well, at least we're still on "responding terms"

Posted by madam doom (we love iran) on September 20, 2009, 17:39:48, in reply to "Re: "a coveted passage""

it's all about trying to use news narrative paradigms from the past in an attempt to convey new meaning. everyone seems to have heard of an arctic ocean "passage". that's why it's been used for the literally scores of articles on the matter this week. the question is : did they use icebreakers, then ? some say not. http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/commercial-arctic-passage-nearing-goal/ "Dr. Brigham said that to a large extent, it is Russian bureaucracy more than sea ice or icebergs that is impeding international use of the Arctic route along its coast, which has in theory been open to such transit since 1987." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32800658/ http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE58B01K20090912 http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2096 http://www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Examiner~y2009m9d6-Arctic-passage-open-without-ice-breakers-first-time-in-history http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=german-ships-successfully http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/Europe/EU_Germany_Arctic_Passage.html

Message Thread: Major geekiness - Eamon Brennan September 19, 2009, 23:27:37 Re: Major geekiness - Sue S September 20, 2009, 13:53:46 "a coveted passage" - madam doom (we love iran) September 20, 2009, 15:14:32 Re: "a coveted passage" - Sue S September 20, 2009, 17:15:00 well, at least we're still on "responding terms" - madam doom (we love iran) September 20, 2009, 17:39:48 Re: well, at least we're still on "responding terms" - Sue S September 21, 2009, 8:53:54 what about the "no icebreakers were used in the making of this passage" claim ? - madam doom (we love iran) September 21, 2009, 19:03:55 « Back to thread

Respond