Continuing the campaign

A post or two ago (http://orthojournalism.blogspot.com/2006/07/against-name-calling.html), I had written about replacing the word "black" with "South American" in the Charles Darwin article on Wikipedia. The original line is:

"He learned taxidermy from John Edmonstone, a freed black slave who told him exciting tales of the South American rainforest."

This change was reverted, and I responded by simply deleting the word "black", as South American was evidently speculation on my part. This time, I did write my reasons on the talk page. Here they are:

Mankind, as we know it, is marked by distinctions, some more immediately apparent than others. Race (= ethnicity?) is a complicated question. Specifically, it is not easy to pinpoint any person's race on the basis of photographs, or literary evidence (the latter especially when derived from a time where race theory was far different than it is now, or did not exist). In some churches in Poland (so I've read in a German book), Jesus was shown with blue eyes. In one American movie (I think it was American anyway), he was shown with black skin. These obviously contradictory representations merely illustrate that race is often a matter of identity, and in the case where peoples mix, often the race of either the mother or the father decides what race the child will identify himself with, or be deemed by his community to belong to. Some years ago I visited a natural history museum in Edinburgh which declared that there were three races of man. Kant said there are four. Others create races at will - in phrases like "our great island race" or "Jewish race" etc.. Hence, I suggest that the concept of race, as used commonly, is not in keeping with honest scientific straightforwardness. It is also accepted that skin colour does not automatically fix a person's race. (there are additional factors such as eye colour, hair, skull shape etc., or so I understand, not being a anthropologist myself)

What does the word "black" here mean? That the person (if something described by just its colour can still be accorded the dignity of human identity) had black skin all over? Or that he belonged to the negroid race? Can we be sure that he indeed was a pure-blooded negroid? Does it make any difference to our perception of him as one who inspired Darwin with stories? I usually avoid using the word "racist" as I think it has meanings beyond what it really should. (similar to democracy, holocaust, Bosnia, terrorist etc.) However, making a reference to his skin colour here is just that - racist. Actually, it's not even racist - it's just petty, and slightly insulting.

What next? In a similar vein, we might have the Wikipedia article on Schopenhauer which states "Schopenhauer, a white Pole, indicated that he was influenced by Kant, a white philosopher, and Buddha, a brown prince." Or the brown crown prince, as he hadn't inherited when he left his father's kingdom behind.

I'm certain there are occasions when a person's skin colour, or race if you will, need to be pointed out. For example, if a certain medical drug causes different reactions based on a person's genetics. Or if a dark skinned person is being photographed - perhaps more light is needed, as compared to when a fair skinned person is the subject. Or commandos with dark skin might be chosen for a covert mission in Ghana, where those with fair skin might stand out. Or in museums of ethnology, where the actual race is defined. And numerous other such situations. But these are far from commonplace.

Everytime we use pejorative words like black, white, brown, kook, eyetie, commie, chink etc. to refer to a human being, we reinforce an image of him which uses his skin colour, race, nationality, religion, political views etc. as his defining attribute. We strip him of his dreams, songs, poetry, ability to make us laugh and think and love - all that makes him human.

What's happening around us right now?

Well, it depends upon what one chooses to see, and to whom one listens and what one reads, or can read. Here are some of the "top" stories from news websites I happened upon - around 2140h here in the UK. It's not done very scientifically - with any rigorous definition of "top" headline, nor is there any accounting for the fact that websites are updated all the time etc. However, it should still be an interesting review of what those who read English content on the Internet have available to them (no account has been taken of the fact that many sites allow one to customize content). They make interesting reading - do keep in mind that not everyone around the world has access to the Internet, and most people do not read English. Still, see if you find an interesting link here - go someplace you've never been before. This list contains sources from the UK, Ireland, Australia, USA, South Africa, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Bangladesh, Mongolia, New Zealand, Canada, Iran, UAE (I think) and Russia.

1. cnn.com
U.N.: 14,000 Iraqis killed in 2006
Death toll jumps in Java tsunami, quake
3 charged with murder in Katrina hospital deaths

2. bbc.co.uk
Israel claims Iran link to crisis
Java tsunami death toll increases
'U-turn' claim over house packs

3. foxnews.com
U.S. Military Moves to Protect Americans
Rocket Barrage Slams Israel
Olmert: Could Last Weeks

4. news.google.com
IAF again drops leaflets on Lebanon
Sector Snap: Stem-Cell Biotechs Near Lows
Nortel, Microsoft Forge Comm Alliance

5. msnbc.msn.com
Beirut Evacuation
After five years, Bush to speak before NAACP
Gay marriage ban amendment fails in House

6. news.yahoo.com
Israelis say offensive could last weeks
Violence in Iraq spinning out of control
Death toll in Indonesian tsunami hits 341

7. abcnews.go.com
A New Member of the Axis of Evil?
House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban Amendment
Iran's Hezbollah Threatens Israel, U.S. Attacks

8. news.com.au
'We kill those we need to kill'
Survivor search continues
PM risks Bush nuke challenge

9. cbsnews.com
U.S. Steps Up Evacuation From Lebanon
Doc, Nurses Arrested In Katrina Deaths
Bush Finally Says 'Yes' To NAACP

10. cbc.ca/news
Military operation could take weeks: Israel
Child killer Clifford Olson denied parole
Some passport exemptions likely: U.S. Homeland Security boss

11. washingtonpost.com
Toll Climbs in Mideast As Fighting Rages On
Gonzales: Bush Blocked Probe
Blast Kills Shiite Day Laborers

12. theglobeandmail.com
Sit tight one more day, stranded Canadians told
No quick end to offensive, Israeli officials say
Parole Board rejects serial killer Olson's appeal

13. hindustantimes.com
Peace moves with Pak hit after blasts: Manmohan
'IGNOU casts aspersions on Gods'
Iran issue: PM against 'coercive diplomacy'

14. deccan.com
Kalam pitches for more farmer loans
Profit Bill decision in 2 days, says PM
Boucher confirms sequence change

15. indianexpress.com
Final seal on N-deal by year-end: US
Mumbai echo in Moscow: G-8 warns terror sponsors
Naxals massacre 26 in Chhattisgarh, many are missing

16. english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
Lebanon toll passes 230
Tsunami death toll tops 340
Violence ahead of DR Congo poll

17. gulfnews.com/home/index.html
Lebanon on brink of disaster
Dubai to get first double decker road to increase traffic in new areas
Tsunami toll passes 350 mark, over 200 others missing

18. jpost.com
125 rockets fired on northern Israel on Tuesday
IDF drops flyers over south Lebanon mocking Nasrallah
Katyushas kill one in Nahariya

19. nzherald.co.nz
Two arrested after teenager shot dead
You lie in bed thinking, how did she die? Why did it happen?'
Sightings of murdered teacher's car crucial

20. mg.co.za
Olmert: Israeli offensive will continue
SA 'not doing enough about Aids'
DA slams Nqakula's absence in current violent climate

21. tehrantimes.com
Israel’s dream to dominate Lebanon will never come true: Leader
Bush escalates the hate
UN involvement will block nuclear talks: Iran

22. graphicghana.com
Justice Annan Passes Away
Bank Fraud, Five arrested, One On The Run
US Experts To Monitor Millennium Account Projects

23. ubpost.mongolnews.mn
Rallying for Mongolia
The complete Naadam menu
Treasure trove

24. sundayobserver.lk
SLMM waits, LTTE won't release cop - 'Despicable' says Kohona
Govt. will honour truce - Keheliya
No TV today, courtesy foreign film suppliers?

25. dawn.com
No evidence of Pakistan’s hand in blasts: US
Talks delay negative development: Riaz
Export target $18.6bn, trade deficit $9.4bn: Trade Policy 2006-07

26. thedailystar.net
More taken out than pumped in thru FDI
Counting from desk continues too to justify expenditure
SC Bar mulls going to president, CJ to raise its objection

27. timesonline.co.uk/global
Lebanon evacuations mount
Katrina hospital murder charges
Suicide bomber kills 53 near shrine

28. ireland.com
Israeli PM blames Tehran over criss in Lebanon
Lebanon Air strikes kill 42 as rockets rain down on Israel
Summer heat set to peak at 30-plus degrees, says Met office

29. herald.co.zw
Cancel copper licences: Police
Inquiry into Chideya’s conduct postponed
70 GMB workers walk free

30. english.pravda.ru
Israel uses Russia's experience in its operation against Lebanon
Group of Eight declines without Russia
Pamela Anderson appears to be a soccer mom at heart

News publishing on the Internet.

The URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Age directed me to the official website of the international newspaper The Asian Age - http://www.asianage.com, with the caveat "(IE only, refuses other browsers)"

This I had to see! I clicked on it and sure enough reached a page which said ""This page can only be seen in IE"" (I'm using Mozilla Firefox, and not Internet Explorer)

Isn't that tantamount to saying: "you need to buy software from Microsoft before you can access this journalistic web-site."?

Their call, I guess; my loss, perhaps.

Against name calling.

For quite some time now, I've considered campaigning against the abuse of derogatory words such as Gook, White, Black, Chink, Gringo, Farang (distinct from Firang), Bong, Kaffir etc. I tend never to use these words in my conversation (and I'm daily exposed to people from around the world).

Some months ago, a member in an online quiz forum quoted the (a) President of South Africa as saying "But it is not the only disease which is of importance and I have always resented the views of AIDS lobbyists to push their nefarious agenda on Black people. AIDS and complex retroviral drugs are not the only health concerns of Black people."

I objected to the South African President calling his people Black and queried, “Why not simply "people"? Or African, or sub-saharan African, or Negroid population etc., for there are people of African descent (with black skin) living in Europe/US/Brazil etc. which I guess are not the focus of this President's views. I believe that words like White/Black/Desi/Kook/Chink/Ghati/Bong/Punju/Guleti/Darkie etc. are distasteful and derogatory."

My remark was lauded and countered with: "Black is not a derogatory term because the Black people chose it themselves and very proudly too. Infact I was quoting the President of South Africa’s words. They were not mine. At a point of time in history, they were called negroes or niggers. They fought against such usage and proudly called themselves Blacks. And now they are universally referred to as such. And when did White become distasteful and derogatory? :). No, don’t answer that."

Perhaps we should force ourselves to use the phrase "black skinned human being" for "black". (Similarly, "white or sometimes pink and brown skinned human" for "white", "more-diagonal-than-horizontal eyed human" for "chink" and so on.)
In time, the absurdity of this nomenclature should become evident and perhaps we can avoid referring to a person's skin colour, sexual prowess, religion, veteran status etc. unless such a specification is conducive to the idea being expounded.

What I did about it today?

As part of my research, I came across the following article on Darwin on the English Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Early_life

I changed the statement "He learned taxidermy from John Edmonstone, a freed black slave who told him exciting tales of the South American rainforest." to "He learned taxidermy from John Edmonstone, a freed South American slave who told him exciting tales of the South American rainforest." I announced in the Changes section: "Replaced "black" with "South American"."

Within ten minutes, I was challenged - "your revert provides no reason? the previous revert does, it also is more consistent with wikipedia, re Scots of the age are indeed listed as such, as are most english."

Perhaps I will answer: "My reason? My reason, Sir, is the dignity of man."

This was published in the Guardian yesterday: http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,,1818247,00.html

> The indiscriminate mass murder of innocent people is terrorism, pure and simple.

Innocent people? What does innocence have to do with the right to live with dignity? If all those who died had covert subscriptions to pornographic magazines, would this have been justified?

Terrorism? The writer seems to have been reading too much of the American media and evidently believes that the word "terrorism" conveys a greater measure of shock than the word "murder". I'm sure we are glad that it was simple terrorism, and not the complicated variety.

> It can never be justified

But it was justified! It was planned and executed - that could scarcely have been done without justification. Justifiable to me - no. To millions of Indians - no. To millions of people who believe in the shared right of all humans to live with dignity - no. To those who did this - yes.

> The first thing to say is that anyone who targets suburban commuter trains is a criminal

A criminal is one who breaks a law. So if targeting suburban commuter trains (as opposed to urban school buses, for example) is against the law, then one who does so is indeed a criminal. Good catch, that.

> It would be wrong to jump to any conclusions, and wrong for hotheads to mount reprisals that would only play into the hands of hate-mongering fanatics.

So that is what is wrong! I wish this writer had written earlier that killing people is wrong - we might have avoided great human loss. Perhaps it's not too late.

This appeared yesterday in www.thestatesman.net, about the role of investigative TV in the aftermath of the blasts in Mumbai, India.



"We reach my colleague’s home in Shivaji Park at 9.30 p.m. and switch the television on. Almost immediately, we hear the anchorwoman on one channel, and she must intellectually be a blonde, tell us that if we are stuck in a traffic jam we ought to send an SMS to a particular number to inform relatives that we are okay. Oh, brilliant! I am stuck in a traffic jam and what do I do? Switch the television on!

I switch channels. Each news channel has a number it suggests can be used to send messages to relatives and friends. And some messages have started to appear on the screen. “Pooja, this is Atul. I am fine”. “Vicky, are you okay?” Of course Mumbai has only one Atul and one Vicky, of course, these messages make perfect sense. Television has achieved its objective, made idiots out of all of us.

The scroll running at the bottom of the screen says in exactly this order – “Phone lines jammed in Mumbai”; “Call 022-xxxxxxxx to make enquiries” or “If you want to be a citizen journalist, call 0120-xxxxxxx”. Excuse me, I just want to be a good husband and tell my wife I am alive. But you, Mr TV anchor, have managed to jam all the phone lines. And don’t tell me the service provider is not giving you a share of the loot. "

> and she must intellectually be a blonde,

A blonde? Why not a Peruvian? Or a Buddhist? Or a low-caste Bihari? How a responsible paper can print such racist slurs is beyond me.

> Oh, brilliant! I am stuck in a traffic jam and what do I do? Switch the television on!

No, you switch your cellphone on. Millions do not have access to traffic jams, cellphones and SMS, or the language the TV broadcast was in - so obviously this is meant for a niche audience. TV on cellphones - it has already happened; obviously no one bothered to inform your reporter, who must have been occupied with the "Use more derogatory racist insults" essay anyway.

> And don’t tell me the service provider is not giving you a share of the loot.

I wouldn't be shocked. But then most of TV is a profit making enterprise. As is this newspaper. Of course, I further assume that journalists get paid to write. (do they get paid more to be insulting?)

She does make a valid point about the futility of broadcasting names on the telly though.

This is from an article in the Jerusalem Post on 01 March 2006 titled "David Irving has a right to free speech, too" written by Peter Singer, defending freedom of speech.

Here's an excerpt:
"We cannot consistently hold that cartoonists have a right to mock religious figures but that it should be a criminal offense to deny the Holocaust. I believe that we should stand behind freedom of speech. And that means that David Irving should be freed.

Before you accuse me of failing to understand the sensitivities of victims of the Holocaust, or the nature of Austrian anti-Semitism, I should say that I am the son of Austrian Jews. My parents escaped Austria in time, but my grandparents did not. "

I applaud the writer for defending freedom of speech (David Irving's, in this instance).
What I do not understand is why he had to state that his grandparents were victims in Austria whilst doing so. If his grandparents had survived Austria, would that make his opinion illegitimate? What if they weren't Jewish?

The principle of freedom of speech entitles one to an opinion and the right to express it - irrespective of the circumstances of the life (or death) of one's ancestors.

I believe it is actually detrimental to the cause of free speech when its supporters lack the courage of conviction to express their opinion without avaling of artificial safeguards in terms of nationality, race, veteran record, gender, disability, religion, ancestry, language, food habits etc. - which are not generally available to all.

Mr. Irving is English. What if he shared Mr. Singer's heritage? Would that affect the truth value of his thesis? I sincerely hope not.

A couple of months ago, Mr. Bono (with the popular music band U2) was made the editor of a UK newspaper (The Independent) for the day, in an effort to generate funds and awareness (or so I imagine) for AIDS victims in Africa. He, and some others including Motorola, GAP, Armani, American Express etc., have launched a brand called RED, part proceeds of which will go towards AIDS victims in Africa. (Or are supposed to, anyway) Why can't these rich organizations and people just give their all (if they are so inclined) and leave the rest of us alone? What if another personality, perhaps a World Wrestling Federation champion, or a princess, comes up with another brand called BLACK (or CREAM), for the same cause? Should we then buy those products and services instead? Perhaps we can pick our favourite colour. What about other competing causes and charities? Should the best marketed cause win? Or the one with the prettiest ambassador, wearing the coolest sunglasses? I find it in appalling taste that style and ostensible charity have so been twined together.

However, if it does lead to good (some good anyway, for only part profits are to be sent to some organizations in Africa), perhaps it is better than nothing - if, that is, one does not take the holistic view. For these enterprises might put others out of business, or cause them losses, perhaps depriving Africa of revenue from that avenue. Let us not forget that large businesses pay taxes to regional and federal governments, and that individual nations will ultimately ensure that their own interests (security, energy needs, etc.) come first? So one might inadvertently finance wars undertaken for the sake of cheap oil, or the dumping of hazardous waste in habitable regions, or the perpetuation of violence and civil war with a supply of weapons.

Instead of buying cellphones, price plans and T-shirts from those participating in schemes like these, I would suggest that we work hard, vote knowledgeably and buy underwear according to our fancy. For those who wish to, there are plenty of ways to donate money, or even to travel to Africa and help with skills.

A couple of weeks ago, the front page of a London newspaper had a report about the Iraq war. Well, understandably the Iraq war isn't automatically "news" anymore - inspite of the killings, deprivations, loss of freedoms, political activity etc. So what does (did) this paper print on its front page? I'm afraid I no longer have the exact date this was published. Sometime in May 2006. All these things:

1. They used a font bigger than usual for headlines.

2. Font on the whole of the front page was the same size - all text was part of the headline.

3. They highlighted in red certain parts of the headline.

4. These highlighted parts were phrases - for example, "ethnic cleansing", "Bosnia" and so on.

5. They put in two photographs as well, one showing a probably starving and deprived child. Undated images, with no caption etc.

This is what it has come to - bigger fonts (perhaps if it's written that big it must be true), colour highlighting (in case one misses the significance), with pictures (which could have been taken in a studio, or downloaded from the special features section of some war film DVD), catchwords like holocaust, Bosnia, 9/11, fundamentalism, freedom (which have meanings associated with them which don't belong to the words themselves) and so on.

My friend GN, a journalist himself, suggested today I publish my opinions on some of the rather questionable print and web journalism doing the rounds. I am quite occasionally saddened and/or angered by ad hominem attacks, name calling and various forms of truth prevarication in news stories from round the world.

Here I shall endeavour to catch up on articles from various UK and international newspapers and point out what is objectionable - alongwith my rationale for so considering them.

What I hope to achieve: that my audience will read news with a more balanced mind and be on the guard for spurious arguments.

It'll also be nice if I start off along the road to immeasurable wealth. Or sagacity.