Skip to main content

Why Using CTTO Isn't a Valid Source at All


Right now, I'm having an argument with a certain old man (wearing a toga, presumably graduating from a doctorate degree) on Facebook. One thing I noticed in some of his Facebook posts is the use of CTTO more often than not. Maybe, I can start giving a sample of his arguments since there are many. One of his posts would go like this:
All nations have protectionist policies, its their inherent rights. It is the role of the business to use strategies to work within these policies.... ctto...

Back then, I remembered I erroneously used Yahoo as a source in my high school term paper. Later on, a college professor placed an X mark on Yahoo and Google as a source. It's because Google nad Yahoo are search engines. Now, we have CTTO which means Credit To The Owner. If we're to really credit the owner, why not post a link or acknowledge the site where it was taken from? For example, the meme above is by 8LIST.PH. 

It's very eays to say CTTO to make myself look smart. However, I can say CTTO all I want and not have any valid sources at all. I can say all I want that "studies show" and CTTO and I never read any of the studies at all. It's like this old man can say, "Do you know Switzerland is a protectionist country? CTTO." I say, "Where are the source?" The person will just reply CTTO. So where are these "tons of studies" if all he cites is CTTO. That's just plain intellectual dishonesty.

Any proper usage such as citation or context needs the source. If I'm going to quote Kishore Mahbubani from a video, it'd be best for me to say that I got it from The Singapore Economic Model - VPRO Documentary 2009 to cite my source. Meanwhile, the old man seeking to back up Hilario Davide Jr and the Monsods up would probably give more CTTO than valid sources. If anything, CTTO might be better worked as a temporary accreditation especially if certain works are meant for free domain use. Quoting Mabhubani, Mohamad, and LKY will give me more credibility to my writing than just simply CTTO.

If I'm going to prove that Singapore never self-industrialized and other nations (rich in natural resources) learned from it, I could cite that it was from the late Lee Kuan Yew's book From Third World to First. As much as possible, I should cite the pages for easier reference to the readers. I could cite how LKY figured out what's wrong with the development economists of his day vs. what the late Albert Winsemius recommended.

Also, using a disclaimer should be done as much as possible. That is by saying, "This book isn't mine. It actually belongs to (insert author)." In the fair use policy, one can list the makers of the show, the documentary, etc. to give proper accreditation that it was all for fair use. CTTO just wouldn't help at all in contrast to citing every last author. 

The usage of CTTO in excess might be an attempt to look brilliant. The person may want to give the illusion that he or she has "tons of studies". Yes, it's possible to say "studies show..." but the studies are either faulty or non-existent. That's why I really feel like that they're ridiculing Philippine Senator Robin Padilla--it's to cover their own insecurities. 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let's Be Real: Term Limits Cause Political Dynasties to Spiral Out of Control

Inquirer There's always the obsession with political dynasties. There's also the obsession with term limits . Back in the 1990s, I remembered fearing charter change . I was afraid that the late Fidel V. Ramos might become a dictator. The talks that if a president would rule for more than six years--would be considered "frightening" or "nakakatakot" in Tagalog. I wrote an article where I wrote one staggering truth-- a  long reign isn't necessarily tyrannical and that a short reign isn't necessarily benevolent . In my discussion, I highlighted both Pol Pot and Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.--both deceased dictators. Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge dictatorship murdered millions in contrast to Marcos' regime. Of course, some people will say Pol Pot would've caused Cambodia to go extinct if he rhad eigned longer. I remember the logic that I was told back in elementary school. I was told that the reason why term limits are imposed is to prevent another Marcos-...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Philippine Elections Can Be Compared to GAMBLING

Gemini AI Art Some time ago, I wrote an essay that Filipinos can expect to lose more money betting that people will vote wisely . It's time for the truth,  and the  inconvenient truth hurts now, doesn't it? I had Gemini AI create this new AI art of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. and Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" S. Gerona-Robredo, at the casino, just to make a point. Sure, Bongbong shook hands with Leni in Sorsogon as a step for political reconcilation . However, such events should be considered more like random variables, such as getting your ball to land on a certain color and a specific number in a game of roulette.  Let's define what a gamble means. The Cambridge Dictionary defines gamble as: to do something that involves risks that might result in loss of money or failure, hoping to get money or achieve success: The gamble of whether your candidate wins or not, because popularity is fickle It's effortless to say, "It's not rea...
Post a Comment
Read more

Hilario Davide Jr.'s Growing Irrelevance Isn't Because of His Age But His REFUSAL to Make NECESSARY Amendments in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

It's times like this that make me ashamed to be from Cebu. This Facebook page tends to demonize charter change without realizing that it can be a proper game changer. I'm pointing out that Hon. Hilario G. Davide Jr. isn't getting irrelevant because of his age. The problem isn't growing old but when one grows old without wisdom . I'd say this is the case for Davide Jr. himself he's grown old without wisdom. He's already 88 years old but he's still too comfortable with the outdated 1987 Constitution of the Philippines as it is. Come on, if that's the case then what happened to  Article XVII  of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines?  Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by: (1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or (2)  A constitutional convention . Section 2.  Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at...
Post a Comment
Read more