Wednesday, 21 May 2008

Return to Persia

Confusion about whether back of beyond and unimportant Burma is “Myanmar” or “Burma”, or both, stems from the fact that those who run the international media have given up referring to it as “Myanmar” having found out that the “ruling military junta” of that country, which they dislike because it is made up of horrible soldiers in uniforms (shudder), is responsible for having changed the name. In its deliberations (agonisings) over this matter, the BBC, ever a fair and impartial organisation, makes the mistake of asking the question: “So does the choice of Burma or Myanmar indicate a particular political position?”

Mark Farmener, of Burma Campaign UK, presumably an individual possessed of extremely furry credentials, replies: "Often you can tell where someone's sympathies lie if they use Burma or Myanmar.”

Does this then mean that the BBC has at last been caught having “sympathies”? No, no! Of course not! “It's general practice at the BBC to refer to the country as Burma”, explains the BBC News website. “This is because most of its audience is familiar with that name rather than Myanmar.”

Ah, so they do it for the sake of the audience. How kind. It’s not a political thing at all. So it’s illogical of us to expect they soon ought to stop referring to Persia, an important country right at the centre of world events, as Iran, the name given to it by the unelected, insane, misogynistic Jew-baiting junta that seized power there.

No comments:

Post a Comment