At least in the case of contemporary, political matters:
If it is really true that "many people" in the contemporary mainstream
believe something, it should not be hard to find a well-known public
figure, or political columnist, or major-newspaper editorial writer,
who expresses that belief.
For example, "some people regard the situation in Iraq as a guerrilla
war" can be replaced with "Army Gen. John P. Abizaid said that forces
in Iraq were 'conducting what I would describe as a classical
guerrilla-type campaign against us.'"
The big problem with attributing a view to "some people" or "many
people" is that it is an unverifiable source. (It's sometimes suggested
that opinion polls be cited, but suitable poll results are generally
hard to find. Polling organizations sell their services; you can't just
go online and access the full results of every Harris/Interactive poll
that's ever been conducted, search for relevant results, and snip out
fair-use extracts).
Ideally the person cited should have more stature or neutrality than,
Al Franken or Ann Coulter. But even the use of a Franken or Coulter
IMHO fixes the problem. It establishes several things, fairly
objectively. 1) the point of view is being expressed really in the
contemporary mainstream (not just held by single-taxers or
hollow-earthers). 2) The accuracy of the quotation/citation can be
checked. 3) The reader either already has, or can easily form, an
opinion about the source's point of view and reliability.
--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith(a)world.std.com alternate:
dpbsmith(a)alum.mit.edu
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at
http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/