A first attempt at multimedia reporting, via the Pulitzer Center’s Untold Stories website. Finally got published. Have a listen! I like this guy’s style, but I wish someone would sponsor him for some better recording equipment. Any volunteers out there?
Media
Announcing my full participation in Twitter
So apparently Twitter is the next big thing, blah blah blah yakkity smakkity.
I must admit that I still don’t REALLY get the effin point. Seems like the ultimate in sound bytes, and unless you’re in a plane crash or being held hostage by terrorists, who the hell really cares what you have to say in 140 characters? And why can’t you say it via email, regular blogging or a text message to your brohamskis?
But I don’t want to be left out of the loop. So I’ve started using Twitter. I’m using it mostly for little haiku-ish revelations that I’m having during the day–the kind of things we all have, every day–and feeding it to the right-hand side of this blog. Here’s the pure RSS feed.
I’m actually finding it a pleasurable way to keep a little journal. Any medium that has clear boundaries is fun to be creative with–funny in that way that rules and structure can be a good basis for freedom. I guess that’s the philosophy behind the haiku and any other fixed-form poem.
Anyway, I hope this provides you a modicum of extra Net enjoyment.
Taking the Darfur discussion to the next level
If you want deeper discussions on all Darfur-related matters (especially the ICC indictment of Omar al-Bashir) you have to add this baby to your RSS feeds: Making Sense of Darfur, started by Darfur expert Alex de Waal. If you’re a Save Darfur member and you’re not engaged in these discussions, well, you should be ashamed of yourself! The thoughtfulness of some of the posts on this blog puts some of my more energetic rants to shame. (Not that I ever get my facts wrong. Ever.)
Also, if you’ve got suggestions for other thoughtful or definitive blogs on Darfur or Sudan that you think are worth following, I’d love to hear them. I’m trying to make Sudan part of my daily readings.
Muammar Qaddafi on “Isratine”
Travel the Arab world a bit, and you’ll find it’s hard for people to agree on much from one country to another. But whether it’s Palestinians in Dubai, Syrians, Lebanese or Chadians, there’s one point on which everyone seems to find common ground: Muammar Qaddafi, the de facto leader of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, is a freakin’ crackpot.
Crackpot, despot and buffoon he may be. But I have to say, his op-ed in The New York Times yesterday arguing for a one-state solution in Israel and Palestine was well put. With his track record, Qaddafi’s claim of interest in peace is preposterous, and it will be easy for detractors to void his argument based on the colonel’s utter lack of credibility. (In that sense, I think it’s interesting that the Times chose to print the one-state argument under Qaddafi’s byline. There are far more credible and respectable people saying the exact same thing. Makes it look like it’s only the opinion of a maniac.) Continue reading
Why is Allah never translated?
Mr friend Matteen wrote the following letter to the AP. I posted it here with his permission. It raises a question that a lot of us with some kind of limited awareness of the Middle East ask ourselves when we read the newspaper: When Arabs are speaking, why is every word translated except for “God”, which is always left as “Allah”? By the same logic, Israelis should be quoted as saying “Adonai” or “Yahweh”, Spanish people as saying “Dios”, etc. It all has the effect of reading a Tintin comic about Arabs. Not to knock Tintin, but it’s not known as being the most ethnically sensitive children’s book ever made. I expect a little more from the AP.
But enough of my rambling. Here’s Matteen’s much better written letter: Continue reading
Good Guys and Bad Guys in Sudan
LGD note: I recently wrote this essay looking at New York Times reporting in Darfur for a class on conflict and reporting. I thought it would be interesting to post here. Some of the footnotes I couldn’t include as links, so if for some reason you need a fully annotated version, please comment.
The biggest news story about conflict in Africa in the last five years has undoubtedly been the conflict in Darfur, Sudan, which has often been called genocide. The current violence in Sudan’s western state emerged in 2003 just as peace agreements were finally being made to end the 20-year civil war between Sudan’s north and south. The conflict propelled a region that had once been regarded as a backwater onto the forefront of the international stage.
As reporting picked up steam in 2004, a story emerged about Darfur that was replayed in various forms: Nomadic Arab tribes, in league with Sudan’s nefarious government, were attempting to exterminate the black Africans of Darfur through a campaign of terror, rape and fire.
But scholars, Darfur experts and some aid groups have questioned the accuracy of this mainstream reporting on Darfur. In the last two years, this has coincided with a waning interest in the Darfur conflict among the American public.
In this essay, I follow the reporting on Darfur through the course of four years and several articles in the United States’ most influential newspaper, The New York Times. Through the evolution of the reporting, I show the ways in which the Times constructed an over-arching narrative about Darfur, why the story was relevant and popular, and why myths came to influence the reporting.
Tripoli Tragedy
When I woke up this morning to the news of a horrific bombing in Tripoli (northern Lebanon) that killed at least 11 people, I swore I would not join the throngs of amateur (or often amateurish professional) pundits who leap to blame someone or other for this kind of strife.
But I have to point out how quickly people are doing just that. Check out this unfounded-in-fact editorial from NOW Lebanon, which blames Syria for the attack.
It’s gotten to the point where, any time any violence happens, folks just pull out their own agenda and slap it onto the vague facts of the case. There’s no sense of justice or accuracy in such games. Quite the opposite, they stoke hatred and suspicions. (Blaming Syria, in this case, implies certain sectarian and political abettors in Lebanon, which I won’t get into here.)
In a place where so many such crimes remain unsolved, I don’t blame people for speculating. But it would be nice to let people mourn and take stock of the situation before making wild accusations, especially if you have a voice that carries some authority. Using the event for a political agenda is terribly callous.
Anyway, I refuse to join the crowd of would-be experts and speculate about who is responsible. All the voices of such pundits gain steam until they are reported as near-fact on respectable websites. I just want to say that this attack — because of its timing and the fact that it apparently did not target any particular individual — especially requires some calmness and careful thought before allegations are made.
We’re not dealing with the latest rumor about an American presidential candidate’s extracurricular activities. We’re dealing with events that threaten to destabilize a country that is still very vulnerable to civil war. So if you’re in the media, be responsible and show some restraint before you start calling out names.
Eamon Kircher-Allen 