Opuscula Word’s “bad name” Sends scrivener On Internet searches

RUTHIE BLUM, managing editor of The Algemeiner, writing in Israel HaYom (Israel Today) notes that former U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian ‎Territories (‎Richard Falk) has given bias a bad name.

Giving bias a "bad name" made me rush to find definitions for the word "bias."

Can a word really be given a "bad name?"

Because I am lazy and would rather "cut-n-paste" than rekey information from my Webster's Unabridged, I offer the following to support my thought that "bias" has a bad name even without the UN's Falk.

Dictionary.com defines the noun "bias" as
1. a particular tendency, trend, inclination, feeling, or opinion, especially one that is preconceived or unreasoned
2. unreasonably hostile feelings or opinions about a social group; prejudice:

As a verb, to cause to hold or exhibit a particular bias; to influence, especially unfairly

Merriam-Webster defines "bias" as
an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially: a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice

Vocabulary.com lists "bias" as
(a) a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation
(b) influence in an unfair way

Business Dictionary insists that "bias" means An inclination or preference that influences judgment from being balanced or even-handed. Prejudice is bias in pejorative sense.

THERE ARE, of course, other definitions of "bias"; most have to do with angles (cut on a bias). The definitions above are appropriate for Ms. Blum's statement.

According to my Edward Bear mentality, "bias" does not need Richard Falk or any other UN anti-Israel (is UN and anti-Israel redundant?) flunky to give the word a bad name. By definition -- as least the foregoing -- "bias" has a “bad name.”

True, a person could be biased in favor of something, albeit that almost by default means the person is against something else. It's most common application is as a position against something. (Of all flowers, I have a bias FOR carnations; translation, I am biased at various levels against all other flowers.)

Falk's bias FOR "Palestine" and AGAINST Israel gives him -- not the word "bias"--a "bad name."

People who follow the continuing UN attacks on Israel -- all the while ignoring all other real or imagined human rights violations in other countries -- know where the UN's bias lies; it's blatantly anti-Israel. Knowing that, why would anyone with more brains than a rock give a UN anti-Israel declaration any credence?

The pity of Ms. Blum's "gives bias a bad name" early comment is that it sidetracked me from reading her otherwise interesting article.

Digging a little, it turns out that the (now former) head of the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), Under-Secretary General and ESCWA Executive Secretary Jordanian Rima Khalaf, resigned -- or was "resigned" -- by new UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres because of the report. She was named to the ESCWA post by former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley slammed the report — authored by Richard Falk and Virginia Tilley — after it was published on Wednesday.

Haley commented “That such anti-Israel propaganda would come from a body whose membership nearly universally does not recognize Israel is unsurprising. That it was drafted by Richard Falk, a man who has repeatedly made biased and deeply offensive comments about Israel and espoused ridiculous conspiracy theories, including about the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is equally unsurprising.”

ESCWA member states
Bahrain, Egypt*, Iraq, Jordan*, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen (*=States with diplomatic ties to Israel.)

PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.