Good letter Paul!
I sent the following comment to TIME Magazine:
"Place metric units *first* not second!"
Gene.

---- Original message ----
>Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:01:15 -0600
>From: "Paul Trusten" <[email protected]>  
>Subject: [USMA:46561] metric system legally gets preference in U.S.  
>To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
>
>   Mr. Rick Stengel, Managing Editor
>   TIME Magazine
>    
>   Dear Mr. Stengel,
>    
>   The U.S. Metric Association congratulates TIME for
>   advancing the use of the metric system in the U.S.!
>    
>   According to a post at
>   http://gawker.com/272475/time-switches-to-the-metric-system, 
>   you have issued a memo to your writers and editors
>   that both metric and U.S. customary units be cited
>   in values of distance, weight, volume, and
>   temperature in the general text of your magazine.
>   But, the purported memo goes on to state that the
>   U.S. units be cited first, followed by the metric
>   units.
>    
>   Such a preference is contrary to a 1988 amendment to
>   the Metric Conversion Act of 1975, which declares
>   the metric system to be the preferred system of
>   measurement for U.S. trade and commerce. Isn't it
>   "TIME" for American magazines to comply with this
>   Congressional declaration?  We urge you to place the
>   metric units first, according to their legally
>   preferred status in the U.S.  Following U.S. law
>   would also make cited measurements easier to follow
>   for your international readers, almost all of whom
>   use the metric system exclusively in their daily
>   lives.
>    
>   Sincerely,
>    
>    
>   Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
>   Public Relations Director
>   U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
>   www.metric.org
>   www.twitter.com/usmetric
>   [email protected]
>   +1(432)528-7724
>    
>    
>    
>    
>    
>    

Reply via email to