<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>The following OP/ED article discusses in different language the
issue of persuasive definitions (see below).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The perspicacious reader will see how the <FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
face="Olde English"><STRONG><FONT size=2><FONT color=#000000>Wilson &
Family's Christless Cult &</FONT> <FONT color=#00bb88>Cash
Machine</STRONG></FONT> -- </FONT></FONT><FONT
size=2><STRONG>(</STRONG><STRONG>You must tolerate us since we do not tolerate
anyone else)</STRONG></FONT></FONT> uses persuasive definitions of "racism",
"sexism", "homophobia", etc, but most frightening of all, "liberty" and
"freedom", just as McDonalds is caught doing below, to disguise the brutality
and repugnancy of their (the cult's) views.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>W.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brands21mar21,0,4828167.story?track=ntothtml">http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brands21mar21,0,4828167.story?track=ntothtml</A><BR>
<H4>EDITORIAL</H4>
<H1>Mega-brands can't buy everything</H1>
<DIV class=storysubhead>Ameriquest gets turned down from branding a ballpark;
McDonald's can't get the dictionary to positively spin the definition of
'McJob.'</DIV><BR>March 21, 2007<BR><BR>NEXT TIME YOU fret that global
corporations such as Microsoft, Starbucks and Wal-Mart rule the world, consider
this: Even as they overtake desktops, street corners and mini-malls, mega-brands
can't own the English language.<BR><BR>Two events this week show how difficult
it can be for companies to control their brands. First, after a year of trying,
the Texas Rangers finally succeeded in dumping their ballpark's name sponsor,
Ameriquest, after the struggling mortgage giant laid off a large number of
employees.<BR><BR>Then McDonald's announced that it would petition the Oxford
English Dictionary to change its definition of "McJob." The dictionary currently
defines the popular term as "an unstimulating, low-paid job with few prospects,
especially one created by the expansion of the service sector." David Fairhurst,
"chief people officer" for McDonald's in Northern Europe, called for a new
definition to "reflect a job that is stimulating, rewarding and offers genuine
opportunities for career progression and skills that last a
lifetime."<BR><BR>Presumably, Fairhurst is semi-joking. Unless he's some kind of
Orwellian villain, he can't possibly believe he can, by decree, get people to
hear "McJob" and think "awesome gig!" Even as companies spend millions splashing
their logos across T-shirts, stadiums and sitcoms, real-life events skew brand
messages all the time — in bad times (Enron Field in Houston became Minute Maid
Park) and good (mergers turned Pac Bell Park into SBC Park, then into AT&T
Park). Executives grumble when trademarks slip into common usage — think of
Kleenex, Xerox or Google — but that's always been part of the price of success.
<BR><BR>Ameriquest, which has bigger problems than a sponsorship deal gone bad
and probably won't mind not having to fork over $75 million to the Rangers,
backed off quietly. But McDonald's fights on, despite a spotty track record
beating up on those nasty lexicographers. In 2003, former Chief Executive Jim
Cantalupo flew into a rage when the definition of "McJob" popped up on a
marketing webpage for Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Like Fairhurst,
he wrote a scathing letter.<BR><BR>The result? "McJob" disappeared from
Merriam-Webster's webpage — but kept its place in the dictionary. And, according
to the lexicographers at the Oxford English Dictionary, its place in the English
language.</DIV>
<DIV>_____________________________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition</A></DIV>
<DIV>
<H1 class=firstHeading>Persuasive definition</H1>
<DIV id=bodyContent>
<H3 id=siteSub>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</H3>
<DIV id=contentSub></DIV>
<DIV id=jump-to-nav>Jump to: <A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition#column-one">navigation</A>,
<A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition#searchInput">search</A></DIV><!-- start content -->
<P>A <B>persuasive definition</B> is a form of <A title=Definition
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition">definition</A> which purports to
describe the 'true' or 'commonly accepted' meaning of a term, while in reality
stipulating an uncommon or altered use, usually to support an argument for some
view, or to create or alter rights, duties or crimes. The terms thus defined
will often involve emotionally charged but imprecise notions, such as "freedom",
"terrorism", "democracy" etc.</P>
<P>An example is the definition of the term "<A title="Date rape"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_rape">date rape</A>" as "sex with an
intoxicated person after a party". The extremely negatively charged term "rape",
typically used for sex without consent, sometimes even enforced by physical
violence, is used here to increase the condemnation of the described behavior.
The definition of "<A title="Software piracy"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_piracy">software piracy</A>" as the
act of infringing the copyrights of computer programs is another example.</P>
<P>Persuasive definitions commonly appear in controversial topics such as <A
title=Politics href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics">politics</A>, <A
title=Sex href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex">sex</A>, and <A title=Religion
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion">religion</A>, as participants in
emotionally-charged exchanges will sometimes become more concerned about swaying
people to one side or another than expressing the unbiased facts.</P>
<P>The term "persuasive definition" was introduced by philosopher <A
title="Charles Stevenson"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Stevenson">C.L. Stevenson</A> as part
of his emotive theory of meaning.</P>
<P><A id=References name=References></A></P>
<H2><SPAN class=editsection>[<A title="Edit section: References"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Persuasive_definition&action=edit&section=1">edit</A>]</SPAN>
<SPAN class=mw-headline>References</SPAN></H2>
<UL>
<LI>Stevensen, C.L. "Persuasive Definitions." <I><A title="Mind (journal)"
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_(journal)">Mind</A></I> Vol. 47, No.
187. (July 1938), pp. 331-350</LI>
<LI>Stevenson, C.L., <I>Ethics and Language</I>, Connecticut
1944</LI></UL></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>