Archive for
May 23rd, 2007
Stories
Peru: The War Between Gisela and Magaly
· 23:55
Peruvian television has a colorful cast of characters. Among them are Gisela Valcárcel, the former “queen of daytime television” and wife of a top executive at one of Peru's main television stations, and Magaly Medina, who has a popular celebrity gossip program on a competing channel. They also both publish gossip magazines about Peruvian celebrities. The two women have a long-standing feud and have clashed over the years. In their most recent bout, Valcárcel claims her privacy was breached by one of Medina's photographers who was trying to take pictures of her while she participated in a charity run. In these days of media frenzy over celebrities, this is the Peruvian version.
It's no surprise to anyone that the quality of Peruvian television is very bad. It's either formulaic programs from Mexico or elsewhere, or Peruvian programs that leave much to be desired. Of course, there are exceptions. Once in a while, there's a well-made mini-series or an interesting documentary. There is also cultural programming on the state-run channel, and although not everyone likes it, it's pretty much the only option on regular television. Then again, who can forget the talk-show hosted by the infamous Laura Bozzo, to mention the most well-known example of bad Peruvian television.
Recently, Peruvian airwaves got heated up by a confrontation between Magaly Medina and Gisela Valcárcel. Actually, it's really just the latest chapter in an old war for ratings. This time, as almost always, Magaly emerged the winner, which of course doesn't mean she's right. Sonia Luz tells us about it in her post, Public Women and Television (ES):
Se trata de dos personajes de la televisión peruana que tienen mucho en común: ambas provienen de sectores pobres, han logrado el éxito económico y son para muchas mujeres pobres paradigma del ascenso social. Una era y es- pese a infinidad de retoques de bisturí- bastante feúcha; la otra fue siempre atractiva aunque ahora la cirugía y los tratamientos la muestran con mayor glamour.
De rato en rato se enfrascan en unas peleas que no tengo ni disposición ni tiempo de conocer en detalle. Pero parece que en estos días exponen sus distintos criterios acerca de lo público y lo privado. Como no podía ser de otro modo, lo hacen a través de las pantallas. Y supongo que cada una lo está haciendo en su particular estilo. La feúcha, ejemplo de sarcasmo y agresividad chillará su condición de inimputable periodista y la bella defenderá con sus armas de etiqueta social su derecho a la intimidad y el respeto a su vida privada.
Every once in a while, the two get caught up in battles I have neither the desire, nor time to understand in detail. Recently, it seems they've both been espousing their views on what constitutes the public and the private. Since they couldn't do it otherwise, [their battle is] via the TV screen. And, I suppose, each one does it in her particular style. The ugly one, sarcasm and aggressiveness [personified], shrieks out she is an untouchable journalist. The pretty one, using social standing as her weapon, defends her right to privacy and respect for her private life.
Pueblo Vruto gives us more details about what happened in More Circus: Magaly vs. Gisela (ES):
Los dos personajes más representativos de nuestra farándula local, la vomitiva Magaly Medina y la figuretti de los humos estratosféricos Gisela Valcárcel vuelven a jorobarnos con esa vieja bronca kioskera que traspasa lo admisible y soportable. La una que abusa del derecho a la información y la otra que se da aires de superioridad amparándose en su marido, el Canal 2 entero prácticamente.
(Gisela se cargó) al torpe fotógrafo que no atinó a defender su trabajo (no se acordó del artículo 2º de la Constitución) amenazándole e insultándole junto a todos los que no tienen carrera universitaria, los desconocidos (para Gisela si no tienes el privilegio de ser su conocido, eres delincuente), los malolientes… Otro tanto hizo Magaly al computarse defensora del gremio y fingir indignación ante un hecho que seguramente estará viendo como sacarle el mayor provecho, cosa que también podría estar pensando Gisela como toda businesswoman que dejó atrás (?) su tormentoso pasado.
Our two most well-known local entertainment personalities, the vomit-inducing Magaly Medina and the stratospherically attention-seeking Gisela Valcárcel, are once again bothering us with their tired street fight that goes beyond what should be permissible and tolerated. One abuses [us] claiming freedom of the press, while the other gives herself airs of superiority and relies on her spouse, which includes almost the entire staff at Channel 2.
(Gisela had it out) with a clumsy photographer incapable of defending his [right] to work (he couldn't remember Article 2 of the Constitution). She threatened and insulted him and everyone else who doesn't have a college degree, strangers (because for Gisela, if she doesn't know you, you're a crook), [and] people who smell bad… Magaly made her own scene, labeling herself the defender of [journalists] and pretending indignation over a situation [while] she is most likely trying to figure out how to get the greatest advantage from it, something Gisela is [probably] also thinking, as would any businesswoman who had left behind (?) her tumultuous past.
In general terms, what happened is that Gisela and her husband showed up at a public event. A photographer employed by Magaly began taking Gisela's picture, as did the other photographers who were present. But, Gisela got into an argument with Magaly's photographer and tried to take away his camera amidst threats and insults, not only from her but from her husband as well. Finally, the police arrived and took away the photographer in question. Omar Zevallos, the blogger at Lagartija (ES), tells us in The same old Magaly something about his personal experience with Magaly, and concludes:
La imagino feliz, regocijándose luego de haber conseguido los 40 puntos de rating en el segmento C con el escandalete de Gisela Valcárcel (su archienemiga porque triunfó antes que ella), y la escaramuza con el “urraco” imberbe que la acosó con su camarita, seguro impulsado por el deber y las indicaciones precisas del equipo de Magaly para lograr lo que finalmente logró.
Ahora ambas “divas” se enfrascan en una guerra mediática (diarios chicha, por cierto) con portadas a favor o en contra, poniendo en entredicho si los peruanos nos merecemos esa televisión de callejón. Quizá sólo habría que apretar un botón del control remoto y listo.
I picture her happy and amused after getting 40 points of rating … from the scandal with Gisela Valcárcel (her archenemy, ever since Gisela attained success before she did) and the skirmish with the young [photographer] who harassed [Gisela] with his camera, surely motivated by his [sense of] duty and the precise instructions [given by] Magaly's people to obtain [this very outcome].
Now, both divas are caught up in a media war (in the tabloids, of course) with headlines in favor or against [one or the other]. [It makes one wonder if] Peruvians deserve this type of alley [cat] television. Maybe, all we should do is push a button on the remote control, and be done with it.
Víctor Liza, of the blog Metiendo la Pata (ES), writes about Gisela, the ‘queen of daytime television' as she was known when she was a television hostess, in his post The queen who never was wants “clean” television:
La señora Gisela Valcárcel se cree con derecho a exigir cosas, como televisión blanca, y respeto al derecho a la intimidad. Parece que no entiende que ya no está en la pantalla chica, ya pasó de moda. Sin embargo, alucina aún que es la reina. Por eso que maltrató a un fotógrafo, que, pese a que se haya portado malcriado, no ameritaba los insultos y la bajeza de quien se cree un manto de moralidad.
Sin embargo, insiste. Ha anunciado que encabezará una marcha contra la televisión nociva, y que para ello, convocará a muchos personajes de la farándula. Su objetivo es presionar a los anunciantes de publicidad para que ya no anuncien en programas como el de Magaly Medina, entre otros. Más allá de las discrepancias con Magaly, creo que los anunciantes son libres de poner sus avisos donde crean conveniente. Si les resulta viable y conveniente, lo seguirán haciendo.
Gisela Valcárcel thinks she has the right to demand things, like “clean” television, and respect for the right to privacy. It seems she doesn't understand she's no longer on the small screen or [even] in fashion. Nonetheless, she's hallucinating and thinks she's still the queen. That's why she mistreated a photographer who, despite acting rudely, didn't warrant the insults and low-blows from someone who thinks of herself as a paragon of morality.
However, she [still] demands. She's announced she'll head a march against harmful television [programs], and will ask many entertainment personalities to participate. Her objective is to pressure advertisers to stop advertising on shows such as Magaly Medina's, among others. Beyond her differences with Magaly, I believe advertisers are free to advertise where they want. If it is viable and good for them, they will continue to do so.
Now, I quote two posts as a commentary about the preceding statement. First about Gisela, who has completely assumed her role, as Gamma of Gamma-Normids (ES) tells us in Divas…
La caracteristica principal de una diva es creerse intocable o que sobre ella ejercen leyes especiales (supongo que eso influye a que luego quieran desafiar hasta la de gravedad al recurrir a cirugias y tratamientos) o que las que se aplican a nosotros, no se aplican en ellas por ser quienes son. “Soy Fulana, por tanto, especial”. Paris Hilton fue detenida el año pasado por conducir ebria. Se le quitó la licencia, se le advirtió que no debia conducir, pero ella, insiste. Porque es Paris Hilton. La condenaron a 45 días en la carcel al volver a conducir con la licencia suspendida, no una sino dos veces, … Paris ahora juega de victima pero su unica defensa es que es Paris Hilton… y por eso, no deberia ir presa.
The primary characteristic of a diva is to believe herself untouchable, or that special laws should be exercised over her (I suppose that influences why later on they even challenge gravitas by recurring to surgeries and treatments), or that the [laws] that apply to us, don't apply to them because of who they are. “I'm So-and-So, so therefore, I'm special.”
Paris Hilton was arrested last year for drunk driving. Her license was suspended, she was warned she couldn't drive, but she insisted [on doing so] because she's Paris Hilton. She was ordered to serve 45 days of jail time when she drove yet again with a suspended license, not just once but twice… Now, although Paris wants to play the victim, her only defense is she's Paris Hilton… and because of that, she shouldn't have to go to jail.
Yes, Gisela spends a lot of time saying, “I am Gisela Valcárcel”. What an ego. This second comment is about this initiative of Gisela's to exert pressure so programs like Magaly's stop getting advertisers, and are consequently eliminated from the airwaves. Reasonably, some see this as a type of censorship. In television: gisela valcárcel, magaly medina and censorhip, El Morsa (ES) writes:
Más allá de la idea de censura promovida por gisela valcárcel, el hecho es que vivimos actualmente en una sociedad censora, que vigila y castiga moralmente al infractor: el borracho, el promiscuo, el homosexual. impone además gestos y formas en el periodismo, ya que el resto de la prensa debe, más o menos, moverse en los márgenes de magaly medina. es una censura silenciosa o un acuerdo tácito. la sociedad recibe con los brazos abiertos a la inquisidora medina y los titulares de la mayoría de diarios del día siguiente festejan. con magaly no hay libertad, todo se vuelve brumoso detrás de lo que ella considera ético o no. (algo parecido vimos con la promoción de una ética blogger). de ese modo, gisela valcárcel y magaly medina se confunden en un monstruo de dos cabezas.
Beyond the notion of censorship promoted by Gisela Valcárcel, the fact is we currently live in a censoring society, that watches and morally punishes infractors: the drunk, the promiscuous, the homosexual. It also imposes [a way of behaving] in journalism, since the rest of the press should, more or less, move to the margins of Magaly Medina. It is a [type] of silent censorship, a tacit agreement. With open arms, society receives Inquisitor Medina and the next day headlines in the majority of newspapers celebrate. With Magaly there is no freedom, everything gets foggy behind what she considers ethical or not. (We saw something similar with the promotion of blogger ethics). Thus, Gisela Valcárcel and Magaly Medina become [one], like a two-headed monster.
I think it's a bit exaggerated to compare this situation with the one dealing with the “blogger code of conduct”, although not with the arguments local bloggers had for reasons that had nothing to do with the code (see: The little blogger wars: The Battle of the Code of Conduct).
Meanwhile, in Magaly, Abimael Guzman and media violence, the blogger at TvBruto (ES), finds similarities between what happens on Peruvian television and what Shining Path used to do: “Similarities and differences between the “popular trials” and the current “media trials”. Is Magaly the only one that currently acts as the popular media judge?” He republishes a text from the year 2000 by anthropologist Carlos Iván Degregori. It's almost about the same thing, with the same characters except at the time, instead of Gisela, it was those showgirl-style dancer-performers called vedettes who turned out to be prostitutes, or at least that's what they say. Wasn't Gisela a vedette as well? I think that's when the quarrel started. I'll quote part of the article titled: Magaly, the vedettes… and “Presidente Gonzalo”:
Uno de los lemas más atemorizantes de SL era el foucaultiano: “El Partido tiene mil ojos y mil oídos”. El canal también los tiene: electrónicos. La colocación de cámaras ocultas en los lugares menos pensados y la impunidad de quien tiene el poder y los recursos, en este caso la conductora del programa, naturalizan la intromisión en la vida íntima de los ciudadanos y borran de manera perversa la separación entre lo privado y lo público.
…
Lo que hizo Magaly TV (el “ampay” de las prostivedettes) fue un ‘operativo de inteligencia’, término que en el castellano del Perú hace tiempo no se limita a la terminología militar y policial, a la lucha contra la subversión o la delincuencia organizada sino que, con ayuda de un líder de opinión tan importante como el Presidente de la República (fujimontesinos), ha ampliado su campo semántico hasta incluir prácticamente cualquier ámbito. El hermano mayor te vigila, no importa cuán pequeño y sin importancia seas.Como en los ‘juicios populares’ senderistas, no basta que las condenadas en el juicio mediático reciban la pena máxima, en este caso la destrucción de su imagen, su muerte simbólica. Es necesario su aniquilamiento. Así como SL chancaba con piedra, cortaba el cuello con cuchillo sin filo, dinamitaba y volaba en mil pedazos el cadáver de sus víctimas, en este caso también hay que cebarse en ellas, destrozarlas en sucesivos programas, ridiculizarlas y humillarlas en los titulares de la prensa “chicha”.
Sin embargo, tal vez la diferencia clave sea el lugar desde el cual ambos ejercen su violencia. Guzmán y SL se ubicaban por encima de todos y repartían premios y castigos cual divinidades sanguinarias. Magaly no se pone por encima de nadie. Afirma, por el contrario: “Yo soy parte de esta escoria. Yo también soy morbosa. Yo gozo con esto, no tengo problemas con mi conciencia, me gusta el rating”. En otras oportunidades ha reconocido en su propio programa ser “una basura”.
Pero, sobre todo, los juicios mediáticos envilecen. SL obligaba a participar como ‘masa’ a los habitantes de los pequeños pueblos donde hacía sus ‘juicios populares’. En Afganistán, cuando los talibanes cortan la mano al ladrón, o en China, cuando se fusila a delincuentes, la gente es invitada a presenciar la ejecución pública en los estadios. Ellos acuden por miedo o por morbosidad. Nosotros por morbosidad, aunque quién sabe qué papel jugará el miedo en la atracción fatal que ejercen esos programas. En todo caso, somos la ‘masa’ captada por los medios masivos y participamos del juicio como público (televidente). Y nos envilecemos.
One of the Shining Path's most frightening slogans was the Foucaultian: “The Party has a thousand eyes and a thousand ears.” A [television] station also has that: electronically. Placing hidden cameras in the most unsuspecting places with the impunity of the one who has power and resources (in this case, the hostess of the program) normalizes [that type of] interference in the lives of private citizens and perversely eliminates the separation between the private and the public…
What Magaly TV did (uncovering the dancer-performer prostitutes) was an ‘intelligence operation' which in Peru [is a term] no longer limited to military or police terminology, the fight against terrorism, or organized crime. With the assistance of an opinion leader as important as the President of the Republic ([the Fujimori-Montesinos gang]), [the term] has expanded its semantic terrain to include almost any circumstance. Big Brother is watching; it doesn't matter how small and insignificant you might be.
Just like in the Shining Path's ‘popular trials', it's not enough that those found guilty in the media trials receive the maximum penalty. In this case, [it is] the destruction of their image, a symbolic death. Just as Shining Path hit with rocks, cut throats with dull knives, dynamited and blew into a thousand pieces the bodies of their victims; in this case, [the victims] are destroyed in successive programs, ridiculed, and humiliated in the headlines of the tabloid newspapers.
Maybe the key difference is the place from which each exercise their violence. Guzmán and Shining Path placed themselves above everyone else, and handed out prizes and punishments as if they were bloodthirsty deities. Magaly doesn't place herself above anyone else. On the contrary, she affirms: “I am part of this scourge. I too am morbid. I enjoy this, I don't have problems with my conscience; I like the ratings.” At other times, she has admitted her program is “a piece of trash.”
Above all, media trials degrade. Shining Path forced the inhabitants of the small towns where it carried out its ‘popular trials' to participate en masse. In Afghanistan, when the Taliban cut off a robber's hand, or in China when criminals are shot, the public is invited to view the execution in stadiums. They go because of fear or morbid [attraction]. We go because of our morbid [attraction ] although who knows what role fear plays in the fatal attraction that these programs exercise. In all cases, we are the ‘masses' captured by the mass media and we participate in the trial as a television-watching audience. And we degrade ourselves.
I think I went overboard with the quotes, but my point is not that I am very interested in the Magaly-Gisela affair as I am in what lies behind it: the fight for ratings, the right of the press to inform, the interference of the press in private lives, the false private life (meaning, the one that only exists when it is convenient), the right of everyone to say what they think, the trash media, Peruvian society and its morals, etc. There's a lot to delve into in an apparently unimportant matter as this one.
Not everyone treated this matter so seriously, as the drawing by Carlín, linked by Ocram of Útero de Marita (ES) in his post Carlín comments on Magaly vs. Gisela, demonstrates. As a side note, in the blog Apuntes Peruanos (ES) in the post titled Confession by, there is a statement made by Gisela: “I will not be cowardly, never again…” I forgot the meaning behind the “never again”. I just almost never watch television… But what I do see is that the one who is supposedly aggrieved is dying to return to television and be talked about by everyone even though it's due to a scandal, while the other one gives her exactly what she wants, which reminds me of those false wrestling bouts where, at their conclusion, everyone ends up friends, and after the match they go have a couple of beers together.
If you want to see a narrative of the events and see some photos check out the post Photos: Gisela fights with Magaly's reporters and threatens her in El Francotirador in Blog de la Tele (ES). You Tube has some videos of the scandal, just like the ones Magaly showed on her program and shown on other entertainment programs.
Translated by Alejandro García.
2 comments · »»Iran: Iran-USA Negotiations, the Chinese Model and Expulsion of Afghans
· 22:42
Iran accepted a U.S. offer last Thursday for direct negotiations about conditions in Iraq. It can be viewed as a historic moment as it is the first time that Iran has agreed to bilateral talks since the United States broke diplomatic relations in 1980 after American diplomats were taken hostage in Tehran. Negotiation between these two countries becomes even more interested when we take into consideration that Iranian officials have called the USA “the Great Satan” while Washington still considers Iran to be a member of the so-called axis of evil.
Several bloggers commented on the Iranian government’s decision to hold talks with the US and some of them described the astonishment of fundamentalist students in Iran.
Hello Mr. Wolf
Shafieyan says [Fa] that fundemetalist students could not believe that their government will negotiate with “Great Satan” about Iraq or any other issue. According to the blogger all perceptions of these students about Iran-USA relations was shattered by the news of the negotiations.
Shafieyan believes that the negotiations are a positive step forward but that they must be carried out in a transparent way to soothe concerns over the content of the negotiations. He adds that fundemetalist students protested in front of presidential and parliamentary buildings. One student asked how Iran can relate to oppressed people after negotiations with the USA following 28 years of silence?
The blogger says that Iranian leader, Ayatholah Khamenie’s announcement about the negotiations was contradicatory and did not leave him convinced that it is a good idea. On one hand, he says, “how can we negotiate with USA?” But on other hand, the Iranian leader announced that the government has accepted negotiations with the USA to remind them their duty in Iraq.
Jomhour reminds [Fa]us that Ayatollah Khomeini, founder of Islamic Republic, described the relationship between Iran and the USA as a sheep and a wolf relationship. Ayatollah Khamenei echoed the same sentiment. The blogger says foundemetalists blocked any improvement in relations between Iran and USA during the eight years of reformist government.
He also discusses the protest demonstrations in front of the presidential and parliamentary buildings where fundemnatlisst students chanted slogans against the Iranian government and speakers criticized Ahmadinejad. The blogger says one of slogans was 'shame on Ministry of Foreign Affairs' and another was ‘Iraqi kids, we are ashamed.'
Chinese model and a fragile economy
Many believe that Iran's fragile economy needs foreign capitals to survive and that Iran cannot be attractive to investors without normalising its relationship with the US. Several bloggers have looked at the Iranian economy and some of its problems.
Energynews says [Fa] that the Iranian government announced that foreign banks can become operational in Iran. The blogger says it follows the Chinese model which Iranian commentators have talked about for several years now: repressing political dissidents in the country while fortifying the economy.
The blogger thinks it has become too late for government to imitate the Chinese model. According to the blogger, it is not possible to attract foreign capital by just changing slogans, especially in a country with rampant corruption.
Ali Mazroi, a reformist politician, informs [Fa] us that the government has always talked about fighting poverty and discrimination as its priority, but so far they have not done anything. The blogger adds that economic corruption is becoming worse year after year.
View from Iran talks about government attempts to reduce gasoline consumption in Iran. It seems that Iran, an oil exporter country, imports gasoline at a cost of about 16 billion dollars per year.
In the rationing card scheme, each car receives a rationing card. This means that owning more cars means receiving more subsidized petrol, not less. It’s a bad idea all around. There is no reward for real conservation. It simply continues to reward the wiley and the wealthy. The wealthy because they have more cars and cars that get better mileage and the wiley because buying up old gas-guzzling paykans means getting more cheap gasoline.
Iran does need price reform. Rationing, however, is a recipe for disaster. Instead, the price should go up, contracts should be renegotiated, and salaries should also increase.
The price of gas will make everything more expensive. The price of doing nothing, however, increases every year.That said, I cannot believe that the card will go into effect this year. There is still hearty debate in Iran’s parliament and there is fear of disrupting the economy further right now.
Afghans in trouble
According to media reports, Tehran has expelled tens of thousands of Afghans from Iran since mid-April in a move Iranian authorities say is aimed at repatriating 1 million unregistered Afghan refugees by March 2008. The government claims that by expelling Afghans, many jobless Iranians will find employment. Several bloggers protested against this policy.
Elnaz, for example, protests [Fa] against the government’s decision to expel Afghan immigrants from the country. The blogger talks about how much Afghans suffered in Iran due to different kinds of discrimination. Elnaz says Afghan kids often aren't given the right to go to school and that Afghans tend to work in very bad conditions with low salary and without any health insurance.
In Kanone Zanan we read [Fa] that more than 240 social and political activists have signed a letter protesting the decision. They argue that the government's rhetoric of expelling Afghans to create more jobs for Iranians is not true. They also are protesting discrimination against Afghans.
1 comment · »»Fijian Freedom bloggers and the military junta 
· 20:32
It seems that the persecution faced by the anti-military Fijian Freedom Bloggers - who are using blogs to protest against the coup of December 5th, 2006- has subsided following a decision by the Fiji Military Forces (FMF) to stop hunting for anti-military bloggers and abandon its efforts to block the popular blogspot blogging platform. However, Lieutenant Colonel Pita Driti still insisted that “if bloggers were eventually found they would be taken to the camp to be questioned”. Last week, he admitted that Rowland Fenton was arrested and released after interrogating him over anti-military blogs deemed a “threat to national security”.
Intelligentsiya reported on May 14th that the army’s Land Force Commander has a list of about 20 people who will be arrested in connection with anti-military blogs. It has also been reported that the Fiji Military Forces (FMF) have pressured FINTEL, Fiji’s only ISP, to block blogspot.com blogging platform, which is nearly exclusively used by the Fijian “Freedom Bloggers”. Previously, on Friday May 11, the prominent businessman Ulai Taoi was arrested and then released after being held in custody for 24. The FMF suspected him of being an anti-military blogger. It has been reported that he was “physically abused while in custody”. According to an email from “Bainivore,” a member of the Fijian Freedom Bloggers, the military claimed that Ulai Tao was Fijian Black - the blogger who ran the May Day protest and called on people to boycott work in protest against the interim administration. (see the video below). But the irony in that is the fact that the Fijian Black is not a person but a blog. As described by Intelligentsiya: “FIJIAN BLACK is the blognym for the blogsite Good Men (and Women) Doing Something and is calling on the public of Fiji to passively resist the interim regime by staying home on Tuesday, 1st of May, 2007.”
(more…)
China: Splitting hairs over stem cells
· 20:31
Stem cell research—it's an old topic, but it's also a top topic, at least for today as two key Chinese public intellectuals—one a tv news personality and the other a crusader against intellectual fraud and traditional Chinese medicine—battle it out on their PhoenixTV blogs.
It started with this post yesterday from Chai Jing:
每一项技术的背后都是生命
飞机上。
我跟老范聊要作的重庆公交的节目—体制的问题在哪儿，到底采访哪个部门，拿支笔在纸上划来划去聊得正热闹。
坐在我右边的先生说”对不起，我能插句嘴么？”
我们有点吃惊地看着他。
“你是新闻调查的吧，你们报道这样的事故，我们已经麻木了”
我跟老范对视一眼，小心翼翼地问”是因为太多了么？”
“不是”他说，”是你们从来没有让我们意识到，那些死去的人其实就是我们身边的人”
“嗯？”
“前两天弗吉尼亚大学枪击案，美国的媒体采访了每一个家庭，每个人都有故事和照片，包括凶手。还有纪念的人群写给枪手的留言，'我对你的同情胜过对你的憎恨”，只有让观众意识到灾难中的人其实就活在我们身边，大家才会关心”
“嗯…是，这当然，但我们刚才只是在讨论具体的技术问题”
“不”他说”每一项技术的背后都是生命”
我转过身子，看着这人。
他解释说，”我是做干细胞克隆技术研究的，在军事科学院工作”
他二十多年全部投注其中，曾是狂热的技术论者”这个领域里最谁能掌握干细胞研究的主导权，谁就会在未来生物科技领域的竞争中占据有利地位，这是事关国计民生的大事”
他得了世界再生医学大会的最高奖。
“然后”他说”我才遇到不得不面对的问题”。
再生医学的核心是干细胞，需要胚胎研究。
在中国，没有伦理的限定，没有宗教的要求，用胚胎作试验是比较顺利的，因为常人认为胚胎不算生命。联合国大会法律委员会关于”禁止克隆人的政治宣言”，我国政府和比利时、英国等国家是投反对票的。
但是，2003年，他去香港演讲，面对一个佛教徒的提问，”生命到底从何时起算？”
他被那个问题问住了。
其实，他是清楚的”一个十四天的胚胎细胞，就会有神经系统的反应，就能够感知光与热。”
他曾经认为这种感知是没有意义的。
后来，某一天，他在工作的时候，不自觉停下来，盯着克隆羊看。
“从它的眼神里是可以看见人的眼神的”。
他说”想到这里，就不能不去想自己的工作—–人这样贪婪地想要活下去是对还是错，甚至会想，人这样的做法到底是在拯救人类还是毁灭人类，人类的文明轮回是不是与此有关，狮身人面像难道不可能是上一次克隆人的遗迹？”
…
在当天的笔记里，我记下这段对话”君子不器，技术上的修为不仅仅是为了建功立业，甚至不是为了服从于国家利益，而是服务于生命本身。”
在重庆的这7天，在近乎无望中，我们能找到那些早已逝去的人，那个欢笑着拍打着妈妈遗照的婴儿，那个每个假日仍然到楼下等着女儿回来的母亲…与这场对话有关。
Old Fan and I are going to do a program on traffic in Chongqing: where the problems in the system are, which departments to interview, as I put our plan down on paper we start chatting up a storm.
The man sitting on my right says, “sorry, may I cut in?”
We look at him in surprise.
“You're from News Probe, right? Let me tell you, you report stories like these, but we're numb to them all.”
Old Fan and I look at each other, then I carefully ask, “because there's too many stories?”
“No,” he says, “it's that you never give us the feeling that these people who die could just as well be people we know.”
“Huh?”
“Two days ago there was the Virginia Tech shootings, and the American media interviewed every single family involved, telling every single person's story, showing their pictures, including the killer's. Those commemorating even wrote the shooter a letter: ‘our sympathy for you is stronger than our hate”. The only way to get people to care is to let viewers feel that those in the midst of the tragedy could be sitting there right next to them.”
“Yeah, you're right, of course, but we were only talking about specific technical issues just now.”
“No,” he says, “behind every technology there lies life.”
I turn to look at this man.
He explains, saying “I work in stem cell cloning technology research, at the Academy of Military Medical Sciences.”
Having invested twenty years in the subject, this ex-technology fanatic says, “in the future, who will be able to dominate research into stem cell research, who will be able to occupy an advantageous position in the competitive field of biotech, these will be major matters related to national economies and people's livelihoods.”
He's the recipient of the highest award given out by the world congress on regenerative medicine.
“And then,” he says, “I came across a problem I had no choice but to deal with.”
Stem cells are the core of regenerative medicine, which relies on embryo research.
In China there are no ethical restrictions, no religious demands, and the use of embryos in experiments is relatively unproblematic as most people don't consider embryos to be alive. The vote on the United Nations General Assembly legal committee's “political declaration banning human cloning” was opposed by China, Belgium, England and several other countries.
But in 2003, in Hong Kong for a lecture, he was asked by one Buddhist: “from which point does life begin?”
He was stumped by this question.
Actually, he was clear in that “a fourteen day-old embryo cell has a responsive nervous system, is able to perceive light and heat.”
He once believed this kind of perception was meaningless.
Later, one day, at work, he suddenly stopped and unconsciously began staring at a cloned sheep.
“From the look in its eyes you could tell that it could see people.”
He said, “with this in mind, I couldn't go on not thinking about what I was doing at work, whether people wanting greedily to keep on living via these means was right or wrong, even wondering if we were actually saving people or destroying them, if this had something to do with human samsara; what if the Sphinx was a remnant of the last time humans were cloned?”
…
In my notes that day, I wrote the following line: “using technology when people fall short in healing people isn't just to build a successful career or to serve a nation's interests, but to serve life itself.”
Seven days in Chongqing, bordering on hopelessness, to able to find those people who passed away long ago, that photograph of a smiling baby slapping her mother, the mother who every holiday goes downstairs and waits for the daughter to show up but never does, that's what this conversation was about.
Next on the blog.PhoenixTV page set up especially for this blog battle comes Fang Zhouzi's retort:
并非每一项技术的背后都是生命
昨天晚上有网友转来央视名记柴静的博客文章《每一项技术的背后都是生命》，我当即写了0一篇反驳，拟留到报纸专栏上发表。今天见到此文已被广泛转载且有了不小的影响，觉得有必要先说几句。
柴静文中转述军事医学科学院负责干细胞研究的研究员（即裴雪涛，喜欢对行外人士说自己获得”世界再生大会的最高奖”以证明自己的权威的就这么一位。行内人士都知道这种奖的含金量）有关干细胞的话有根本的错误，很容易引起公众对干细胞技术的误会：
一、14天的胚胎的细胞刚刚开始分化形成三个胚层，神经组织此时还没有出现，是不可能像裴研究员所说有什么神经系统的反应的。
二、人的胚胎干细胞的研究材料用的是5天的胚胎，只是一团针尖大小、没有分化的细胞。除了狂热的宗教人士和对人的胚胎发育过程一无所知的人，没有谁会认为那样的一团没分化、没感觉的细胞是一个人。每年有数以万计的这种胚胎在生育诊所被扔掉，不知为何没有人对此也煽情一把。如果有人要以这些胚胎细胞如果植入母体有可能发育成人为由认为它们是人，那么以同样的理由我也要求把每一个精子都当成人来看待。
2. Human embryo stem cell research makes use of day five embryos which are just a glob no thicker than a needle and have yet to split cells. Except for religious fanatics and those ignorant of the process of embryonic development, nobody would believe that an undivided, feelingless glob of a cell is a person. Every year tens of thousands of these embryos are thrown away at fertility clinics, so I don't know why nobody's getting worked up over those. If someone were to want to see these embryo cells as people on the grounds that if they were implanted into a mother's body they might grow into people, then with the same reasoning I demand every individual sperm cell to be given the same consideration.
目前有关人胚胎干细胞研究的争论主要是在美国发生，是美国宗教界中的极端保守派在小布什的支持下挑起的，全世界都在看美国的笑话。这是其他国家在这一研究领域赶上美国的良机，美国科学界对此痛心疾首。美国社会的主流、美国国会的大多数也是支持胚胎干细胞研究的，只不过小布什为了自己的宗教信仰在滥用其总统否决权。中国科学的发展受到的阻碍已经够多了，难道还有人嫌不够，为了显示自己的崇高，还想再加一道宗教的束缚？
鉴于裴研究员对干细胞研究的目的心存疑虑，甚至怀疑是否会”毁灭人类”，显然没有足够的信心和意愿来尽力推进干细胞研究，不适合于继续领导这一课题，请国家有关管理部门重新考虑有无必要继续资助裴研究员的干细胞研究项目，否则中国宝贵的科研经费、纳税人的钱就有可能被滥用掉，中国干细胞研究有可能受到重大挫折。
连国家重大科研项目的主持人都在怀疑该研究的合理性，发无厘头的感慨误导公众，中国的科学怎么还会有希望？
In light of researcher Pei's misgivings over the goal of stem cell research, even wondering if it amounts to “destroying people”, it's clear he lacks the confidence and desire to do all he can in promoting stem cell research and is unfit to continue as a leader in this issue. Would the related administrative departments please reconsider the necessity of continuing to fund researcher Pei's stem cell research project? Lest China's precious funds for scientific research and taxpayers' money be squandered away and China's stem cell research possibly given a major setback.
Even directors of China's major scientific research projects doubt the rationale of research and express nonsensical sentiment which misleads the public. How can China's scientists still have hope?
Then Chai Jing's response to that:
回应方舟子
很晚回到家，才知道方舟子先生就上一篇文章写了评论，把他的文章转贴如下，并作一些相应的解释。
1 “世界再生大会的最高奖”，在我的文章里并不是直接引语。裴先生没有提过这个话题，这个消息来自我在网上查到的文章 http://news.tom.com/1002/20050607-2199463.html 。
希望大家不要误会。
2
方先生担心”中国的干细胞研究遇到重大挫折”，关切之情可以理解。
但是我想，把科学问题唯技术化，而忽视对伦理学的边界，生物安全的边界的思考，忽视科学研究的终极目的，带来的危险要更大。否则爱因斯坦不会为他自己曾在1939年8月2日，向罗斯福总统建议，应抢在纳粹之前研制出原子弹，而感到懊悔。
晚年时，他说过”别把理智看成我们的上帝，它当然有强健的肌肉，但没有人格，它只能服务…理智对方法和工具有独到的眼光，但对于目的和价值却是盲目的”，
But I think that to only technologize scientific issues, disregard theoretical boundaries and boundaries and considerations of biological safety, to overlook the ultimate goal of scientific research is to bring about a much bigger danger. Otherwise Einstein wouldn't have made the suggestion he did to President Roosevelt on August 2, 1939, to develop the atomic bomb before the Nazis did, and feel the later regret.
In his later years, he once said, “We should take care not to make the intellect our god. It has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality. It cannot lead; it can only serve… The intellect has a sharp eye for methods and tools, but is blind to ends and values.”
3
科学研究的重要前提是自知无知，并且勇于质疑和批判，如果一个人仅仅因为对自己研究有疑问和自省，就被认为是”误导公众”，甚至要”请国家有关管理部门重新考虑有无必要继续资助裴研究员的干细胞研究项目，”那么我想这个结论可能是粗暴和不公正的，而且也可能低估了公众的智慧。
我不敢说中国科学的希望在哪里，但我想它并不在于对效率和成功的狂热崇拜。
I don't dare say where the hope for China's scientists lies, but I don't think it's in the mad worship of efficiency and success.
4
这只是一场在飞机上的私人谈话，我本人并非科技记者，而且因为不是报道，只是博客，所以谈话的某些细节根据记忆而写，发这篇文章之时也未得到裴先生的核实，如果方先生是想就具体的科学问题进行讨论，那么我所写的东西不足以作为裴先生全部观点的凭据，您需要从更多的途径来作更准确的了解。需要的话我也可以帮助您联系裴先生本人。
And Fang's re-retort, unresponded to by Chai Jing as of early morning May 24, day three:
反对胡扯不等于反对反思——回应柴静
“方先生担心'中国的干细胞研究遇到重大挫折'，关切之情可以理解。
但是我想，把科学问题唯技术化，而忽视对伦理学的边界，生物安全的边界的思考，忽视科学研究的终极目的，带来的危险要更大。”忽视这类思考究竟会有多大的危险，这是另一个问题。但是我从来并没有反对、而是在支持做这方面的思考，我只不过是希望大家在思考科学问题时，要依据可靠的事实而不是道听途说，要抱着严谨的态度而不是危言耸听。对干细胞技术涉及的伦理问题，我自己就也做过思考，依据的是科学界主流的观点，至少要比裴研究员的神吹胡侃靠谱些：
But I think that to only technologize scientific issues, disregard theoretical boundaries and boundaries and considerations of biological safety, to overlook the ultimate goal of scientific research is to bring about a much bigger danger.”
Just how big a danger there would actually be in overlooking these kinds of considerations is another question. But I've never had any problem with such, in fact I support carrying out these kinds of considerations. I only hope everyone, as they consider scientific questions, will rely on dependable facts and not hearsay, that they will maintain a cautious attitude and not resort to sensationalism. With regards to where embryo technology touches upon theoretical issues, I myself have considered this, and my views are based upon mainstream views in the scientific world, at least a little more suitable than researcher Pei's hogwash:
Here Fang gives links to two articles he's had published in mainstream Chinese media, also found on his Sina blog:
《布什再掀干细胞风波》（《中国青年报·冰/点周刊》2006.7.26.） http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/47406879010005dq
《胚胎与人》（《经济观察报》 2006.8.19） http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/47406879010005rs
Again Bush Stirs Up the Stem Cell Storm, Freezing Point, China Youth Daily, July 26, 2006
Embryos and People, Economic Observer, August 19, 2006
“科学研究的重要前提是自知无知，并且勇于质疑和批判，如果一个人仅仅因为对自己研究有疑问和自省，就被认为是'误导公众'，甚至要'请国家有关管理部门重新考虑有无必要继续资助裴研究员的干细胞研究项目，'那么我想这个结论可能是粗暴和不公正的，而且也可能低估了公众的智慧。”
科学研究的重要前提是什么？这是个大问题，最好交给科学界自己去处理，不要根据自己朴素的理解就给下断言。即使要”自知无知”，也不等于自己无知就以为别人也都和你一样无知，就要把科学确知的、已知的都当成”无知”来看待。裴研究员在”14天胚胎”问题上也许”自知无知”，难道我们必须跟着他一样也无知起来才能搞科学研究？”自知无知”也许是一种美德，但是以为别人都和自己一样无知就是无德了。科学研究提倡质疑和批判，但是也要求质疑和批判必须是有理有据的，不是什么无厘头的胡扯都算得上质疑和批判的。如果有人在克隆人问题研讨会上大谈”狮身人面像难道不可能是上一次克隆人的遗迹”，不怀疑其精神状态就够客气的了，扯得上什么质疑和批判的勇气？
一个科研项目要获得公共资助的重要前提，在于其领导者对该项目的正当性和必要性有清楚的认识，有尽力推进它的决心和意愿，如果他自己有疑问、要反省，就先退出来再说，交给更合适、更胜任的人去做。这是起码的专业素质和职业道德，也是对课题领导人的起码要求，不是什么粗暴和不公正。爱因斯坦并不曾主持过原子弹的研发，如果他承担了原子弹的研发任务却又反对起研发原子弹，肯定会被换下来。一个科学家有质疑、反对某个科研项目的自由，却没有承担着该项目却又质疑、反对它的权利。公共科研项目是在花公众的钱的，不是某个科学家的私事，这点智慧，我想公众还是有的。
“这只是一场在飞机上的私人谈话，我本人并非科技记者，而且因为不是报道，只是博客，所以谈话的某些细节根据记忆而写，发这篇文章之时也未得到裴先生的核实，如果方先生是想就具体的科学问题进行讨论，那么我所写的东西不足以作为裴先生全部观点的凭据，您需要从更多的途径来作更准确的了解。需要的话我也可以帮助您联系裴先生本人。”
裴研究员在正式场合发表的观点我是知道的，但是有时候私人谈话更能反映出一个人的真实想法。细节有出入是一回事，整体观点是否传达有误是另一回事。如果柴记者完全搞错了裴研究员的观点，那就是柴记者的问题而不是裴研究员的问题了。不过我对柴记者的新闻素质还是有信心的，何况里面一些话不像是一个非科技记者能够编造出来的。
Who are these people? In absence of English-language wikipedia entries on either of these nationally-known public figures, the self-introductions from their PhoenixTV blogs read:
Fang Zhouzi
方舟子，本名方是民，1967年9月生于福建云霄县。1995年获美国密歇根州立（Michigan State）大学生物化学博士学位，先后在罗切斯特（Rochester）大学生物系、索尔克（Salk）生物研究院做博士后研究，研究方向为分子遗传学。目前定居美国加利福尼亚州，从事互联网开发、写作和兼任美国生物信息公司的咨询科学家。为中文互联网的先驱者之一。2000年创办中文网上第一个学术打假网站”立此存照”，揭露了多起科学界、新闻界等学术腐败现象，美国《科学》曾两次专文介绍。
And Chai Jing?
现为《新闻调查》出境记者 主持人。记者不仅是我的职业身份，做新闻也是我生存的一种方式，记者的天职就是调查事实的真相。以前，做电台的时候，我喜欢说，这是一个像流沙一样的世界。那是非常文艺和情绪的字眼，而 2000 年接近 25 岁的时候，我在一本书的扉页上写下：现在是时候该蹲下来观察地面上的沙粒了，观察它们的湿度、密度、结构、流向和探究为什么这样流向的原因。我庆幸，在迈入成年的门槛时，从自我的世界里走了出来，开始关心他人，关心社会公共事务，关心将自己和这个世界联系在一起的东西。
[Nov. 12, 2007 update: it has been pointed out that Mr. Fang has never worked for the D'Trends corporation, and a correct introduction would describe Mr. Fang as “an independent consulting scientist for an American bioinformatics company.”]
3 comments · »»Sudan: Blogging From the Conflict Zone
· 20:23
Increasingly, aid workers, volunteers and even peacekeepers use blogs to share their unique experiences and insights from conflict zones. Take the Darfur conflict in Sudan, for example. Sleepless in Sudan was one of the first blogs to highlight the untold suffering of innocent people in Darfur. Sleepless in Sudan, which was nominated in the 2006 “Bloggies” Weblog Award contest, was maintained by a female aid worker stationed in Darfur. For nine months, Sleepless in Sudan told stories of life in Darfur from the ground. In one post, she gave us insight into the state of the African Union peacekeepers:
On the ground, I've heard a lot worse. There is no fuel for [Africa Union] cars, never mind helicopters. Ammunition runs out (as it did during the attack that killed four Nigerian peacekeepers and two AU contractors in October). Soldiers routinely show up at aid agency compounds to ask if they can have some mosquito nets or even blankets. Civilian police officers walk around the camps unable to communicate with people because they have not yet sent them any translators. It's clear the Africa Union has not been able to do its job - and there is still no one actually protecting those who need it most.
However, on February 2, 2006, Sleepless in Sudan was closed:
It's somewhat bittersweet to write those words after having ranted and raved, moaned and marvelled, and generally obsessed about Darfur for so long. Of course, it's not that I have run out of things to rant about.
In this case, it's merely personal circumstance (an agreement with my employer to be re-deployed to another crisis after having completed my mission here in Darfur) that brings an abrupt end to my brief but passionate stint as an anonymous Darfur blogger.
Letting go is never easy - and I'm bemused to discover that leaving Darfur is filled with just as much stress, frustration and heartache as living here has been. This blog has provided relief to me not just in terms of self-therapy (at the end of the day, we all just want to have a good rant), but also through the virtual friendships, offers of support, and thoughtful comments that reached me every day through that shaky satellite connection.
Sudan Man works with the Mennonite Central Committee in Southern Sudan. He sees signs of peace in the improved state of local public transportation:
Anyway, another benefit of peace is that there is now public transport between towns in Sudan and neighboring countries! The rehabilitation of the Yei - Juba road and the road between NW Kenya and Juba has opened up trade between Sudan, Uganda and Kenya. Sudanese who've been living in Uganda and Kenya now have a reliable and relatively inexpensive way to travel to Sudan to visit relatives or to scout out whether they want to “officially” return to Sudan. Fresh fruits, vegetables, packaged and processed foods, beverages, building materials, and loads of consumer goods are now available in Juba and other Sudanese towns.
There are still risks though. Our trip to Yei was delayed due to demining activities along the way (not on the road, somewhere nearby) and this brought a reminder that, yes, landmines were used during the war and alot have been cleared but more work needs to be done. Also, there have been incidents of banditry, car hijacking, etc. carried out by “other armed groups” like LRA and random individuals. This hasn't happened on the road to Yei, but other roads to Uganda and Kenya are quite unsafe.
But it is great to know that buses are full, people are traveling and enjoying the opportunity to move back and forth for business and personal reasons.
Describing the sensation of watching the international media from within the conflict zone, Sudan Man reflects on “What is news?“:
What was the BIG NEWS on CNN International? Receiving the most air time was the BIG NEWS that some participants in the UK based Celebrity Big Brother reality television show made insensitive and possibly racist remarks towards the Bollywood (India's Hollywood) actress participant.
I couldn't believe that CNN International found this worthy of being one of the top stories several days in a row. Yes, there was strong reaction by Indians in the UK and elsewhere to what obviously were insentive and racist remarks. Is it news that there is racism in the world? I hardly think so.
We switched to Al Jazeera and found they were following real news - insightful programs on the Rwanda genocide and how China is influencing Africa; the challenges facing the new Somali government; an interview with the Eritrean president; Condi Rice's visit to Middle East and Germany.
I don't doubt the Big Brother story was popular with viewers, but it isn't news.
Sudanese Knight makes a very interesting observation about aid workers vis-à-vis journalists in conflict zones:
I am currently working in Humanitarian Aid, in Sudan. I wish I could say more, but it's better to be anonymous: you never quite know who might be reading, and what might be construed as controversial. As journalists' access to places like Darfur is highly restricted, aid workers are one of the few international groups who know what's really going on, on the ground. However, I don't want to add to the idea that aid workers are merely spies here … reporting on what is going on. That doesn't make our job any easier, which in turn means we can't assist the people we are here to help, and so our presence becomes useless. Like journalists, our access can be severely restricted. Though I want to tell the world about some of the problems here, there is a fine line to tread. That's not my job.
Sudanese Knight emphasizes that the atmosphere of peace is still fragile and punctuated by the presence of firearms:
But at home, smiles and polite greetings can turn to the universal familiar bickering, and guns are quietly hidden in obvious places. In the market, they are purposefully brandished in public places – from in front, you are greeted with a big smile, from behind, a big Kalashnikov slung across the back. This week, following CPA stipulations, the government started demobilising one of the local militias. House to house searches left big crosses on those that have been given the all clear, or disempowered of their weapons. To noisily remind us all of these not so hidden dangers, this afternoon (before the shopping trip) between mangoes and rain falling, other bangs and crashes made me run to my vantage point looking out over the wall. Everyone had stopped to watch. On the other side of the market smoke rose and explosions popped red as stored munitions disempowered themselves (and their owners) in one fell accidental swoop. Or so it was generally agreed. More news tomorrow.
Humanitarian aid volunteer, Aaron Stewart, is optimistic about the future for South Sudan:
Since 1955 Sudan has experienced just eight years of real peace. In the face conflict spanning over 50 years there are times when I ask myself just what it is that I think I'm doing here. Sometimes there is a temptation to get lost in details and figures, the information is overwhelmingly difficult to swallow as a whole and I can feel doubt and hopelessness creeping in on the edges of my thoughts. This is where I am glad that I work for an organization that is about the individual even in the midst of so much suffering. I meet people that would weigh the success of their career on how many boreholes were drilled or how many people were vaccinated against meningitis.
To me the most important thing is not the quantifiable number of things that were done but that they were done at all. Lives are being saved here in South Sudan and lots of people are doing good work that they believe in, this is all that matters to me. It doesn't matter that whether is 1 or 1,000, when I've served someone in a small way I'm afforded the opportunity to be a part of the work that God is doing here on earth. It's a privilege and an adventure that I am glad to be on.
Stewart's optimism, however, is contrasted by the feelings of hopelessness described recently by South Sudan Stories:
I woke up this morning feeling hopeless. I’m not sure why today, but for some reason I am overwhelmed by the difficulties ahead for Sudan especially the way my work is going. When I think of everything that the country has gone through and the difficulties still ahead it makes me feel like I am wasting my time and lots of money here.
Maybe that is always the difficulty of development work- having a sustainable real impact without wasting resources. The government of the South is still in a nascent state and is unable to do many of the things that they a government should do and then NGOs end up doing it. Government employees are not receiving their salaries, the system is over-inflated with too many employees, and there are allegations of corruption going around. I understand that the work that the local government has to do to rebuild the country is enormous! Imagine trying to rebuild a legal system, army and police system, property rights, access to health care, water, education, solve tribal conflicts, etc, etc with very limited resources and surrounded by people with guns who have more power than you do. In trying to help them do their job we end up fighting with the local authorities because they are working towards their political interests rather than the interests of the people.
“At 9am today, my day began with a sit-in at UNICEF where I situated myself in their guard/waiting room and refused to move until someone met with me and straightened out all the issues that they seem to have a special tendency to perpetuate,” writes Kelsey Hope, describing her sit-in at UNICEF:
Then, when they agreed to let me in I launched into, what can only be described as, a tirade. I began with a calm explanation detailing their uselessness, ineffectiveness, ineptitude; added to that the reasons why I think that it is futile to partner with them; building to a crescendo with my step-by-step plan to persuade every one of their donors in Darfur to withdraw their support; and concluding with my plan for a hunger strike in solidarity with the children that are starving in our field site due to their internal bureaucracy.
Realizing the dangers of writing about the life in Darfur while living there, some bloggers choose to write anonymously. South Sudan Stories’ describes herself as “a 29 year old female working for an International NGO in Sudan. I would say more about myself, but since Sudan can still be a little repressive on what you say I will wait until I leave the country to update my profile…” Similarly, Sleepless in Sudan offers few biographical details: “Aid worker, female, 31, extremely single. Would tell you more about myself, but don’t really want the Sudanese government to kick me out of the country for this…”
Blogs: essential tool for Darfur cyber-activists
Apart from aid workers in Darfur blogging from the ground, Darfur cyber-activists use blogs to share information, news and call people to action. We Blog for Darfur is “a reaction to the lack of coverage concerning the Darfur conflict by the mainstream media.”
Let’s spread awareness. Let’s not rely on the mainstream media. Let us get the word out and spread awareness on the blogosphere. Let us inform. Let us give a voice to our voiceless fellow human beings. Let us blog, blog and blog some more.
Together, we can make a difference.
Together, we blog for Darfur
Sudan: Passion of the Present is a place for sharing information on Darfur from mainstream media sources. The blog asks readers to help people of Darfur through net advocacy, hactivism, and netpeace. Sudan Watch and Coalition for Darfur also collect and redistribute Darfur-related news from mainstream media sources.
A number of blogs such as Save Darfur, Globe for Darfur, Darfur Wall, and STAND are examples of new media initiatives by Darfur-focused organizations. The STAND Advocate, for example, provides up-to-the-minute information about Darfur-related legislation.
Take Action!
“Take Action” is a common feature on most blogs about Darfur, particularly those maintained by activist organizations. In addition to providing information about Darfur, these blogs ask readers to take a number of actions such as donating to organizations, writing to representatives, joining public rallies, and reading further about the Darfur region and the conflict that has come to define it. STAND National Blog suggests reading Not on our Watch as a summer activity for Darfur activists:
Looking for some summer reading? Take Not On Our Watch to the beach with you! John Prendergast and Don Cheadle's new book on Darfur is a great way to stay engaged in Darfur activism over the summer. You won't be the only one reading - the book just made the New York Time Bestseller list this week! STAND even gets a shoutout in one of the chapters.
Italian Blogs for Darfur asks readers to sign their online appeal directed toward major TV stations in Italy:
300 thousand dead, 2 million homeless, 200 thousand refugees. A tragedy consumed over 3 years. But the dead in Darfur don’t make headlines. Sign the on-line appeal to ask RAI, Mediaset and La7 to give more TV space for information about Darfur and other humanitarian crises worldwide.
And Sleepless in Sudan answers what is perhaps the most important question for concerned readers based around the world: “What can I do to help the people of Darfur?”:
Find out more. The conflict in Darfur may be complex and the context somewhat daunting, but it's hard to help when you're ignorant about the issues involved. It's going to be a lot easier for you to help the people of Darfur if you try to understand the situation and use your knowledge to take certain actions (see the following points) or to influence others. No matter how good your intentions, uninformed opinions or arguments will not take you very far. Reading Darfur news (for example on Alertnet or Sudan Tribune) or the work of Darfur activitists and academics like Eric Reeves is a good start.
Give money. Yes, in some cases throwing money at a problem does help. Particularly if you are throwing it into the hands of a respectable and effective aid agency.
The UN HAS (Humanitarian Air Service) desperately needs some cash to ferry around the aid workers in their helicopters and planes, while the UN JLC (Joint Logistics Center) is running short on funds for things like plastic sheeting, blankets and soaps. Then of course, there's always us NGOs - and we always need money. You might have your own favourite organsition already, but if you don't it's hard to go wrong with some of most long-standing and reputable outfits like the ICRC, MSF, Oxfam or the IRC.
In addition to supporting the organisations who are providing relief on the ground, you might also want to support human rights and policy groups like Human Rights Watch or the International Crisis Group so they can continue to carry out research and advocacy work on Darfur - unlike the aid agencies working on the ground, these groups are not as restricted in what they can say about the situation, and they often make concrete suggestions on political solutions.
The author of Darfur Daily News has started an online petition calling for complete and inclusive peace for Darfur.
Other useful links to learn more about Darfur include, but are not limited to:
Crisis Group
Sudan Tribune
Sudan researcher and analyst
Sudan Times
Sudan Mirror
The Sudan Divestment Task Force
ENOUGH: The project to abolish genocide and mass atrocities
Our Pledge
South Sudan Institute of Democracy and Peace
Facing Sudan: A documentary film
24 Hours for Darfur
Crisis Guide: Darfur
Arabeyes: What's Happening at the Daily Kos?
· 12:31
Pro-Israel and pro-Palestine bloggers have been battling it out at the Daily Kos for quite some time.
And then came Al Nakba, or the catastrophe, as the pro-Palestinian camp refers to it - when Pro-Palestine diarists were allegedly banned from cross-posting their diaries on the DKos.
Banned Diarists
Palestinian Haitham Sabbah, one of the banned bloggers, gives us his take here.
Yesterday, which marked the celebration of the Nakba, Daily Kos blew the last bridge it had with the Palestinian voices. Midday GMT, the news started coming. They first banned Umkahlil, later on they banned me, and last but not least, they banned Anna Baltzer. Why? Nobody knows. No reason is given. No warning or any notice from the ‘busy’ Kos administrators to let any of us know the circumstances under which the decision was taken and what valid reasons they gave for throwing these poisoned donuts at us. All that we heard from unofficial sources: we are associates of Shergald, again!
It is sad to believe that Daily Kos administration based its decision on such meaningless illusions. It would not have taken them more than a minute to check the history of each of us and see that we all are established pro Palestine peace activists, just by looking at our blogs and websites. We don’t have to have any association with anyone, not even with other banned Kos members or other groups that might also talk about the plight of Palestinians. Our blogs and our work, online and offline, have their own merits and stands on its own.
Desert Peace, from Tel Aviv, who has also been banned from the Dkos weighs in.
In their continuing ‘War Against Truth, Justice and The American Way' Daily Kos banned two other writers who dared to speak the truth. My dear Brother Haitham of Sabbah's Blog and my Sister Nancy of Umkalil.
Desert Peace posts another article on the situation at the DKos here.
The link provides an explanation from Hunter, another diarist and apparently a site administrator, on why Sabbah and UmKahlil were banned. An email to Hunter from GV went unanswered. However, here's Hunter's two cents on the banning:
A word about ‘Shergald', (27+ / 0-)
to set up the background here. Shergald is, short version, an unapologetic and pathological liar — towards friends and enemies alike — and has increasingly slid towards anti-Semitism. Worse, as he falls out with his old friends he finds solace in new and very much more hardline ones of his own rather more racist bent: he has recruited individuals for his cause, in people like Ben Heine and others, who have been even more transparently anti-Semitic. And, as time goes on, his posts (on other sites) have edged towards more and more transparent defenses of terrorism against Israelis.
At least on this site, these things are showstoppers. Anti-Semitic statements and conspiracy theories are right out. And any defense of terrorism against civilians counts as an argument so vile, so loathsome, that it will not be tolerated in any shape or form.That's the backstory. Now (apologies for that, but I think it's important to understand the recent history, here) on to the actual point…
The ‘annainpalestine' diary included the words of a member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, a terrorist organization by any objective measure, i.e. one that targets civilians and murders them for the sake of its cause. A statement from their group was presented in such a way that multiple administrators thought it clearly crossed the line into advocacy for their group.
Now, this should not need to be spelled out in the rules. That this would be a problem should be, to put it tersely, Really F—ing Obvious.
Sabbah and umkahlil were banned because they recommended that diary, with those statements. There were only a few others who recommended that diary, but for these two particular users and their history of being a little too involved in similar arguments, it was the last straw.
This particular action may be unfair. Or it may not be. But like it or not, there is an escalating history among the newer I/P posters, the ones with various connections to the vivacious and batshit insane Shergald, of anti-Semitic remarks and remarks that ‘defend' terrorism, or come close to it. There is ZERO tolerance on this site for anything that even HINTS at being supportive of terrorists or terrorist groups, regardless of cause: if some posters find that iron-clad requirement too restrictive, then those posters are roundly encouraged to leave.
We will remove any posters that come within a stone's throw of that line, or who have histories of edging up to it. I note that other sites on the right and left do not have such restrictions — to their distinct shame and detriment.
I sympathize with your side of the debate losing some voices, but I don't see any way around this decision. There was ample warning given that we were going to start cleaning up these threads, and I thought mcjoan's note was quite blunt as to the reason for the decision in this case — as I said, there was agreement among multiple admins that the diary crossed a very big line. There is no ongoing effort to remove pro-Palestinian posters, but there is an ongoing effort to remove the posters who get in the most fights, step across the most lines, or radicalize the debates via over-the-top or offensive rhetoric, on either side.
I don't like talking about the reasons people were banned. It doesn't sit right with me. But lots of people have been asking, so there it is.
Shergald, who is accused of being a troll on the DKos, has the following to say:
If Daily Kos' banning of Steve Amsel and Eileen Fleming, two peace activists who support the rights of the Palestinian people, a few days ago, and three other peace activists that preceded them, were not enough, today Daily Kos banned two Palestinian peace activists. This action was taken in an apparent attempt to appease a small group of right wing proIsrael supporters who have invaded Daily Kos. If anyone believes that of course they should probably take ownership of the Brooklyn Bridge. The true source of all of these banning is not yet evident, but no one is ready to believe that Daily Kos is getting ready to be sold to an AIPAC subsidiary.
Possible Compromise
Despite this grim picture, diarist Heathlander, hopes that a compromise may be possible.
We would like to emphasise that we are truly sympathetic to the difficulty of successfully moderating a subject which so frequently generates an astonishing degree of venom and vicious personal attacks. In highlighting what we feel to be a serious error in administrative policy, we are not impugning the motives of the admins or minimizing the difficulty of their task. Our aim is simply to correct an injustice.
It appears that Sabbah and umkahlil were banned because it is thought that they were initially invited to post at DKos by He Who Must Not Be Named. If this is indeed the reason, it is perplexing, to say the least. If a diarist's behaviou