I want to be a Christian. I wanted to have a friendship with Jesus Christ but Please categorize for me

For the department of English and Media studies.

By Prof DR Sohail Ansari Dead line: 9thMay 

Objectives: Making students the critical consumer of information. 

Initiating students into the art of academic writing.

How to categorize Editorial Reviews.

Answer would help to end years of bondage to Islam.

Why We Left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out First Edition, First edition

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Powerfully written and deeply compelling, these accounts of people of conscience who left Islam are rendered all the more poignant by the realization that each one of them, no matter their status or situation, lives under the death sentence mandated by the Prophet Muhammad for apostates from Islam. Why We Left Islam should be required reading for human rights activists and all those who value the dignity of the human person, so that they will see why this horrific denial of the freedom of conscience within Islam must be resisted by all people of goodwill."

 --Robert Spencer, Director of Jihad Watch and NY Times bestselling author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)" and "The Truth About Muhammad."

"The right of Muslims freely to leave Islam is emerging as an international human rights issue of the first order. Why We left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out both documents and humanizes the tragedy of those born-Muslims who wish to pursue their conscience. The stories are vivid and the political implications profound."

 --Daniel Pipes, Founder and Director, Middle East Forum

Definition and explanation of ‘Editorial Review’

Editorial reviews aim to improve the readability of a manuscript. The reader examines the manuscript for ways in which it can be clarified and simplified. Then the reviewer either makes the changes and returns the marked-up manuscript to the writer or makes marginal notes and a written report for the writer's use in revising. The review often proceeds as follows:

1.Read the draft for content: coverage and organization. Read the draft all the way through before you start to make suggestions for adding or rearranging material, reordering paragraphs, or recasting sentences. Get a firm grasp of the author's purpose, problem statement, audience, and organization.

2.Make marginal notes. If you have to slow down in your reading or have to reread a section, mark it for revision. Make marginal notes of sections that are vague, awkward, inconsistent, or poorly supported. Note any grammatical or stylistic problems as you read along.

3.Place potential problems in context. Reread each area you marked in the first reading. Place the problem in the context of the audience, the reader's purpose, and the rules of grammar and style.

4.Write down your recommendations. Make written suggestions in the margins or on a separate sheet of paper. Identify

o    lack of clarity of purpose and problem

o    material inappropriate for a given audience

o    weak organization

overall document organization

format inconsistencies

paragraph structure

o    grammatical errors

o    stylistic weakness’

Professor Duncan states:  editorial review as in an editor of a journal or magazine reading an reviewing a manuscript to assess the relevance and quality of work

Mark Duncan states:

Editorial review is the review process for submissions. The editor ‘examines’ each submission to determine whether it might be appropriate for inclusion. Some manuscripts will be rejected outright at editorial review because the editor/designate deems the submission unsuitable as they are poorly written therefore do not conform to the requirements for the journa’l.

‘An editorial review is about ensuring that the grammar, spelling, and wording are correct and make sense, and that the MDN writing style guide is followed.’

Editorial reviews are done not published. If published then they will simply inform readers of fixing typos, spelling, grammar, usage, or textual errors in an article.

Editorial reviews are done not published. If published then they will simply inform readers of copy-editing and proof- done in an editorial review.

‘Editorial reviews tend to focus on the technical aspects (grammar, formatting, spelling, consistency, punctuation, etc.) of a work along with the writing craft of the author by an editing professional. Other publishing or media professionals use these assessments when evaluating for works purchasing decisions or for distribution purposes’.

Question:

How to categorize Editorial reviews by Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes: they do not focus on any technical aspects?

Question:

Can the reviews of Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes be used for assessments when evaluating for Why We Left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out? 

Question:

What kind of editorial reviews are these? Reviews do not state: "Powerfully written and deeply compelling, these accounts of people of conscience who left Islam…"The right of Muslims freely to leave Islam is emerging as an international human rights issue… but they state fixing typos, spelling, grammar, usage, or textual errors.

One may argue that these editorial reviews are

editorial Judgments; editorial reviews can never be editorial Judgments but if one supposes they are so one must know what editorial Judgment is:

Editorial Judgment

‘While the innate characteristics of a piece of information (prominent people…peculiar doings...and so forth) determines if it is newsworthy, there are other forces at work.

How does a news organization decide which information is news and which is not? An Editor or Producer makes those judgments, weighing these factors:

In the past, American journalists wrapped themselves in the flag and first amendment and emphasized Importance, Relevance, Conflict and Change when choosing top stories. As marketing data improved, and competitors stole customers, newsroom leaders began paying attention to what interests the audience and who is the audience.

Today, a big part of the job of leading a news organization is finding the balance between what the audience wants, vs. what it may need. And those judgments of Want vs. Need are also reflected in how a story is handled once it is selected. That’s what we call Presentation… How a story is displayed, illustrated and described…in relation to the other stories that are selected by that news outlet.

Presentation is best described in terms of Tone and Weight.

Tone: humorous, serious, conversational, scholarly indicates whether editors think the story alerts, diverts or connects.

Weight: The time and space devoted to a story indicates how important and/or interesting editors think it is.’

Put it in a nutshell

Editorial Judgment is:

Editor makes judgments and decides which information is news and which is not?

Editor finds the balance between what the audience wants, vs. what it may need.

Editor handles a story according to judgments of Want vs. Need.

Editor decides how a story is displayed, illustrated and described…in relation to the other stories that are selected by that news outlet.

Editors make editorial judgments but to decide which stories to allocate their resources to the news values. Editors make editorial judgments to strike a balance between what the audience wants to know and what it might need to know.

Question:

What kind of editorial Judgments ‘Why We Left Islam should be required reading for human rights activists and all those who value the dignity of the human person, so that they will see why this horrific denial of the freedom of conscience within Islam must be resisted by all people of goodwill." are these?