Kyiv

Газети, журнали, видавництва

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » П'ят серпня 21, 2009 11:13 am

Після останньої нашої кампанії The Economist протримався чотири місяці і знову взявся за старе - писати Кієв.

У відповідь на чітке запитання [ http://kyiv.of-cour.se/2008/08/22/lette ... comment-52 ] генеральний директор The Economist Group пан Андрю Рашбас знову відхилився від прямої відповіді і переклав все на редактора Джона Міклетвейта, який просто не хоче мінятися і відмовчуються.

From: Andrew Rashbass <andrewrashbass@economist.com>
Cc: John Micklethwait <JohnMicklethwait@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Thanks for your e-mail. I don't think the position of our editor has changed since we last exchanged e-mails. As you may remember, part of what John said then was: "I don't regard this as an eternal verity because it is plainly a disputed case. Indeed, there is a noisy minority of journalists at The Economist who
think we should use Kyiv. We review our policy on place names each time we update our style book - and we will bear Kiev/Kyiv (and what people say on
Facebook) in mind next time we do so."

I am not sure what you mean when you say "your paper was supposed to investigate the case". John has said that the editorial team will reconsider the policy on the spelling of your capital when they next revise their style book. I can assure you that he will indeed review the matter then though I do not know what the outcome of that review will be.

Thanks, though, for keeping this top of mind with us and for letting us know the strength of feeling that the issue evokes.

Best wishes

Andrew

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Rashbass
Chief Executive
The Economist Group
http://www.economistgroup.com
mailto:andrewrashbass@economist.com
Tel: +44 (0)20 7830 7120


To: Andrew Rashbass <andrewrashbass@economist.com>
Cc: John Micklethwait <JohnMicklethwait@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Dear Mr Rashbass,

Let me remind you that this is not a Facebook initiative by the one approved by the world ruling governments. The association of Ukrainians I represent has merely used, among the other media, the online community to raise the awareness. Your paper, unlike other companies that did listen and updated their dictionaries, is not listening to what appears to be the ultimate institutions on naming matters, but for no reasons invents any unreasonable excuses not to change.

Give me a reason why it should be Kiev after all that follows below:
    * The State Department of the U.S. issued a directive to write Kyiv
    * The Prime Minister of the U.K. calls the city Kyiv
    * United Nations Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names) approved it as Kyiv
    * The Ukrainian government insists on Kyiv spelling
    * and many more evidences on http://kyiv.of-cour.se/

The reluctance of The Economist to write Kyiv only looks like you are playing along with Mr Putin.

With best regards,
Mark


:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » П'ят серпня 21, 2009 12:01 pm

А ось і відповідь редактора. Просто голову в пісок ховає.

From: John Micklethwait <johnMicklethwait@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Thank you for this. Just to confirm, as Andrew said, we will review this the next time that we update our style book - and we are well aware of the arguments on your side of the dispute.

Best

John M


To: John Micklethwait <johnMicklethwait@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <AndrewRashbass@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Dear Mr Micklethwait,

May I enquire when the next review of your style guide will take place?

Who is on other side of the argument anyway? On the "Kyiv" side we have all the governments, authorities, Kyivites, Ukrainians, companies operating in the country. Looks like you at The Economist are very much alone on the "Kiev" side.

Your reluctance to tackle this issue is taken as a negative stance towards the community of thousands of those who signed the petition and I personally reserve the right to steer the community to more public actions to make sure that the capital of Ukraine is spelled correctly.

With best regards,

Mark


:ugeek:
Востаннє редагувалось Марко в П'ят серпня 21, 2009 10:54 pm, всього редагувалось 2 разів.
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » П'ят серпня 21, 2009 12:42 pm

Едвард Лукас завжди славився нахабством. І як завджи, перескакуванням на іншу тему, замість того щоб справою займатися.

From: Edward Lucas <EdwardLucas@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Will you be writing to the french press to tell them to stop calling our capital "Londres". What do you think about the Poles writing about "Lwow"?

Vive le difference!

Also, I think the pathological obsession with orthography is rather sad.

Best regards, Edward Lucas

(Automated message) If this seems terse to the point of rudeness, sorry; it was typed on a tiny keyboard. My phone no is +447770380791


To: Edward Lucas <EdwardLucas@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/21
Subject: Re: Kyiv

Dear Mr Lucas,

I leave "Londres" between French and British. "Lwów" is something between Polish and Ukrainians. By the way Ukrainians are okay when Russians write "Львов".

However, "Kyiv" is the matter of great importance, it is the brand of new Ukraine. If you insist on Kiev misspelling, please go and tell Chinese it is Pekin nowadays.

Give me a reason why it should be Kiev after all that follows below:
    * The State Department of the U.S. issued a directive to write Kyiv
    * The Prime Minister of the U.K. calls the city Kyiv
    * United Nations Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names) approved it as Kyiv
    * The Ukrainian government insists on Kyiv spelling
    * and many more evidences on http://kyiv.of-cour.se/

The reluctance of The Economist to use the modern English spelling Kyiv only looks like you are playing along with Mr Putin.

With best regards,
Mark


:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Вів серпня 25, 2009 11:39 pm

Ось відповідь ще одного редактора, і ще тупіша. Він просто перекручує факти і відхиляється від пояснення.

Що ж, будемо питати далі.



From: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/25
Subject: Re: Kyiv


Dear Mr Kусhmа,

As I have found repeatedly, there is no point debating this matter. It is just wrong to accuse us of "misspelling". We have a clear set of rules, laid out in our style-book, which we have adhered to for many decades. Under these rules the capital of Ukraine is Kiev not Kyiv, just as the capital of Italy is Rome not Roma, of Russia Moscow not Moskva and of Poland Warsaw not Warszawa. And, closer to your concerns, we write Lvov, not Lviv. This has nothing to do with politics or our view of Ukraine (which is usually positive) or Russia (usually negative): it is our simple, long-established rule to "use English forms when they are in common use". I am sorry you and others who write in on this subject cannot grasp this point.

Yours sincerely

John Peet
Europe Editor





To: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <andrewrashbass@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/25
Subject: Re: Kyiv


Dear Mr. Peet,

You mislead with your statements, as The Economist is writing Lviv already for a long time:
* http://www.economist.com/displaystory.c ... E1_JNRDGRP
* http://www.economist.com/agenda/display ... E1_PQNTDGD
to name few articles from the paper you represent.

As to Kyiv, it is common name nowadays, so your paper looks very silly in the eyes of your readers who visit the country and see Kyiv everywhere, from the airport down to the city centre. Being one of them, I am just trying to help you.

Would you be so kind and explain us why you prefer to write Beijing and Mumbai instead of Pekin and Bombay?

The Economist writes Moldova, Belarus, Chisinau instead of Soviet era names Moldavia, Byelorussia, Kishenev, saying nothing about Myanmar versus Burma.

You failed to provide a single logical argument. Neither I, nor others who singed the petition [ http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Kyiv/signatures.html ] are convinced. Please explain.

You might also take your time and study the following facts:
    * Ukrainian government insists on Kyiv spelling
    * The State Department of the U.S. issued a directive to write Kyiv
    * The Prime Minister of the U.K. calls the city Kyiv
    * United Nations Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names) approved it as Kyiv
    * Major English speaking governments worldwide switched to Kyiv spelling
    * CIA refers to the city as Kyiv
    * The name of the famous football club is Dynamo Kyiv
    * Many papers, e.g., British The Guardian, are already writing Kyiv
    * All major Canadian media already use the spelling of Kyiv
    * And many more on http://kyiv.of-cour.se/

Sincerely yours,
Mark


:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Сер серпня 26, 2009 1:59 am

А ось і ще один лист, від пані Ліди, що теж активно підтримує боротьбу з The Economist:

To: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <andrewrashbass@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/25


Dear Mr. Peet,

As someone who has subscribed to The Economist for over 18 years and has also long corresponded with its writers and editors about the official spelling of Ukrainian location names, I would like to respond to your letter to Mr. Kусhmа, whose campaign I have also been participating in.

> As I have found repeatedly, there is no point debating this matter. It is just wrong to accuse us of "misspelling".

Is Bombay the correct spelling of the name of this Indian city?

> We have a clear set of rules, laid out in our style-book, which we have adhered to for many decades.

Your style-book of "many decades" ago would have Burma, Calcutta, Ceylon, Moldavia, and Peking (to name just a few places) rather than the spellings The Economist currently applies: Myanmar, Kolkata, Sri Lanka, Moldova and Beijing. It seems that you are updating it very selectively, i.e., the names of places that are former British colonies get changed virtually overnight, while certain non-colonies, such as China and Ukraine, have to wait for decades for you to recognize new spellings.

> Under these rules the capital of Ukraine is Kiev not Kyiv, just as the capital of Italy is Rome not Roma, of Russia Moscow not Moskva and of Poland Warsaw not Warszawa. And, closer to your concerns, we write Lvov, not Lviv.

Rules are made by people, and in the case of The Economist, by presumably professional, experienced editors, which means they can be adjusted to reflect changes in the outside environment. At the same time, any style rules should be applied even-handedly. That is, if The Economist adopts the new version of a geographic name based on the official spelling adopted by the relevant government, it should do so across the board, within a similar timeframe. The examples you use (Warsaw and Moscow) are irrelevant as those countries never issued an official change of spelling for their capitals. But for those cities whose names these countries did change officially (Leningrad comes to mind), you switched to the new version quite quickly. (Ironically, The Economist has not used "Lvov" for "Lviv" for some years.)

> This has nothing to do with politics or our view of Ukraine (which is usually positive) or Russia (usually negative): it is our simple, long-established rule to "use English forms when they are in common use". I am sorry you and others who write in on this subject cannot grasp this point.

You are correct that this is not a question of politics or views, but it is not we who do not grasp the reality but certain editors at The Economist who "cannot grasp the point" that you are applying your own rules rather arbitrarily. All our campaign is trying to do is to persuade you to be consistent with "long-established rule to use English forms when they are in common use." That is, if you use Kiev, then use Bombay, Burma, Ceylon and Leningrad (all of which were far better known and more widely spread than Kiev). If you switched to Mumbai, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and St. Petersburg, then switch to Kyiv as well.

I have personally known The Economist's Moscow correspondents since the time of Edward Lucas and all three complained that editors kept changing the spelling of Kyiv in their articles.

In the hope that you will see the light before the end of the tunnel comes,

--

Sincerely,

Lidia

Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Чет серпня 27, 2009 6:32 pm

Знову пан Джон перевів дискусію в іншу площину, заперечивши самому собі. Він все ж таки напевно днями думає, щоб ще такого витиснути, лиш би не писати Київ нормально. Але як ми бачимо, аргументи закінчились, окрім тупого небажання.

From: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <AndrewRashbass@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/27
Subject: Re: Kyiv


Dear Mr Kусhmа,

As I have said, let us not prolong this correspondence. I perfectly understand your position. But you misunderstand ours when you talk of our applying our rules arbitrarily or selectively.

The Economist style-book says that, if a country has expressly changed its name or that of any rivers or cities, we should follow local practice (thus Beijing, Mumbai, Yangon, Sri Lanka, St Petersburg etc). But, to quote its exact words, "Mere changes of transliteration do not merit a change from traditional British practice. So Chernigov not Chernihiv, Kiev not Kyiv, Lvov not Lviv and Odessa not Odesa." I can assure you that we are not indulging in some kind of arbitrary discrimination here.

And although you are right that Lviv may have sometimes crept past unalert editors, we have in fact used Lvov on six out of the eight times that the city has been mentioned in our pages in my six years as Europe Editor - I just checked. Naturally we moved on from Lemberg some years before I took over - so we are not wholly inflexible. But I do not think our careful and thorough style-book editor is going suddenly to change his position because of a strident web campaign. Moreover, we are hardly unique in our position: even if you consider our publication to be "silly", there are many other serious and respectable newspapers and magazines that also use Kiev.

Yours etc

John Peet
Europe Editor

This e-mail may contain confidential material. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies. It may also contain personal views which are not the views of The Economist Group. We may monitor e-mail to and from our network.

Sent by a member of The Economist Group. The Group's parent company is The Economist Newspaper Limited, registered in England with company number 236383 and registered office at 25 St James's Street, London, SW1A 1HG. For Group company registration details go to http://legal.economistgroup.com



To: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <AndrewRashbass@economist.com>
Date: 2009/8/27
Subject: Re: Kyiv


Dear Mr Peet,

Once, again you are contradicting yourself. Your paper has changed from Alma-Ata to Almaty. According to your definition it is a clear case of a transliteration change. When you were kindly asked to do the same for Kyiv some decade ago, you preferred to veto it for no significant reason.

You do nothing but selectively apply double standards. This does not add to The Economist's trustworthiness.

More to it, you did not study the whole list of arguments submitted to your editors. Among the others, as noted by the United Nations in their Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names):

"In its letter of 14 November 2002, the Ukrainian Government requested that the capital be rendered as Kyiv, rather than Kiev."

Please see for yourself in the English section of UNTERM:

http://unterm.un.org/dgaacs/unterm.nsf/ ... enDocument

It was a clear request from the official State authority and according to your style-guide you should follow, not to bother thousands of Ukrainians by constantly misspelling the name of their capital.

Ukraine is an independent state for 18 year already, and misspelling its geographical names only tells that your editors are out of touch with reality in Eastern Europe. Not a single newspaper allows itself to refer to Lviv as Lvov. It is like writing Londinium instead of London. I hope you understand what kind of image your paper is projecting on its readers. Stop living in cold war past and get yourself to 21st century.

The Economist had enough of time to discuss it internally, to study all the arguments, to do field studies and to implement the change. No excuse can be excepted for perpetually ignoring the views of a country of some 50 million people.

If continue misspelling Kyiv, let me assure you, it will look silly and certain.ly play along with Mr Putin's propaganda.

Herewith, my regards,

Mark


:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Лариса » Чет серпня 27, 2009 6:40 pm

Виглядає цей Джон як алкоголік:

johnpeet.jpg
johnpeet.jpg (6.79 Кб) Переглянуто 6712 разів



Цікаво, чого він вперся рогом, і як його можна переконати? Проте, може він скоро на пенсію піде, і тоді буде простіше з кимось новим говорити.
Лариса
 
Повідомлення: 126
З нами з: Пон лютого 09, 2009 8:29 am

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Чет серпня 27, 2009 9:30 pm

Як завжди, пані Ліда просто не залишила жодного шансу редакторам. Сподіваюся на цей раз до них в Лондоні дійде, як привильно писати Київ англійською.


To: John Peet <johnpeet@economist.com>
Cc: Andrew Rashbass <AndrewRashbass@economist.com>
Subject: FYI Place name changes
Date: 2009/8/27


Dear Mr. Peet and Mr. Rashbass,

How many changed letters constitute a "real" change, vs a "change in transliteration" according to The Economist? Your own paper has noted that changes like Mumbai and Kolkata are simply changes in the sound of the name, that is, an adjustment of the transliteration. The same is true of Beijing, Bengalooru and other changes that have been widely adopted in the English language.

The Economist itself had a leader on name changes in its November 11, 2008, issue (p. 16) that argued: "So many places change their names, and so often./They have every right to do so, of course, and it seems discourteous not to use their new names if they expressly ask you to." The leader concluded: "This is another argument for using the names that governments request, even if they are not democratic."

Many place names have been changed by governments to a version that is closer to the actual pronunciation of the name in its original or official language, including India and China. This is also true of Ukraine, which now officially uses Kyiv, Lviv, Odesa, Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Mykolaiv, Ternopil, Kryviy Rih (hence Kryvorizhstal instead of Krivoirogstal for the steelmaker purchased by Mittal four years ago), Luhansk, and so on. Moreover, our main rivers are the Dnipro, Dnister and Buh, not the Dniepr, Dniester and Bug. These differences are all based on the proper pronunciation of these names in Ukrainian, versus the Russian-based versions of old. For Ukraine, such changes are neither arbitrary nor minor, as The Economist seems to think, but a declaration of independence from a former colonizer, just as the changes to many Indian city names and some country names obviously are. Needless to say, Ukraine has NOT requested that the country's name be changed to "Ukraina" or "Ukrayina," proving that its changes in official location names are not whimsical in nature.

This same Economist leader makes the point that perhaps Guangzhou (Mandarin version) should remain Canton (Cantonese version), given that Cantonese is the local dialect. Yet you have respected the national government's decision to change from one dialect to another and have followed course.

And this is all that Ukrainians ask of The Economist -- to follow your own well-stated argument: "It seems discourteous not to use their new names if they expressly ask you to." We ask that The Economist practice what it preaches in a consistent manner. Respect Ukraine's specific, official request to change its geographic names from the Russian versions to the Ukrainian ones, as many English-speaking governments and institutions already have. For Ukraine, this is part of its declaration of independence. Surely The Economist can respect such a change?

Sincerely,

Lidia



:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Суб серпня 29, 2009 7:23 pm

Повертаючись до переписки піврічної давності з редакторами "Financial Times", газета закрила початковий форум обговорення http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=8 ... topic=6738 - власне газета закрила всі форуми на Фейсбуці. Останнє повідомлення було зроблено щодо написання назви Києва - напевно редактори злякалися, що не зможуть встояти перед натиском користувачів найбільшої мережі.

Отже, посилаємо ще одне нагадування в редакцію:


To: Hugh.Carnegy@ft.com
Cc: Letters.Editor@ft.com, Peter.Crompton@ft.com, Stefan.Wagstyl@ft.com, Chrystia.Freeland@ft.com
Date: 2009/8/29
Subject: Re: Kyiv


Dear Mr. Carnegy,

In January this year you have responded to your readers' petition on misspelling the name of the capital of Ukraine.

Would you please be kind to inform me, and consequentially those who signed the petition, about the status of your internal investigation and your paper's official stance on the issue?

Let me remind you that as noted by the United Nations in their Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names): "In its letter of 14 November 2002, the Ukrainian Government requested that the capital be rendered as Kyiv, rather than Kiev." You may see it in the English section of UNTERM: http://unterm.un.org/dgaacs/unterm.nsf/ ... enDocument

Hence, this issue should be also treated as the request by the official State authority.

Even the Prime Minister of the U.K. writes it correctly now - Kyiv:
http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page20199

Of course, all other important arguments are listed on http://kyiv.of-cour.se/

Yours truly, those who signed the petition, and many other official and unofficial organisations of Ukraine are patiently waiting for your clarification.

Маrk


-----------------------------------------------------

Green tip: Printing e-mails is usually a waste of scarce resources.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
Make this tip travel around the world: add it to your e-mail signature too!

http://Carbon-Free.Of-Cour.se/green-email-signatures/





2009/1/9 <Hugh.Carnegy@ft.com>


Dear Mr Kусhmа,

I am writing to thank you for the petition you sent me in support of your
campaign to have the FT adopt Kyiv as our style for the spelling of the
Ukrainian capital.
I am, of course, impressed by the strength of feeling expressed by yourself
and everybody who has signed the petition - and those many who have posted
comments online in one form or another.
We are looking carefully at this issue - along with a number of other names
around the world where similar issues exist. I appreciate that from your
perspective it is a simple matter that could be changed with a snap
decision. But we have found over years that it pays not to rush into such
decisions (by the way, the FT has not adapted Myanmar as house style). I
will be discussing it with colleagues and, of course, the Editor, and will
let you know in due course what decision we have taken.

With best regards - and a Happy New Year,

Hugh Carnegy
Executive Editor

**********************************************************************************
This email was sent by a company owned by Pearson plc, registered office at
80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL.
Registered in England and Wales with company number 53723



:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Kyiv

Повідомлення Марко » Чет вересня 17, 2009 10:29 am

Редакція Файнаншіал Таймс вирішила проігнорувати попередній запит, отож довелося натиснути ще раз.

To: Hugh.Carnegy@ft.com, Stefan.Wagstyl@ft.com,
Cc: Peter.Crompton@ft.com, Chrystia.Freeland@ft.com, Yuri.Bender@ft.com, Roman.Olearchyk@ft.com,
Bcc: Letters.Editor@ft.com,

Subject: Kyiv (spelling properly the name of the capital of Ukraine)

Dear Mr. Carnegy,

Neither you nor Mr Wagstyl nor anyone from your paper have responded to the previous letter, so here I write you again in the name of those who signed the petition. Now with extra convincing arguments.

Your paper has switch to Almaty spelling long time ago. For the same reasons you should be writing Kyiv. This discrimination is seen as imposing double standards and misleading your readers too.

As was emphasised many times already, "In its letter of 14 November 2002, the Ukrainian Government requested that the capital be rendered as Kyiv, rather than Kiev."

On the other hand, I have found 187 instances of using Kyiv on FT.com (versus of 518 instance of using Kiev). You are using modern spelling indeed: Kyiv National Economic University, Kyiv Institute of National Economics, Kyiv Association of Industrial Aviation ... (http://markets.ft.com/ft/tearsheets/bus ... ?s=UK:XXIC, http://markets.ft.com/tearsheets/busine ... =uk%3AFXPO, http://markets.ft.com/tearsheets/busine ... =AST%3AWSE, ...).

Thus your colleagues are well aware that this is how the City and all the institution are called now. Ukrainians do not demand from Financial Times to go through its archives and correct all the past misspellings (although that would be nice), just to switch to a proper spelling in the future publications.

Ukraine is an independent state for 18 year already - misspelling its geographical names only tells that your editors are out of touch with reality in Eastern Europe. I hope you understand what kind of image your paper is projecting on its readers.

Financials Times had enough of time to discuss it internally, to study all the arguments, to do field studies and to implement the change. No excuse can be accepted for perpetually ignoring the views of a country of some 50 million people.

If you continue misspelling Kyiv, let me assure you, it will look silly and certain.ly play along with Mr Putin's propaganda.

Sincerely yours,
Mаrk Kусhmа


PS: once again for the sake of complete overview here go strong arguments in favour of Kyiv spelling in English language:
* Ukrainian government insists on Kyiv spelling
* The State Department of the U.S. issued a directive to write Kyiv
* The Prime Minister of the U.K. calls the city Kyiv
* United Nations Multilingual Terminology Database (the ultimate body on geographical names) approved it as Kyiv
* Major English speaking governments worldwide switched to Kyiv spelling
* CIA refers to the city as Kyiv
* The name of the famous football club is Dynamo Kyiv
* Many papers, e.g., British The Guardian, are already writing Kyiv
* All major Canadian media already use the spelling of Kyiv
* And many more on http://kyiv.of-cour.se/

-----------------------------------------------------

Green tip: Printing e-mails is usually a waste of scarce resources.
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
Make this tip travel around the world: add it to your e-mail signature too!
http://Carbon-Free.Of-Cour.se/green-email-signatures/


:ugeek:
Зображення
http://Kyiv.Of-Cour.se/ - кампанія за правильне написання назви міста
Аватар користувача
Марко
 
Повідомлення: 235
З нами з: Нед лютого 08, 2009 11:30 pm

Поперед.Далі

Повернутись до Друковані видання

Хто зараз онлайн

Зараз переглядають цей форум: Немає зареєстрованих користувачів і 1 гість




РЕКЛАМА






cron