2002-01-01 Did NG actually write something about the metric martyr which would show him to be in the right? How pathetic!
Can you copy here what they said? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, 2001-12-31 23:39 Subject: [USMA:17056] Europe, January 2002 issue > Editor, National Geographic magazine > > Dear sirs: > > I have posted this on your forum pages, but would like to call it to the > attention of your editors; please pass it to the senior editors. I strongly > encourage you to revise your editorial policy and to give metric indications > prominence in your articles. > > The article on Europe in the January 2002 issue of National Geographic > magazine presents erroneous and dangerously incomplete information regarding > the EU and Steve Thoburn, the "metric martyr" of England. Mr. T.R. Reid hand > his editors must have forgotten an important principle of journalism -- > checking the stated facts. > > First the erroneous matter. Thoburn was charged with operating non-certified > scales, not for selling bananas by the pound. The reason for his scales > lacking certification was his refusal to use scales that met the > specifications of British law. Scales are supposed to be able to weigh food > items in kilograms, though auxiliary readings in pounds and ounces are > allowed. Standards officials no longer carry non-metric weights to check > scales. Customers may ask for a desired number of pounds of produce, but the > official weight and receipt must be in metric units under British law. This > law was enacted to support standards harmonious with ED 80/181/EEC but that > was not the basis for the charges brought against Thoburn, whose scales > lacked a metric readout. The law that Thoburn thumbed his nose at was > Britain's, not Brussels'. > > Now, the dangerously incomplete matter. The European Directive cited > (80/181/EEC) requires all goods sold in the EU to be labeled only in metric > units and to be devoid of all other units. This applies to packaging, product > labels, instruction sheets, and advertisements. The original deadline for > this requirement to be met was Dec 31, 1984. It was then delayed to the end > of 1989, then to the end of 1999, then again to the end of 2009. These delays > were provided to give the United States time for producers to prepare and for > our government to revise the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) to allow > metric only labeling in the U.S. This third delay may well be our last. Japan > and the Republic of Korea have already passed similar laws, which are now in > effect. We in the U.S. now have metric-only labeling allowed for goods sold > under regulations and laws modeled on the Uniform Packaging and Labeling > Regulation (UPLR) and over half the states allow this metric-only labeling on > UPLR goods. The FPLA is next to be revised. > > Educational magazines in the U.S. are, for the most part, meeting > Jeffersonian principles for journalism by using metric units, sometimes alone > and sometimes in parallel with non-metric units, in order to "provide for an > educated public". A handful of diehard, conservative editors are preventing > their magazines from living up to these responsibilities. It is past time for > the National Geographic magazine and the Smithsonian magazine to quit living > like the spurned spinster in Dickens' "Great Expectations". They need to open > their windows to realize that Americans comfortably watched the 2000 Olympic > games broadcast almost entirely in metric units and to see that Americans, > except for these dusty editors, are seeing metric units with increasing > frequency in the marketplace. > > James R. Frysinger > > > -- > James R. Frysinger University/College of Charleston > 10 Captiva Row Dept. of Physics and Astronomy > Charleston, SC 29407 66 George Street > 843.225.0805 Charleston, SC 29424 > http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cert. Adv. Metrication Specialist 843.953.7644 >
