I had my faith in the media shaken some time ago. So, what credibility I do extend to any news sources, I try to do so with a grain of salt. Anything these clowns write, any narratives they discuss can turn out to be nothing more than lazy, unresearched rumor mongering. It can be a parrot of a falsehood, told so many times people just believe it is true, and that those attempting to correct them are viewed as noisome shrews and nitpickers.
(I'm reminded of this every time someone refers to New Orleans as a "city built below sea level" or that the 2005 flood was the greatest natural disaster in American history. I don't go a month without hearing one of those from respected news organization, so my cynicism is often renewed.)
Into that mindset is now injected the staggering and public commission of credibility suicide by Newsweek. While I'm glad to know some members of their staff pushed back against this colossal and fundamental misunderstanding of the term "terrorism," I just cannot countenance the scope of this debate.
"Terrorism" is not a nebulous term. It is not a fluid definition.
But ever since 2001, the overpoliticization of the term, and the connotations that were associated with it, have eroded its meaning in just 9 years. That erosion is so bad that a panel of news experts in a recognized national publication think that it is a good idea to publicly air their ignorance in favor of catering to a population they percieve as ignorant.
(HT: The Daily Dish.)