All 11 entries tagged Politics

Hypocrisy abound!

I'm going to wade briefly into the issue of the Middle East conflict, but because its so contested I'm going to keep it short.

As the conflict enters its third week, an Israeli foreign office spokesperson appeared on the BBC's World Today programme a few minutes ago. He was asked when a ceasefire would happen and he replied that Israel want a ceasefire that lasts – in other words, he said, when Hizbollah are forced to abide by the UN resolution which demands their disarmament.

I'm amazed that so far this line of argument by Israel and the U.S. hasn't been challenged for it's glaring hypocrisy. Israel is demanding by violent force that Hizbollah abide by a U.N. resolution….between 1955 and 1992, Israel ignored no less than 63 U.N. resolutions, including:

• Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".


• Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".


• Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".


• Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".


• Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide
  by the Fourth Geneva Convention".


• Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"


• Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

….and this is all before 1992. I count a further 20 between 1993-95

[Click here to see the full list]

Time and again, Israel has flouted U.N. rules since 1955 and over half a century later, it seems they are still at it, continuing aerial bombardments in south Lebanon despite promises of a 48 hour ceasefire.

That plus Condi's disgusting speech expressing her "shock" and "sadness" at the destruction at Qana, most likely caused by US bombs; it really is hypocrisy abound in the Middle East.

: 01 Aug 2006 08:46 |  Tags: Condi Rice Israel Lebanon Middle East News Politics United Nations |  Comments (4) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Less valuable lives?

Writing about web page http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/07/the_statistics_of_war.html

This week, the Editor of the BBC Ten O'Clock News made an interesting point about deaths, body counts and statistics. He pointed out that on average 30 – 40 people are dying every day in Israel and Lebanon. Time devoted on the average news bulletin: 10–15 minutes. Meanwhile in Iraq 100 die daily. Time devoted: 3–5 minutes (provided its something more substantial than your average car bombing). And in the war in the Congo, 1,200 people die every day. Yes, there's a war in the Congo.

What's important?

To their credit, the Ten ran a piece on the conflict on Monday night, but the programme's editor Craig Oliver felt it neccessary to justify his running order:

…our judgement is that Middle East (sic) is currently the biggest story in the world – by a wide margin – and it has the greatest implications for us all.

The Congo conflict is "desperately" important he says but it's being going on for decades. Does that make it any less important?

Yesterday, Holly argued that the Lebanese are getting more media "sympathy" because more people are dying in Lebanon than in Israel and so appear more readily as the victims. Surely then, by this rule, the Congolese should get more attention, as their daily death toll is 30x greater? Of course this isn't the case – the death toll is but one facet in any conflict.

So why is the Middle East conflict more important? Well as most people point out, the Middle East has oil and Israel has nukes. And of course our glorious western governments have their grubby fingers in many a pie in the region so we all follow the Bush/Blair party with interest – it's a British angle on an international conflict.

I fully appreciate this, but I'm sorry, I can't ignore some of the world's more severe conflicts on the African conflict as not as important. Even putting Congo aside, there's a potentially devastating war about to erupt on the Horn of Africa as Somali Islamists steadily take over more of the lawless country with Ethiopia and Eritrea sharpening their bayonets ready to fight over the spoils. And this weekend, hugely significant elections are taking place in the enormous D.R. Congo, which have been marred by scores of deaths. And the Democratic Republic has its own fair share of oil and diamonds.

Will these events get a dozen correspondents plus their entourage of satellite trucks? No.

Media racism?

One person responded to Craig Oliver by accusing the media of being institutionally racist:

The main reason wars in Africa get barely a mention in the mainstream media is obvious: The media is owned, controlled, and bought by white people…White people don't care about starving blacks killing each other.

Unfortunately, I believe this is a sad truth. Do editors in London give a toss about Africans killing each other? And even more sad, do audiences in Britain give a toss?

The complexity of it all

Craig Oliver's second justification for the importance of the Middle East over African conflicts went simply:

The sheer complexity of the situation requires space to help provide context and analysis.

The Middle East conflict is complex. But so is the Congolese conflict. And the Somali one. Even more so, and I'd wager a bet and say while the average joe on the street could profer a vague explanation of the Israel/Lebanon crisis, they'd be flicking through an atlas trying to find out where the hell the Congo is.

Context and analysis are vital – in all serious conflicts. But the mainstream media has conclusively failed in "context". The BBC et al have had 6 years to explain and analyse the rise of Hizbullah. Similarly, they've had decades to explain and contextualise why Israel and Palestine don't get on. They had two years to explain and contextualise the genocide in Darfur.

But they didn't.

Instead the mainstream media waits for a situation to explode in a television friendly way before they cover it, and thus find themselves talking to an audience who they haven't prepared.

It was decent of the Ten O'clock News to try and justify their editorial decisions, but Craig Oliver's explanation doesn't even begin to accept nor address the deeper more worrying trends within the international news media, contextual, racist or otherwise.

: 28 Jul 2006 10:13 |  Tags: Africa Broadcast Journalism Israel Lebanon News Politics |  Comments (11) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

The football code

There's an email doing the rounds in Lebanon at the moment, pointing out a spooky coincidence.

• In 1982, Italy won the world cup and Israel invaded Lebanon.
• In 2006, Italy won the world cup and Israel invaded Lebanon.

So the message to the Lebanese is: if Italy win the World Cup again, get the fuck out of there!

Nice to see they can still laugh about something.

: 27 Jul 2006 22:59 |  Tags: News Politics |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Labour's staunchest ally

Writing about web page http://www.thankyoutony.com

He's besieged by the media over the cash–for–peerages row. His Deputy is accused of breaking the ministerial code. He's hated for sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. He's taken the wrap for cocking up the Home Office, and more than ever appears as Bush's poodle panting at the president's side. In fact, right now he'd get more votes on Pop Idol than in a general election.

But that's OK - the Americans love him

Dear Lord. Meanwhile in America.

: 22 Jul 2006 13:13 |  Tags: Me Trying To Be Funny Politics Stupid People |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

A Political Question

Does David Cameron look like a lesbian?

: 30 Jun 2006 13:40 |  Tags: Me Trying To Be Funny Politics |  Comments (7) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Deadly!

Writing about web page http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/bjkeates/entry/have_your_say/

Writing about an entry you don't have permission to view

Thinking about Ben’s post, among others, accusing the media of over hyping today’s Bird Flu announcement, got me annoyed at the extreme, unneccessary overuse of the phrase “The deadly strain of Bird Flu”when referring to all things avian flu.

It begins or appears in every report on TV and radio. Aside from the fact all journalists seem to have given up coming up with new ways to introduce bird flu stories, it’s just completely out of proportion to emphasise the “deadly” element of bird flu. Yes people have died from it but not enough to justify the prefix.

If we’re going to start calling something that has killed (on average) 36 people a year since 2003, then surely everything else that kills as many or more deserves the title too. So, newswriters and readers of the world, are we to start hearing any of the following?

• “The deadly activity of driving” (which kills 44,000 a year in US)
• “The deadly task of taking the bus” (which kills 43 people a year)
• “The deadly action of getting out of bed” (which kills 785 people a year)
• “The deadly bee” (which kills 40 people a year)

Any more suggestions are gladly welcome. Bird Flu is potentially deadly, but it amazes me (as well as many others on here) that the media seem intent on scaremongering the public.

….Or maybe they know something we don’t…oooh-errr, spooky!

: 06 Apr 2006 16:53 |  Tags: Broadcast Journalism Politics Stupid People |  Comments (8) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Is TV reflecting the real world? No!

Writing about web page http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,1745303,00.html

It was the 2nd of July 2005, and Live8 was in full swing amid extraordinary hype. That afternoon, I wrote a short blog entry, expressing my concern that Geldof's crusade would only damage the world's view of Africa, mashing dozens of diverse countries into one desperate famine ridden lump.

Nine months on, and I've been proven right.

A report released this week by the Commonwealth Broadcasting Association and VSO has found that in 'the year when the world cared about Africa' the public's opinion of the continent is more stereotyped than ever.

The survey, entitled "Reflecting the Real World? used focus groups to assess how television had changed our views of Africa. The results showed that nothing had changed since a similar report four years ago: people still primarily viewed 'Africa' as a continent of war and hunger.

According to the VSO:

Even the Make Poverty History campaign and the Live 8 concerts, which enthused millions of people, appear to have inadvertently contrived to confirm a stereotype of Africa as a continent on its knees and added to a sense that nothing has changed over the last 20 years.

The people surveyed gave an overwhelming impression that they wanted a more balanced view of the continent, with more "good news" stories.

I wholeheartedly agree. This shouldn't mean propaganda, but balance. Broadcaster Jonathan Dimbleby puts it better:

I do not expect, or wish, news and current affairs programmes to become ‘good news’ propaganda, but they could offer a wider and more balanced perspective. Similarly, documentary, drama, and entertainment producers should use their range of talents to embrace people of the ‘poor’ world as well as the rich world.

There was some praise offered to broadcasters last year. The BBC's Africa Lives series, and Rolf on African Art were picked out for their creativity. It was their mixture of factual and entertainment that won them favour, and the a Holby City episode set in Ghana was similarly applauded.

The answer then is that broadcasters need to produce programmes like this, that bring a realistic/balanced reflection of Africa in the 21st century, not just in straight news programmes but in entertainment as well.

The key is creativity.

News producer need to be more creative in the stories they find, reporting the good and the bad, in new and original ways that are more reflective of the continent, as well as the rest of the developing world.

And producers from other genres must broaden their horizons. The survey has found that audiences do want to see more from the outside world, but they're tired of the same repetitive formats.

I hope broadcasters will take note of the report, because as I see it right now, the media is yet another institution that's letting the developing world down.

: 04 Apr 2006 11:06 |  Tags: Broadcast Journalism Politics |  Comments (4) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

May you die in agony

While researching for my dissertation this afternoon (on soviet foreign policy 1917-22 if you're interested) I uncovered a brilliant letter written to a Russian ambassador to the US in the mid thirties from an American citizen.

By this time, most Western countries had reluctantly reinstated diplomatic relations with soviet Russia after several years of trying to crush and then ignore them. It was decided that living with the Russians was more beneficial than trying to pretend they didn't exist.

It would seem one American didn't think so, and was pretty sure he didn't want no Red Rusky in his land of the free. Check out this brilliant letter the poor Russian ambassador Aleksandr Troianovskii received soon after taking up his post in Washington D.C.

Detroit, Mich
Feb 28 1935

To
A Murderer of the Ukrainians:

Here is one American who is becoming fed-up with the horrors, mass assassinations, foul schemings and all-round barbarisms of the damned gang of cut throats that are strangling the people of Russia.

This country cannot feel itself other than besmirched by the presence here of you and your loathsome crew. The sooner you leave these shores behind you the better for America.

May the day come quickly when humans of your kind are herded onto anything that will float and taken beyond the sight of our great country. You befoul the very atmosphere of the land. Get back to the God-damned place from whence you came. And get there PRONTO...if you know what that means. America has had quite enough of your vile propaganda...your lies...your schemings.

This writer of this is leaving on Sunday for Washington. He will be there until he personally observes your departure for New York, to take ship out of this country. You and your crew are GOING, perhaps, sooner than you expect. There are ways and means of REACHING you if we find you in Washington after March 15th. It will be wiser to take this HINT and GO while you can...on your feet. And when you GO be sure that no successor comes after you.

May you die in agony
[signed] AMERICAN

By simply replacing some of the words in the above letter, you now have the perfect template letter to send to your MP/ex-boyfriend/girlfriend, tutor, bus company or daytime television presenter. What a gem.

: 01 Apr 2006 17:16 |  Tags: Politics |  Comments (1) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

French protests get violent

Writing about web page http://news.bbc.co.uk

One of the most remarkable pieces of television news in some time is taking place right now on BBC News 24. Jon Sopel is live in the Place de la Republique, on a hotel balcony, offering what is effectively football commentary on violent confrontations between riot police and a small group of protesters.

There seems to be two protests going on similtaneously – a peaceful protest about the French government's new youth employment laws passed this month, and – at the other end of the square – a small hardcore of rioters who are sporadically attacking the police. It all seems to have started at around 4pm.

The BBC have several cameras feeding in so Jon Sopel can literally pick out a skirmish and have it covered very well.

===============
And as a late edition, this website has put up some pictures of 'the fearless Jon Sopel' really getting in the thick of it

He had retired to a balcony before I tuned in but the pictures suggest it was the most memorable piece of rolling news in a while…

On the left he's dodging missiles and in the right shot he is being confronted by an angry protester…keep your cool Jon boy!

: 28 Mar 2006 18:02 |  Tags: Broadcast Journalism News Politics |  Comments (7) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

V for Viktor

So the preliminary results from the Ukrainian elections are seeping out, and it seems like there’s a clear victor: Viktor.

The other Viktor (who was the victor last year, defeating the new victor Viktor) despite strong campaigning has lost much of his popularity. He rode victoriously into power in the orange revolution, 12 months ago when the other Viktor (who’s now the new victor) allegedly poisoned Viktor.

A year on and the old Viktor who was defeated last year is the victor this year. He (Viktor) is claiming victory with just over 27% of the vote.

Interestingly we all thought the other Viktor (who was a victor just a year ago) would come a close second (no-one thought he’d be the victor this year). But instead, the rather attractive Yulia (who allegedly calls herself Viktor on weekends) who was Viktor’s Prime Minister until he fired her, (forcing her to start her own party vying for victory) came a close second with 23% of the votes. For the other Viktor, victory seems a long way off with just 16% of the vote.

“The party of the regions has won a convincing victory” Viktor told the assembled media.

: 28 Mar 2006 11:00 |  Tags: Me Trying To Be Funny News Politics |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem