Americas: Virtual Memorial for 72 Victims of Migrant Mass-Killing

72 Migrantes

This is an interview with Alma Guillermoprieto who is a fabulous journalist, originally from Mexico, who writes on Latin American issues for both the US and Latin American press, and has also published a number of books.  She is one of the organizers of an interactive virtual memorial called 72 Migrantes, dedicated to the mass murder of 72 migrants in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas in August. 

Coverage of the 2010 Miss World Competition

Hello, all!

Opinions about who's the prettiest aside, I found Yahoo's slideshow coverage of the 2010 Miss World Competition fascinating. Click through the pictures here while paying close attention to the captions.

Just a few observations / things to think about:

- In picture 2, you can see girls of many different appearances. However, the "tall and slender" body type idealized in America and much of the West seems universal in all contestants pictured here. What does that say about the cultural/media influence of the West and the potential dominance of the beauty ideals it exports? Again, I didn't see all contestants, but somehow I doubt many of the confident "Coca-Cola" or "Fanta" shape girls from the article we read in class are in this contest.

- In picture 17, last year's Miss World Kaiane Aldorino hugs the new Miss World. But curiously, her nationality is not identified.

- In picture 24, we see several contestants lined up and clapping, but only Miss Finland is identified. Why did the other models in this picture, especially given that Miss Finland is way in the back? Could they be from nations the mainstream media consider "less important"? Picture 25 does this too.

- Many of the photos feature the contestants experiencing Chinese culture or bonding with each other. In this sense, could the Miss World competition be viewed as a positive fosterer of intercultural exchange? Do you think the girls' experiences are too isolated to make a difference (ie, only in nice hotels with tour guides) or do you think that the international nature of the competition (ie, they get the opportunity to bond with young women from countless nationalities) will inspire them to be ambassadors of tolerance and intercultural connectedness in their communities? And on a semi-unrelated note, do you find these competitions sexist and outdated or empowering like the women in the Coca-Cola article said?

Interesting thoughts!

Juan Williams Fired From NPR

This is a pretty controversial issue that has occurred. Recently the NPR commentator was fired for a remark he made toward muslims while appearing on Fox News. Williams said that when he boards a plane and sees a person in traditional Muslim garb that it makes him nervous. A personal comment on the way he feels. Williams, also employed by Fox, is known for bringing his liberal insight to Fox News debates and giving a more diverse caste. Below I have posted the a video clip of the conversation and remark. The are a few issues that rise from this situation. Firstly, is the firing of Williams a violation of free speech and what are the professional consequences of speaking your mind and opinion? Secondly, did he violate NPR's code of ethics, which is the reason they claim for firing him? Thirdly, no one really brought the issue to public concern until NPR fired him. So was this really that controversial of an issue or was NPR just looking for a reason to complete the deed? Lastly, after this occurrence Williams signed a 2 year, 2 million contract with Fox to be an on air expert. I also posted a couple articles, one from our very own Denver Post, concerning the issue to give you guys more information. I would to hear feed back from people on what they about this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGUyLEJnfsg

http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_16401210

http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2009/02/juan_williams_npr_and_fox_news_1.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/21/npr-fires-juan-williams-oreilly-appearance/

Silencing Roy to Silence Kashmiris

Indian author Arundhati Roy is facing possible arrest in Indian on sedition charges after she publicly advocated for Kashmir independence and challenged India’s claim that Kashmir is a, quote, "integral part of India." Roy could face up to life in prison for calling on the Indian government and the world to allow the Kashmir people to speak for themselves.

Defending the sedition charges, Roy comments: "I said what millions of people here say every day...I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world."

And she beautifully goes on to say to Amy Goodman:

"Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds. Pity the nation that needs to jail those who ask for justice, while communal killers, mass murderers, corporate scamsters, looters, rapists, and those who prey on the poorest of the poor, roam free."

(WHY IS SHE NOT COVERED/INTERVIEWED IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA?)

But best of all - Roy calls on the international community to pay attention - something I don't feel you hear very often - but this might be a benefit of globalization.....the possibility of activism on an international level. Additionally awesome to me is Amy Goodman asking Roy what we should do....this I feel you do not get from interviewers and broadcasters often enough - a quest for action. Very often, I feel, reporters and interviewers do not probe interviewees further for ways the international community can rally together and act....not just passively listen to the awful plight of people around the world whose government's are not coming to their aid. (I'm thinking of Newmont now too).

Equally awesome Roy says:

"But I think that the most important thing is now not to allow India or Pakistan to speak for Kashmiri people, you know? Because Kashmiri people need a space in which to think. They’ve just lived all their lives with a palatine bag over their heads and a gun pointed at their temples. They need—somebody needs to create the space for them to be able to say what they want, because this is a whole population that is in—living in the most insufferable conditions."

Though I've quoted a great deal - there is more: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/27/acclaimed_indian_author_arundhati_roy_faces

Mining in Peru in the Media

Hi everyone. As I mentioned in class, I found this 30 minute video about the mining in Cajamarca, Peru by PBS frontline, with a NY Times reporter from 2005. The video spends some time talking about the political scandal involved in the genesis of Newmont as the controlling mining company in the region.

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/peru404/

Wikileaks footage of the Iraqi Journalist shooting

So I've wanted and planned to post this link a while ago. I guess I was waiting for a text we would read in class to connect this material to it. The footage came out in April of this year and I'm curious to find out if anyone heard about this when it came out? Given our discussion today in class I think it's relevant. It obviously fits with the Afghani killings and the US kill teams. Though the killings were not seemingly for sport, the quickness and certainty that a journalist with a camera was an 'armed' enemy who brought his children to a war is the easy diagnostic. Given that the war was not any Iraqi's creation to start, it’s fascinating how privilege lacks self-reflexivity and believes it's justified in making such a ridiculous comment. Where exactly are Iraqi children supposed to go when the country is at war? A war, no Iraqi asked for, either. I strongly recommend you watch the whole video. It's not simply that a man laughs when driving over a body that bothers me; actually laughing was not memorable when I watched it the first time. It is the satisfaction with which we kill that I find problematic. I think it closely parallels Neroni's article highlighting the smiling faces in Abu Ghraib. What's 'nice' about this clip is it's not simply pictures we see, but a conversation, communication and a performance. It's like the second best thing to a video camera sneaking into the Abu Ghraib prison while the U.S. soldiers tortured Iraqis.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20001802-38.html

I know a lot has been said/discussed/posted on the drug wars in Mexico and the role of the US but I could not resist making one more post about it. This is an interesting article that appeared on the BBC website - it is an interview of the Mexican president Felipe Calderon. In the interview, he has essentially placed the onus of the escalating drug war on the US. Ironically, the article talks about how Californians will vote this week on Proposition 19 - a measure that will legalise marijuana use in California.
I thought it was so wrong that while on the surface the US seems to be playing the role of peacemaker, underneath it all, it's busy making sure that there remains a market for drugs in the US and thus by extension, it's engaged in this constant conflict with Mexico. Unless of course, policy makers have a skewed logic where they believe that legalising marijuana will help the drug war in Mexico.
It is rightly so, that Mexicans are outraged. To me, it's a simple equation of supply and demand. If the US can make getting those drugs difficult, the demand may eventually wind down. But maybe they don't want to do that. However, here there is huge money involved and the stakes are very very high - it's just easier to be part of this war than do something to stop it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11633914

Some pleasant news about gender

After all the horrible, depressing things we've studied and read about gender this quarter, I am pleased to share some pleasant news about a positive international developments in gender from Africa.

The article below tells us how, in 2007, the Liberian capital of Monrovia received a UN police force deployed from India. In addition to patrolling the city in the classic UN blue uniforms and helmets, the soldiers provide children with medication, as well as lessons in computer use, self-defense, and Indian dance. And these peacekeeping soldiers all happen to be women.

The contingent of female peacekeepers was deployed in response to the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security, which was passed by a unanimous vote in the Council October 31, 2000. The resolution was aimed at giving gender considerations a more important role in security and reconstruction in war-torn areas. The thought is that by including women in security, it will be harder for men to get away with perpetrating the mass rapes and other violence against women that has become characteristic of conflicts in the region. But it also has the effect of giving women and girls positive, visible role models and helping them feel empowered to take on more leading roles in society. The principal of a local school is quoted as saying, "in Congo Town, at the Victory Chapel School, there is a feeling that the next generation of Liberians are growing up with the view that women can do anything and everything men can do."

That’s awesome. I think this is a fantastic template for improving the conditions of women in unstable areas. It seems almost obvious that integrating women into the military or peacekeeping forces would reduce the instances of violence against women. It’s amazing to me that no one else tried this sooner. It has all kinds of implications for women's roles in developing societies and suggest a kind of paradigm shift might be in the cards.

What do you think about this? Would an all-woman peacekeeping force do a better job than an all male force? What challenges might such a force face, especially from men in the communities? This also relates back to the article about gender in the Israeli army, so we can also ask: Should women they be allowed to serve in combat roles? Why or why not?

India's Female Peacekeepers Inspire Liberian Girls

Wikipedia Article on UN Security Council Resolution 1325

The actual UN Resolution

Drug Wars in Mexico

Here is a New York Times article that continues the media coverage of the drug wars in Mexico. Since researching on this topic for my group project I have tried to find any new information concerning the topic. This article in interesting in that it talks hopefully how the number of deaths related to this in the past year have been lower than in the previous year or two. However, over the weekend thirteen people were killed at a drug rehabilitation center and another fourteen were killed at a party in Ciudad Juarez, rising the death toll to around 666 people. This number compares to the number of 695 which was to death toll of last year around this time. One cannot forget that these are only the numbers that have been reported. So many additional deaths and murders in conjunction with the drug wars go unreported. This outbreak of recent killings is said to be the result of the seizing and burning of the largest load of marijuana in the country's history. It is encouraging that the government is continuing the effort to destroy the drugs but at what cost? This deed is not going to go unpunished as journalist stated. It is a lose, lose situation. The more drugs that are being reprehended, the more violence and killings are occurring. This is yet another dynamic to the drug war that can not be cleared up until the corruption within the government seizes and the nation fights as a whole to free their country from this problem.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/26/world/americas/26mexico.html?ref=world

India's Female Peacekeepers Inspire Liberian Girls

After our class discussion with Maria about Haiti, I was very disturbed about the rapes and violence in the camps in Haiti. Someone in class mentioned helping the women by teaching them basic self-defense. I feel this is a great solution. Perhaps some all female Peace Keeping units could help.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53268

This article outlines the impact an all female peace keeping group from India has had on a school outside the capital in Liberia. “According to Jickson Sargeor, the principal of Victory Chapel School, the Indian peacekeeping contingent provides the children with medication, lessons on using computers and Indian dance and self defense.” The article explains that since the Peace Keepers have come, many more women have joined armed forces within the country.

In other class discussions, we have talked about the local impact of sending in military or peace keepers to a region for fear of increased rapes, abuse and other issues. Could an increased number of all female units be a solution?

The all female Peace Keeping unit in Liberia has had a huge impact on the young women in the community. “In Congo Town, at the Victory Chapel School, there is a feeling that the next generation of Liberians are growing up with the view that women can do anything and everything men can do.”

Trial By Fire

Hi all, Happy Monday.

This is an article that was published in the New Yorker last winter about a man on death row after he was convicted of setting his house on fire and killing his family. The first part of the article describes the man and the evidence in a way that the reader can feel sure that the man is guilty.. he got into trouble as a child, he had a history of violence, etc. In an interesting twist, the second half of the article pleas at his innocence and at the end- after his excecution- he is found not guilty. I think it is an excellent example of framing and agenda setting, as it was released right around the controversy over the death penalty in Texas last year. It is a great piece of journalism and worth a read.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=1

Just Vision and the promotion of nonviolence

I recently attended a fundraiser for the non-profit organization Seeking Common Ground and I had the chance to listen to the Founder of Just Vision talk about her organization and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Just Vision focuses on highlighting the stories of Israeli and Palestinian citizens who are working to end the conflict nonviolently. The organization began because the founder, Ronit Avni, felt that there was so much news coverage showing all of the violence surrounding this conflict, but the peace activists from both sides were ignored. The media tends to tell the stories that reflect sensationalism and conflict, but there needs to be more of a focus on ordinary, everyday people who are searching for nonviolent solutions to end this conflict.
Just Vision has just released a documentary called Budrus. This film tells the story of a town that is brought together by one man and his daughter to protest the Separation Barrier that is being built through their town. This man rallies together members from Fatah and Hamas as well as local Israelis to peacefully protest the building of this wall.
Here's the trailer for the movie:

Cholera Epidemic in Haiti

The Haitians are currently experiencing the worst medical emergency since the January earthquake. There is a cholera outbreak currently underway in the country. As of Saturday over 200 people have died from cholera and there are over 2500 confirmed cases. The main source of the outbreak is contaminated water. I am frustrated with how the government prioritizes needs for the people. How can they provide the people with access to televisions during the World Cup but fail to provide an adequate amount of clean water?

NYTIMES ARTICLE

AP VIDEO

Al-Hurra/ الحرة

ttp://www.alhurra.com/ProgramDetails.aspx?id=2244593&CID=1

The link above is to the magazine section of Al-Hurra. Al-Hurra (Arabic for Freedom) is the channel the US Military created in the Arab world with their invasion of Iraq and to respond to other channels such as Al-Jazeera. In our class discussion last Wednesday Dhvani spoke of her frustration that Media of the 'first' world bombards 'us' in the 2/3rds world Majority.

I think things like Al-Hurra are fairly powerful tactics --and it's referenced by name (page 3) in the article by Nye, "Public Diplomacy and Soft Power." I really encourage you to browse the site, and realize just how much ideology and hegemony permeate it. Of course, the channel is broadcast in Arabic. A lethal power indeed is soft power. Though others may disagree. I find 'soft power' and cultural hegemonic trends one of the most alarming powers the US uses internationally. I imagine even White Europeans must be sick of it. It disturbs me because so many people don't have Media literacy internationally and they lack critical tools to distinguish a discourse of race available only to the 'privileged' few of us in the US. The reality we live in, gives none of us tools against this phenomena.

I'm disturbed. We, the 2/3rds world Majority, are loosing. Everyone will be culturally white soon enough and perform whiteness without any ability to distinguish otherwise, or see a flaw. We have no tools and no strength to combat this monster. It's far too big and the pockets are far too deep. If we happen not to perform whiteness then we perform the lens of stereotype whiteness stages us in instead, thinking and identifying with it as authentically our own.

I reflect back on Leanna’s comments of her experience as a Peace Corps Volunteer in one of the poorest African countries. There too, children consume American Media and it affects their culture. I reiterate, in the US we are the strongest and most protected population against US cultural imperialism. BUT, What does the 2/3rds world majority have to combat it? What alternatives are given us? . . .

Tibetans Protest China's Plan to Curb Language

Tibetans Protest China's Plan to Curb Language 

This is not the first time in history that such a policy has been proposed, and strikes at the heart of the role of language in culture.  Some may call it linguistic genocide, others contend that it is a means of creating national unity...your opinion? 

Juan Williams/Media framing

Juan Williams, contributor for both Fox News and NPR, was fired by NPR earlier this week after making controversial statements on The O'Reilly Factor, through which he explained his ongoing fear of those dressed in "Muslim garb" when he flies. What I've posted is an article laying out NPR's side, Tim Wise's essay speaking against William's firing and also Williams' actual statement on Fox News. It is interesting to critique these as examples of media framing, and to analyze each side with notice paid to the opposing terminology used as positional validation. The NPR article suggests that the CEO was righteous in firing Williams on the basis of his opinionated comments since NPR encourages objectivity from its analysts and reporters. Vis a vis, Wise contends that "white liberals" at NPR are simply denying the prejudicial tendencies that exist in each of us as we are continually bombarded by a rhetorically racist hegemony. Williams merely expressed his self-awareness and was crucified for it by NPR.
What I take issue with is not so much Williams' admission of fear - I'm sure many people continue to fear false stereotypes such as these - but his use of the phrase "Muslim garb" is a sickening generalization that seeks to scapegoat rather than promote cultural appreciation or tolerance. Forgive my sarcasm, but I would love it if someone could please tell me what Muslim garb is - I don't believe anyone can. It seems like what Williams really meant is "Arab" when he said this, yet another example of the commonly mistaken conflation of Arabs with Muslims and a total misrepresentation in my opinion, since not all Arabs are Muslim, and vice versa.
On a side note, Williams was offered an extended contract and pay raise at Fox News post-firing. Fox must be pleased to now have Williams all to itself.

How do you feel? Was NPR justified, or is Wise correct?



http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130713285&sc=fb&cc=fp

http://www.timwise.org/tag/juan-williams/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRwok2Ffoys

One more reason to love Democracy Now...

Democracy Now ran a great story today on the troubling Ugandan anti-gay bill, and considering discussion we had yesterday, I though it pertinent. According to this story, a Ugandan weekly published on its front page a "kill list" of gay men and lesbians, which contradicts a comment made in class yesterday that Ugandan press and citizenry do not care about this issue as much as US press/citizens do. If it's on the front page, apparently the press finds the situation important, and wants others to value it as well. Perhaps this has not always been the case, but it certainly suggests increasing contemporary interest.
I am also intrigued (and disturbed) by the involvement of US conservative Christian players such as the creepily-named group "The Family," of which several US politicans have been a part. What I can't wrap my brain around is the motivation behind this involvement...the only idea I can come up with is that these individuals seek to further an evangelic Christian agenda by othering and ultimately eradicating "sinning" gay folks from the global scene.
It seems like the author of this bill might be seeking a scapegoat upon whom to blame AIDS - a ridiculous notion in itself, but also one that cannot be justified by exterminating an already marginalized group. Further, I don't believe this law to be moral, ethical or even rational. Reminiscent of the Nazi rationale for Jewish isolation and extermination, this also speaks to today's arising "blame Muslims" rhetoric.

What do you think is the historical significance (or future consequence) of US political/power elites putting their noses in Ugandan lawmaking?
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/21/anti_gay_fervor_in_uganda_tied

China's One Child Law...

Chinese woman forced to abort 8-month-old fetus

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101021/ap_on_re_as/as_china_forced_abortion

According to the article, the couple already had one child, and the woman was forcefully taken from her house to a clinic where she was injected with a drug to kill her baby. Officials are saying that they had permission from her husband to do this, but he denies he was ever contacted or that he ever gave any sort of permission for the abortion. It also says that forced abortions are illegal, but that the police often look the other way should they occur.

Is this a women's rights issue? Human rights issue?

What are your thoughts on the One Child Law?

Is it fair that the child be aborted because it is against the law to have a second child?

Will this be covered more in the media and will China address it internationally or even nationally?

I know what my opinions are on the matter, but would love to hear from the rest of you!

Here is a link to AlJazeerah, they have a video interview of the husband and wife:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/10/201010208145793266.html

BP Oil Spill: So many untold stories

6 Months Since BP Oil Spill, Writer and Environmentalist Terry Tempest Williams Asks "Where Is Our Outrage?"

This is an excellent interview by Amy Goodman on DemocracyNow with Terry Tempest Williams, writer and environmentalist, about her recent travels and interviews in the Gulf Region to record so many stories of what is happening there that we are not hearing about from media conglomerate news.  She also talks about efforts by BP and also Homeland Security to silence those who are speaking out.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/21/6_months_since_bp_oil_spill

World Food Week workshop for journalists in Rome

Leading journalists from Africa, Asia and Latin America were invited to meet experts of the three Rome-based UN agencies, to discuss and exchange with them about the facts, trends, sources and news coverage opportunities around reporting food insecurity.

"Some of the points raised were that the big UN agencies often give recommendations and indications, imposing a view of “correct behavior” without taking into consideration the real needs and circumstances of the people living in those countries. The journalists also noted that they often ask about “success stories”, which are not frequently mentioned by the agencies. Participants also suggested that FAO, IFAD and WFP create a stronger link among themselves, as their approach is often very different, even if they work in the same field.

Finally, journalists were very enthusiastic about the workshop, and asked for it to be repeated, saying they would also welcome opportunities to do it in situ where projects take place, to enable them to learn from people who directly benefit."

Link to article: http://www.ips.org/institutional/world-food-week-workshop-for-journalists-in-rome/

This initiative is similar to the "Reporting the World" project - efforts toward a more "workable ethic of responsibility" in development communications. These two projects seem to be a truly positive step towards journalists understanding that their work truly impacts societies and ideologies. It's great to see/hear that many journalists are abandoning the idea of "realism" - that change is only brought about by states, governments or elites. Although there does seem to remain a need for going forward with reporting also from the ground and not just from these large international organizations (in my opinion). The good thing is that it seems many journalists (at least the ones at this conference) recognize that need - reporting from and for the people.

A bill proposed to allow government censorship of the internet IN THE US

While we have been talking about censorship in the Chinese, Indian and Arab media in class, this looks like a case where the US government is perhaps trying to censor what Internet pages people in the US are allowed to view as well. A bill is in the works that would allow the US government to blacklist websites at their discretion, disallowing US Internet users from seeing them. This is something so controversial it seems as though it should be visible in mainstream media, but mainstream media doesn't appear to be reporting on the issue at all. Is this a case of government agenda setting? Media agenda setting (why wouldn't mainstream media conglomerates quietly support legislation that would help silence the fringe voices)? What is going on and how could something like this be happening so under the radar? I am curious if this is something that other people in the class have heard about and if so in what context. One of the articles I read about it claims that legislators "haven't heard much in the way of objections." It seems to me that people would be objecting if they knew about it. How have the people pushing the bill forward managed to keep it so well under wraps? The only sites that I have found reporting on it are independent blogs and websites I had never heard of previously. When I searched keywords in conjunction with "NY Times" all that came up is a kind of a non-page in the politics section recording that the bill had been introduced and by whom. Is this not a case in which the idea of "press responsibility" comes into play? This is obviously of interest to the public, and a situation in which we count on the media to make us aware of what is going on in the government.

This is a quote from the site that is linked at the bottom of the page that offers a petition to sign against the bill.

"Just the other day, President Obama urged other countries to stop censoring the Internet. But now the United States Congress is trying to censor the Internet here at home. A new bill being debated would have the Attorney General create an Internet blacklist of sites that US Internet providers would be required to block. This is the kind of heavy-handed censorship you'd expect from a dictatorship, where one man can decide what web sites you're not allowed to visit. But the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to pass the bill as soon as they get back after the election -- and Senators say they haven't heard much in the way of objections! That's why we need you to sign our urgent petition to Congress demanding they oppose the Internet blacklist." http://demandprogress.org/blacklist/?source=etaf

Media and Democracy in the Middle East

So this is an issue I've wanted to comment on since reading our piece on "Television, Gender and Democratization in the Middle East." On page two of that article it says:
"We need historical specificity as well as sociological modeling; we need thick description of internal processes as well as analysis of external forces."

I was disturbed reading the article because of the basic assumptions within it (see page 5). Does Media help the Middle East become a democracy? I saw obvious flaws in looking at this assumption and judgment. One implicit assumption made is that in the West we have true democracy, another is that democracy is what everyone needs, and a third is the assertion that Media still controlled by the state though indirectly, is anything but democratic in both Western and Arab Countries (I'll be specific here, since I cannot fairly speak to Turks, or Iranians).

Hence, I question the influence of Media ownership in the Middle East as well as ownership in the West. An article I read recently while researching the US Kill Teams mentioned that CNN refused to air footage given them by a reporter of Soldiers killing innocent civilians. Since the US government does not directly own CNN, I wonder why it would not air such footage? In Reel Bad Arabs the producer states that Hollywood has always been a mouthpiece for the US government and policies. Given this reality, I'm including a link highlighting a much-unknown relationship to most people, but a pretty obvious block to democracy in the Middle East and in the West really. A few very powerful people, with strong governmental ties/interests across the board, own our Western and Arab media. A Saudi Prince will never advocate democracy, as Rupert Murdock will not reform FOX. Neither have any 'true' democratic desires in them. All look out for their own interests (see page 8 and 9 where there is reference made to the Princes and their ownership of media).

Anyway, I just had to reiterate the problematic assumptions the article makes to start. Although I will not denounce the fact that Media has provided a space to speak of unspeakable issues previously in groups in the Middle East. Also, though I do list this link, there are implicit assumptions that I still find questionable with the broadcaster and some that Reel Bad Arabs addressed. I just wanted to share another take on things.

In Joy!

http://article.wn.com/view/2010/10/17/NewsCorp_Chairman_Rupert_Murdoch_Tells_Shareholders_He_Will_/

Attention!!!! This is not a direct link. You must click on the link below it that has the title 'ground zero mosque, prince’ to see the clip.

German multiculturalism has "utterly failed"

With the drama of the French expulsion of thousands of ethnic Roma from its country still playing out, German Prime Minister Angela Merkel recently made remarks about her own country's uncomfortableness with its population changes. In a recent speech, Merkel lamented that "the approach [to build] a multicultural [society] and to live side-by-side and to enjoy each other... has failed, utterly failed." During the speech, she played to both sides of the argument, saying that immigrants are welcome and benefit German society, but also added that they need to do more to integrate, such as learning to speak German.

This article reminds me very starkly of the ongoing immigration debate here in America, specifically the proposed legislation in Arizona. The article also refers to comments made by German officials connecting immigrants with crime and abuses of state welfare programs. The anti-immigrant sentiment seems to be a widespread phenomenon both in Europe and here at home. I wonder what you think about why this is?

I'm disturbed by the effects that the comments Mrs. Merkel made could have. When the leader of a country proclaims that multiculturalism doesn't work, it is bound to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. She has essentially given Germans permission to stop believing that living side-by-side with people from other nations and cultures can end in prosperous coexistence. Like most things in life, positive multiculturalism takes effort to achieve. But you won't put forth enough effort if you truly don't believe what you are working for is possible. If you don't believe you can finish a marathon, then of course, you can't. The same holds true for building a multicultural society. Merkel has just dealt a great blow to her nation's belief in the usefulness of continuing to strive for multiculturalism by making disbelief the official government position. As influential as Germany is in the European sphere, immigrants all over Europe should be chilled by these comments from her and other German officials. Taken together with France's expulsion of the Roma, it seems that Europe is changing direction on how it deals with diversity. I, for one, am deeply disturbed. What are you reactions?

BBC article (better)
CNN article

Premier of China on Freedom of Speech and Creativity

Fareed Zakaria recently interviewed Wen Jiabao, premier of China:

ZAKARIA: You speak in your speeches about how China is not yet a strong and creative nation, in terms of its economy. Can you be as strong and creative a nation with so many restrictions on freedom of expression, with the Internet being censored? Don't you need to open all that up if you want true creativity?

WEN (through translator): I believe freedom of speech is indispensable, for any country, a country in the course of development and a country that has become strong. Freedom of speech has been incorporated into the Chinese constitution.

I don't think you know all about China on this point. In China, there are about 400 million Internet users and 800 million mobile phone subscribers. They can access the Internet to express their views, including critical views.

I often logon to the Internet and I have read sharp critical comments on the work of the government, on the Internet, and also there are commendable words about the work of the government.

I often say that we should not only let people have the freedom of speech, we more importantly must create conditions to let them criticize the work of the government. It is only when there is the supervision and critical oversight from the people that the government will be in a position to do an even better job, and employees of government departments will be the true public servants of the people.

All these must be conducted within the range allowed by the constitution and the laws. So that the country will have a normal order, and that is all the more necessary for such a large country as China with 1.3 billion people.

ZAKARIA: Premier Wen, since we are being honest, when I come to China and tried to use the Internet, there are many sites that are blocked. It is difficult to get information. Any opinion that seems to challenge the political primacy of the party is not allowed? Hu Yaobang, for example, was not somebody who could be mentioned in "The China Daily" until your own article appeared. It seems like all the restrictions, the vast apparatus that monitors the Internet are going to make it difficult for your people to truly be creative and to truly do what it seems you wish them to do.

WEN (through translator): I believe I and all the Chinese people have such a conviction that China will make continuous progress, and the people's wishes for and needs for democracy and freedom are irresistible. I hope that you will be able to gradually see the continuous progress of China.



I found this interview fascinating when I watched it on TV a few weeks ago and I couldn't seem to get it out of I head, mostly I think because it offers a distincly "de-Westernized" understanding of capitalism and media censorship in China. The Rethinking media studies in China article argues that Western media theories need to be adapted to truly understand and assess media in China specifically, for cultural reasons and also because "no other country is moving from planned socialism to market socialism" (Eric Kit-wai Ma, 32) In this interview, Wen references Adam Smith when describing the Chinese economy. Seeing as Adam Smith has been called the father of capitalism which based on free markets, and the Chinese economy is under strict control of centralized government planning, this seems like a paradox. When it comes to the issue of free speech, I wonder if Wen is honestly convinced of the freedom of expression in China or driving the Chinese agenda by consiously lying. I think this interview might be helpful in understanding the agenda setting of the Chinese government for the knifing group!

Video Clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaEEr-Q7fME&feature=related - 7 min
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rsu0L9sdus - Market economy in socialist country
Interview Transcipt: http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/03/fzgps.01.html

Gender Politics in France

In her documentary Marilyn Waring argues that the economic system is largely blind to the benefits of the work that women do in most societies, rendering the entire economic system that the most powerful countries in the world operate under, fundamentally sexist. This article from the New York Times is a report on gender inequality in France, which underlines many of Waring's arguments from the documentary. Legislation in France is ostensibly supportive of women's rights, allowing generous benefits and maternity leave (to a degree unheard of in the US) to French mothers. The French government also provides free nursery schools, family allowances and huge tax breaks for families with children. This pro-domesticity government position seems to indicate a progressive point of view of the French government on the real benefits of the work women and mothers do, but society doesn't follow suit. While 82% of women are employed, they are still evidently doing nearly all of the house work and they lack representation in Parliament where 82% of seats are occupied by men. The expectation that women are meant to continue to accomplish all of the domestic tasks that constitute "not working" while also working full time jobs, indicates a continuing lack of acknowledgment of the genuine value of this kind of productivity. Statistics illustrating this continuing level of inequality show that "forty percent of French mothers undergo a career change within a year of giving birth, compared with 6 percent of men. Both parents have the right to take time off or reduce their hours until the child turns three — but 97 percent of those who do are women." The picture is confusing in this case. Legislation supports women's equality, but society doesn't become essentially less sexist. What has gone wrong in this situation--why are French women essentially doubling their workload and their husbands lives are almost unaffected? This article argues that even though the government in France is acknowledging the value of domestic work, society disagrees in practice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/world/europe/12iht-fffrance.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hpw

Media and the U.S. Kill Team

Research Question:

How does the media’s reporting on issues and events in Afghanistan affect different audiences?

Topic Background:

The US’s involvement in the war in Afghanistan has been long and complicated. And in the early months of 2010, it became more complicated when five soldiers stationed in the province of Kandahar, Afghanistan began the practice of indiscriminately targeting and killing innocent Afghan civilians. Led by Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs, members of the Stryker brigade are accused of having murdered at least three Afghan civilians without cause between January 15th and May 2nd of 2010. In at least two of the killings, the soldiers detonated one of their own grenades to create the illusion of being under attack, then used the ruse to justify opening fire on the innocent Afghans. Sgt. Gibbs and some of the other soldiers are also believed to have collected body parts including fingers, teeth, and skulls as souvenirs from the murders.
Almost as shocking as the murders themselves is the controversy around how the events finally came to light. An investigation began when the military received word that members of the brigade were smoking hashish and drinking alcohol. The investigation soon turned up evidence of the misdeeds that Sgt. Gibbs’ unit had been engaging in. It was also discovered that Specialist Adam Winfield, a member of the brigade that committed the murders, had tried to sound the alarm about the crimes after he witnessed the first killing carried out. Since the brigade was stationed in a remote section of Afghanistan, Specialist Winfield could not raise his concerns with anyone but the highest ranking officer at his outpost, Sgt. Gibbs, who had already threatened Winfield with violence if he did not keep quiet. Winfield sent Facebook messages to his father shortly after the first incident, telling him what happened and expressing concern that more killings would take place. Despite multiple attempts by Winfield’s father to alert military officials back in the U.S., an investigation was never begun until the allegations of the lesser drug-use charges came about. Specialist Winfield is now is being charged with involvement in the third murder.
As of now, the individuals involved in the killings are under military arrest, and the investigations and trials surrounding the killings are still in progress.

Theoretical Perspectives:
Critical Theory
We first analyzed this issue from a critical theory perspective. Critical theory focuses on the intersection of power, ideology, and hegemony within the media. Media outlets have specific ideologies and varying levels of power that they use to spread these ideologies to the public. We decided to use this perspective to analyze the different stances that could be discerned in the coverage of the Kill Team issue by three different news sources. Critical theory provides a basis from which to evaluate if and how the power and ideology of each news source affected its coverage.
We used discourse analysis to assess how the issue was framed by the U.S, military, the L.A. Times, and Al-Jazeera. We also paid attention to the phrasing and implications in the articles to better understand the different kinds of arguments, values, and attitudes espoused by these three sources to see where differences in coverage could be found.

Spiral of Silence Theory
Our second analysis of this issue was informed by spiral of silence theory, which focuses on the way in which media discourse can affect the public’s perception of what the majority opinion on a given topic is, and how individuals’ willingness to dissent is affected by that perception. The theory focuses on the role of social norms and cohesion, the fear of social rejection or isolation, and how these all interact to discourage individuals from voicing their dissent when they feel their opinion is in the minority.
This theory has a special relation to the Kill Team issue because of the social dynamics at play in the case of the soldiers who were members of the brigade responsible for the murders, but opposed to the practice. We propose a survey to be administered to members of the military that asks about their willingness to speak out against crimes they witnessed, and how or if the media’s portrayal of those incidents or of the military might affect their willingness.

Questions for Discussion:

1. What is the relationship of the power of the U.S. military to the media’s coverage of it?
2. How might the ideologies of the U.S. military, a U.S. newspaper, and an Arab news corporation affect their coverage of the misdeeds of U.S. soldiers?
3. What kind of pressures might make a soldier hesitant to speak out against the actions of his commanding officer? How might the media’s coverage of the military affect such a decision?
4. How does the media’s coverage of an issue affect the public’s opinion on that issue?

Links to more info:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-soldier-crimes-20100928,0,6689411.story

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130026739&sc=17&f=1004

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/06/201061701715503570.html

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=59261

The Idol Franchise

Research Question: How are cultures around the world influenced by local versions of American Idol in terms of cultural homogenization?

Background: The Idol series started in Great Britain as Pop Idol in 2001 and due to its extreme success was soon adapted for television in the United States, South Africa and Poland. Since 2001, it has spread to 35 other countries around the world (Dann, 2005). All of these countries have incorporated varying degrees of local culture in their Idol versions, but the overall show format, including logo, the judge’s stereotypical personalities, and the voting process was adapted from the west (Coutas, 2006). According to convergence theory, the differences between national cultures will diminish as international communication increases (Barnett & Rosen, 2007). In regards to the Idol series, this theory suggests that the spread of this western reality show will result in a more homogenized and global culture reflecting western values and ideas.

Theoretical Approaches: Through the process of cultural synchronization, this reality television series managed to transcend national borders and become a global phenomenon. Using cultural imperialism in the critical theory approach and the uses and gratifications theory in the social sciences approach, we will analyze the cultural implications and implicit meanings and influences of the American Idol series in a few of the countries where it has been adapted. We will look specifically at Idol in India, Poland, and Latin America. All shows have a similar motif while simultaneously incorporating some of the home culture’s values and interests. In this way, the Idol series is an example of glocalization, in which the foreign reality television show enters a new country and becomes localized so that it appeals to the general public of the country (Mody & Lee, 2003). This glocalized version of the show represents a cultural hybrid that reflects the overall western format and ideology, but also incorporates local culture and values in order to gain popular appeal in the new country.

In terms of cultural imperialism, the Idol series is an example of western corporation, Freemantle Media, exporting a reality television structure to countries around the world. Although each version of Idol has a certain degree of autonomy incorporating local flair, the overall format of the show is dictated by the hegemony of Freemantle Media. The uses and gratifications theory analyzes how media is used by the audience to gratify certain needs. Across national and cultural boundaries, people identify with the show. Idol consumers find it appealing because they are part of the action (Hicks, 2009). Through the voting process, audience members enjoy the ability to influence the fate of the contestants. The show also appeals to its audience because contestants are regular, ordinary people attaining celebrity status, thus increasing the perception that anyone can be famous (Hicks, 2009). The Idol series experiences worldwide appeal because it gratifies the needs of a wide range of consumers, not only through entertainment, but also through involving the audience in the show and inciting feelings of ambition and potential among audience members.

Links for additional information:

http://popcultural.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/global-television-why-we-love-pop-idol/ (Why we love Idol)

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1606692-2,00.html (Uses and gratifications, why people watch Idol)

http://www.fims.uwo.ca/mit/mediations/essays.html (American Idol, power and money)

Discussion Questions:

1.) Is the process of globalization detrimental to the receiving culture?

2.) Does the spread of reality television and other forms of media result in the loss of national cultures and the convergence into one global culture?

3.) Does the uses and gratification theory cause a separation from reality for the viewer by placing so much emotion on the idol television show?

4.) Is this another example of how the expansion of media is causing the public to lose grasps on personal experience as well as reality?

Danielle, Lynn, Jennifer, Dhvani, Brittany

Cutting Out the Story: China's Kindergarten Slashings

School knifings Janghuai newspaper front page.

Research Question:

How does media censorship affect what the audience perceives as important?

Case Background

Second school stabbing newspaper illustration

On May 15, 2010 a man wandered into a kindergarten in Shaanxi province, China and stabbed 29 children and three teachers with a knife.  Seven children were killed and another 20 were seriously injured.  This was not an isolated incident.  Since March there have been four other unrelated stabbings in kindergartens across the country.  China had previously been regarded as a relatively safe country with low rates of violent crime, but the attacks have created concerns about how the country deals with the mental health and the social welfare of its citizens.

Later newspapers ran headlines about school security

            Also in question is how the state media chose to cover the events.  In the earlier incidents the Chinese news was explicit in its coverage of the knifings after 15 students and one teacher were injured in an attack in a Guangdong school on April 28th.  The story made front-page headlines and included graphic photos and sketches depicting what took place.  The very next day 29 children were injured in a school-stabbing spree in Jiangsu province.  The newspapers wrote very little about the event, but instead filed stories about the measures that China’s schools were taking to beef up their security.  Chinese academics initially argued that this approach would discourage copycat killers who read about the attacks in the news.  However,  the government delivered a notice to reporters instructing them how to write about the knifings.

SIDA Media Notice

 

ATTENTION: 

In regards to the Taixing Kindergarten Injury Incident, notice has been received from higher levels that Xinhua reports are to be uniformly adopted. In light of the World Expo opening, this news shall not be placed on the front page for the time being.

Shanghai World Expo Opening Fireworks

The state authorities don’t seem to want the “sensationalized” kindergarten coverage in the media to overshadow the larger event of the Shanghai World Expo that will run till the end of October.  However, on May 30^th, one day after the Jaingsu incident and one day before the Expo opening, the trend of school violence continued.  A man in Shandong province assaulted five children with a hammer.  Then the fifth and final attack came when seven children were killed in Shaanxi on May 15^th.

Shaanxi Murder Weapon

Theoretical Perspectives

Critical Theory

First we chose to analyze the situation from a critical theoretical perspective. Critical theory is useful when critiquing one group’s use of media and texts to manipulate another group. In the case of the China knifings, we focused on the Chinese government’s censorship of the media, arguing that its suppression of the coverage of knifings was a deliberate move intended to maintain the status quo by stifling public speculation and unrest centered around the possible motives of the knifings (lack of support for the mentally ill, social inequity, poor school security, and the lack of recourse for frustrated citizens being among the most commonly cited issues we read.)

When we performed a content analysis of Chinese and Western news articles, blogs, and propaganda notices we observed that the government had indeed mandated reduced coverage of the school violence, shifting the focus first to improved school security measures (several government officials were quoting touting this) and then to the glory of the approaching Shanghai Expo. We believe that this shift in coverage was designed to reinforce the state-controlled hegemony; the Chinese government wanted its people – and the external world as well – to view to view it as a safe and prosperous nation untroubled by simmering social inequity or any of the other negative issues coverage of the school knifings seemed to have temporarily exposed." 

Saanxi Murder Scene

Agenda Setting 

The other theory we chose was agenda setting, which is used to examine media and the selection of news that are communicated to the public to be important or salient. Saliency, which is defined as relevancy and importance, is depicted through the quantity and the content of news stories. Chinese media is shaped by the country's government.  We identified it as the "agenda setter" in our study.  The state media reported on the knifings indirectly (improvements in school security), rather than giving attention to negative messages (such as social inequity, mental illnesses, societal backlash, and the connectedness of school knifings). When the knifings occurred close to the opening of the Shanghai Expo the Chinese media made security the most salient  issue in its stories.  Direct coverage of the knife violence was believed to have created insecurity and fear in Chinese citizens.  

We also looked at the possible affect that China-based American media, Chinese bloggers, and other Western media had on the Chinese public's perceptions of saliency.  Systemic agenda setting was not as pronounced when the Chinese-based American media covered the stabbings. It is not clear how, to what extent, or if Western media has reached Chinese citizens, nor is it clear what Chinese citizens view as important.

Bloodstains- Taixing Kindergarten

Questions to Consider

• How far is should a state be allowed to exercise its hegemonic power to promote greater ideological or economic interests? 

• Is there ever a time when an agenda is set by a government institution or media organization that is beneficial to society?

• Considering school shootings in America, do you think allowing media coverage about school shootings or knifings might contribute to the copycat effect?

• What factors should be considered when reporting on crimes in relation to the government, culprits, victims, and citizens? 

Chinese kindergartners at the scene of the crime

Carrie, Anna, Jean-Pierre