Jump to content

Talk:Ben Kiernan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marriage to Gilmore

[edit]

"Gregory Stanton '82JD, a close friend of Kiernan's and president of Genocide Watch, offers another explanation. "There's no way you can avoid becoming angry doing this type of work," he says. "Many people get depressed. They go under. Ben has reacted by channeling this into an extraordinary outpouring of extremely useful scholarship." Kiernan's wife, Glenda Gilmore, the Peter V. and C. Vann Woodward Professor of History at Yale, agrees. "He researches and writes on tragedies," she e-mails me, "but it would be much more tragic to him if genocide happened and no one knew about it or took action. So, in a difficult way, his work uplifts him because he knows that he is making those lost lives count for more." [1]

Controversy

[edit]

Can anyone clarify Kiernan vis-a-vis the Australian History Wars, a quote and response re Kiernan has been place on the Keith Windschuttle article, with a dismissive note on Kiernan's early analysis of the Cambodian genocide. Paul foord 08:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

[edit]

The material in the article is non-neutral. One specific problem is the following paragraph:

"In his early twenties, Kiernan visited Cambodia but left before the Khmer Rouge expelled all foreigners in 1975. Though he initially doubted the scale of genocide then being perpetrated in Democratic Kampuchea, he changed his mind in 1978[1][2][3] after interviews with several hundred refugees from Cambodia. He learnt the Khmer language, carried out extensive research in Cambodia and among refugees abroad, and has since written many critically-acclaimed books on the topic."

(a) This is not an accurate or neutral description of the subject's pre-1980 career. It does not describe his academic or professional career in the era in question.

(b) The only sources presented are those of the author himself or his close collaborators.

(c) The controversial parts of his career are currently excluded *in total*

"Twenty-six Cambodian scholars publicly sided with Kiernan in the brouhaha."

The 26 names are not made of up of all Cambodian Scholars.

(*) Eileen Blumenthal is a Professor of theater (*) Sara Colm and Paul Quinn-Judge are journalists (*) Laura McGrezo is involved in human rights law and not a scholar (*) Theanvy Kuoch, Linchy Higham and Dith Pran are Cambodians survivors, not scholars (*) Mary F. Scully is a health professional, not a scholar (*) Several others were research or postdoctoral fellows at the east-west institute in Hawaii. They are at the edge of what can be called "scholars".

By its presentation of the list, by the factual error in representing the list as made up of scholars, by using the word "brouhaha", the article is non-neutral.

"In an article in the Walrus Magazine, Kiernan and Taylor Owen wrote that recent evidence reveals that Cambodia was bombed by the U.S. far more heavily than previously believed. They conclude that "the impact of this bombing, the subject of much debate for the past three decades, is now clearer than ever. Civilian casualties in Cambodia drove an enraged populace into the arms of an insurgency that had enjoyed relatively little support until the bombing began, setting in motion the expansion of the Vietnam War deeper into Cambodia, a coup d'état in 1970, the rapid rise of the Khmer Rouge, and ultimately the Cambodian genocide.""

The above is clearly NPOV in that it is selective political statement inserted into the middle of what is supposed to be a biography section. The subject of the article is not responsibility for the cambodian genocide, but Ben Kiernan. The description of a 2006 article as dealing with "recent evidence" is inaccurate.

174.46.28.58 (talk) 21:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some edits to the page which resolves the NPOV argument posed here, and I have removed the NPOV tag. I'll address each point made by the anonymous writer one by one.

The material in the article is non-neutral. One specific problem is the following paragraph: "In his early twenties, Kiernan visited Cambodia but left before the Khmer Rouge expelled all foreigners in 1975. Though he initially doubted the scale of genocide then being perpetrated in Democratic Kampuchea, he changed his mind in 1978[1][2][3] after interviews with several hundred refugees from Cambodia. He learnt the Khmer language, carried out extensive research in Cambodia and among refugees abroad, and has since written many critically-acclaimed books on the topic." (a) This is not an accurate or neutral description of the subject's pre-1980 career. It does not describe his academic or professional career in the era in question. (b) The only sources presented are those of the author himself or his close collaborators. (c) The controversial parts of his career are currently excluded *in total*

Under point (a): I dispute the claim that this is NPOV or an inaccurate assessment of the subject's early and later academic career. There is, however, an imprecision in the article - I have changed the second sentence to read: "Though he initially doubted the scale of genocide then being perpetrated in Democratic Kampuchea, he changed his mind in 1978[1][2][3] after beginning a series interviews with several hundred refugees from Cambodia."

Under point (b): The two first citations accurately reflect the content in the sentence, as both are written by Kiernan in the era in question and document the position being asserted in this sentence. The third citation is from William Shawcross.

Under point (c): The controversy is addressed in the section "Criticism and Defense of Kiernan's Scholarship, particularly with the Peter Rodman citation and quote. Therefore, the article cannot be said to exclude controversial parts of his academic career.

"Twenty-six Cambodian scholars publicly sided with Kiernan in the brouhaha." The 26 names are not made of up of all Cambodian Scholars. (*) Eileen Blumenthal is a Professor of theater (*) Sara Colm and Paul Quinn-Judge are journalists (*) Laura McGrezo is involved in human rights law and not a scholar (*) Theanvy Kuoch, Linchy Higham and Dith Pran are Cambodians survivors, not scholars (*) Mary F. Scully is a health professional, not a scholar (*) Several others were research or postdoctoral fellows at the east-west institute in Hawaii. They are at the edge of what can be called "scholars". By its presentation of the list, by the factual error in representing the list as made up of scholars, by using the word "brouhaha", the article is non-neutral.

I have corrected this paragraph, as it included incorrect information. The total number of signatories on the letter was 29, not 26. In addition, to address the concern, I've removed the word "brouhaha". I have also added "and specialists" to better characterize the signatories to the letter in question. To address the concerns with the signatories on the letter. Eileen Blumenthal is a professor at Rutgers, with a PhD from Yale. She is an expert in Cambodian and Asian theater. Sara Colm was the founding editor of the Phnom Penh Post Paul Quinn-Judge was the Far Eastern Economic Review’s Bangkok correspondent and covered Cambodia for that magazine. Laura McGrew (not McGrezo) has written on Cambodian legal issues Theanvy Kuoch, Linchy Higham and Dith Pran: I'm certain the author of this criticism does not mean to imply that characterizing these individuals as "survivors" discounts the work they have done, nor discredits their status as scholars or specialists in Cambodia? In addition, two of the three names can be characterized as well-known and respected specialists in the field: Theany Kuoch is featured on the UNHCR.org website as a refugee who has made a difference for her work post-genocide, Dith Pran's account was turned into the movie "The Killing Fields and also edited an anthology entitled Children of Cambodia’s Killing Fields (published by Yale University Press). Mary F. Scully is an associate director of Khmer Health Advocates Inc, and a former worker in refugee camps. Research and post-doctoral fellows are, by definition, scholars.

"In an article in the Walrus Magazine, Kiernan and Taylor Owen wrote that recent evidence reveals that Cambodia was bombed by the U.S. far more heavily than previously believed. They conclude that "the impact of this bombing, the subject of much debate for the past three decades, is now clearer than ever. Civilian casualties in Cambodia drove an enraged populace into the arms of an insurgency that had enjoyed relatively little support until the bombing began, setting in motion the expansion of the Vietnam War deeper into Cambodia, a coup d'état in 1970, the rapid rise of the Khmer Rouge, and ultimately the Cambodian genocide."" The above is clearly NPOV in that it is selective political statement inserted into the middle of what is supposed to be a biography section. The subject of the article is not responsibility for the cambodian genocide, but Ben Kiernan. The description of a 2006 article as dealing with "recent evidence" is inaccurate.

As this paragraph deals with critically important and recent work done by Dr. Kiernan and colleagues, work that has changed our understanding of the impetus for the Cambodian genocide, it is relevant to include in a biography of a scholar. The final critique is simply incorrect - the article from which the quote is drawn is discussing evidence declassified in 2000, which is indeed quite recent. Solgress (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot remove an NPOV tag unilaterally and without consensus. The tag will remain until this has at least been discussed. 174.46.28.58 (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV round (2)

[edit]

"Under point (a): I dispute the claim that this is NPOV or an inaccurate assessment of the subject's early and later academic career." Solgress (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On what basis do you consider this an accurate accessment? The article presents no detail whatsoever on the subjects pre-1978 career. I think it is well known that there was more to Kiernan's pre-1978 life than a single trip to Cambodia before 1975 without even a date associated with it. It is an extremely inaccurate assessment by omission. The article deliberatly omits any and all details about the subject before 1978. How can an article which seemly has declaired certain portions of a subject's life to be off-limits meet a standard of neutrality?

The sources are also highly questionable in they almost all track back the subject himself. Why are no other sources referenced? There would seem to be a number of well-known sources for this period of the subject's career which are omitted.

I point you to the definition of NPOV:

"....representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources."

(1) The biography does not fairly represent the subject in that it excludes coverage of his pre-1978 career

(2) The biography excludes significant views and is far too dependent on the views of the actual subject.

(3) The biography section of the article is unfair and biased in its coverage of the subject's career.

I have other comments that I intend to make on your response after I have had sufficient time to examine it. The NPOV tag cannot be removed until the dispute is settled. The NPOV tag should not be removed in the case of this discussion being "blanked" or otherwise removed.

174.46.28.58 (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ben Kiernan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:43, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ben Kiernan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ben Kiernan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ben_Kiernan&oldid=1205026192"