In a message dated 12/21/98 7:35:23 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
<< I was simply wondering whether we are in a moral decline, or perpetuating
the kind of misery and horror human beings have always been more than
willing to share. >>
Yes to the latter. See The Searchers. Read Shakespeare. (Hi. Vince, James
and David!)
Jeff, I appreciate the common sense you are bringing to this orgy of
nonsensica I've been receiving via the mailbase.
<<My question regarding film technology is about whether we should view the
proliferation of film 'coverage'--the fact that an ever-increasing amount of
human activity is caught on film or video tape or digital media--as primarily
a negative infringement on privacy and freedom, or as some however-so-meager
means of keeping track of human rights violations and other crimes?>>
Two years ago I stood in line for a concert for two hours with a young man
whose mother had recently died. After her death, boxes upon boxes of audio
cassettes were discovered in which the mother had tapped the home and business
telephones of her family. The kid telling me this was perhaps one of the most
frail individuals I have ever met. He had grown up never being able to lie to
his mother. She knew everything he and his friends ever did or planned to do.
I'm not a doctor, but I believe the man fit the clinical definition of
schizophrenia.
What struck me about meeting him is how essential the ability to lie is to the
maintenance of any kind of social order. After a few wobbles with Vietnam and
Watergate, the components of the US political machine (sometimes, but often
enough including the electronic media) have become masters of
disingenuousness. Maybe it's all just a matter of relative degree, but I
observed that this time around there was less a sense of the Pentagon saying,
"Look, we're showing you all there is to see, short of endangering troops," as
they did in the Gulf War. That may only mean that "We're being honest about
not telling you everything," has just refined the process of disingenuousness.
In any event the point you make that, however meager an improvement, the fact
that we see something of what is going on (cutting between CNN and Iraqi State
TV during bombing raids, no less!) allows us some idea of what is going on.
The rest can be mythologized after the fact, with perhaps some actual facts
emerging for the very attentive. CNN showed the bombing from their safe,
limited viewpoint in Baghdad, and they also brought us whatever Iraqi
officials were willing to release to the media in pictures.
As for the repeated designation of this being a 'movie' we watched, I must say
other countries must be getting a better version of CNN than we get in the US.
What I saw was a series of nickelodeon loops, played over and over.
Finally, before we go too far in victimizing Iraq, let us recall what it was
like for Kurds and Israelis to have Scuds rained down upon them. In two
words, dangerous and imprecise. One great contrast between the most recent
action in Iraq and the Gulf War was the behavior of people in Baghdad.
Formerly, the streets were silent and deserted. This time, city buses, taxis
and private autos continued about their business even during bombing raids. I
wish I had a citizen of Baghdad to answer this for me: are they becoming more
trusting of the US in the stated goal of hitting only military targets? Are
they, indeed, becoming more trusting of the technology that can rain bombs
upon a city and leave few more civilians at risk than a normal day in big city
traffic?
To the mailbase: try to keep the vitriolic responses to your nearest
approximation of civility. Thanks.
Bill
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|