ignorance he tries to copy directly as much of the press release as he thinks can get away with, but he still makes a complete mess of it, producing a barely coherent and sometimes contradictory piece that tells the reader precisely nothing. It is 'not even wrong.' Fortunatelysome of the commenters are on the ball, and one provides a very useful link for those who want to understand more of the subject.
The Chicken or the Egg and Who Pays?
49 minutes ago