Talk for Article "Detained, disappeared, and tortured — for tweeting — in Venezuela"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    “Since 2014, Foro Penal has recorded another 17 cases of people being arbitrarily detained by Venezuelan security forces for tweeting.”
    ==>
    “Since 2014, Foro Penal has recorded another 17 cases of people being detained by Venezuelan security forces for tweeting.”

    Again, misuse of the word “arbitrary”. The nuance is in what the sentence is calling arbitrary.

    Saying “arbitrarily detained” means “detained at random” or “detained due to the individual preference/convenience of the detaining officer/person” (see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary ). However, it’s clear from your writing that the detentions are due to tweeting.

    What is arbitrary is the assessment/perception of those tweets that results in the detentions – not the act of detentions themselves.

    It’s nuanced, but it maters. I’d recommend reviewing the piece and cleaning up the incorrect classifications in your sentence structures.

  2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    “Foro Penal recorded 12,320 arbitrary detentions from January 2014 to April 2018, according to an OHCHR report published in June 2018. Most of these detentions took place during the nationwide protests that rocked Venezuela in 2014 and 2017.”<br>
    ==><br>
    “Foro Penal recorded 12,320 detentions from January 2014 to April 2018, according to an OHCHR report published in June 2018. Most of these detentions took place during the nationwide protests that rocked Venezuela in 2014 and 2017.”

    Misleading use/misuse of the term “arbitrary” in the sentence. Seems obvious by the statement that the detentions were correlated to the protests – which is the opposite of arbitrary.

    I’d go further to suggest that the inference/intonation is a [very minor] slip from fact-based journalism. The problem and morality of the facts are self-apparent: no need to editorialize it.

    Edited: 2018-08-02 00:57:34 By Patrick Mazzotta (talk | contribs) + 38 Characters .. + 4% change.‎‎ (Note | Diff)

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Hi Patrick. This is what we mean by arbitrary detention. I’ll add a link to make it clear. Thanks.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrary_arrest_and_detention

      1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        Fair – I hadn’t considered the due process component (vs. the “likelihood or evidence of crime” which feels far more apparent).

        I guess a call-out is that I’m likely not the only one to misread or misinterpret the term “arbitrary arrest.” May be beneficial to add phrasing to underscore the definition in use so as not to assume prior knowledge of readers.

        I’ll consider my call-outs inaccurate but leave them here for others to track against.

        Thanks for the correction/clarification.

        Edited: 2018-08-07 17:28:38 By Patrick Mazzotta (talk | contribs) + 22 Characters .. + 4% change.‎‎ (Note | Diff)

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us