I have just scanned through everyone's reflections and I feel pretty lazy-- Everyone is really aware of what is going on in the world right now. I am aware, I just can't keep up! I follow all of the people on twitter that I mentioned last week, but there is so much going on that they are tweeting non stop and so I don't even have time to read their tweets nor do I have time to read news sites and so on. I really don't have an excuse, but that is all I have to give. I'm going to pick an Al Jazeera article and just rant on that to make up for my week of living in my own little American University bubble. First, I wanted to mention something that I am struggling with in this class and other SIS classes. I am not really sure at what point I am supposed to develop an opinion, or at what point my understanding is well-rounded enough to form an opinion. Is there a specific number of news articles I should read on a subject before I say "THIS IS WHAT I THINK!"? As I have mentioned in class, I come from a military family--My Dad, my Poppy, my brother, my uncles, and all of my parents friends who are like family to me are all in the military. I was raised in an apolitical setting and so I never really learned how to have an opinion on things in the political sector. It may seem weird to people coming from a different background where people were discussing their opinions with one another at the dinner table. For me, I feel a little dirty and as if I have no right to have an opinion. Not in the sense of human right/ freedom of speech but in the sense of 'Who does she think she is having an opinion that subject, she doesn't understand whats going on'. I don't live in MENA and I feel wrong speaking as if I understand because there is no way that I understand. If I read a million articles, I have not been there and experienced those regimes or that culture so why would I have the right to an opinion on their affairs?
It's a learning process. I'm sure/ I'm hoping that by the end of the semester I will be able to tell everyone what I think on these areas. I'm just not there yet. I need to know more and I don't know when I will be able to say- 'Hey, I know enough to think this..'
If anyone has any advice on developing opinions..please comment and give me some advice or pull me aside after class or whenever you see me and just give me a heads up.
Bringing things back to world events:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/2012926115125431960.html
An Iranian Press TV correspondent was shot in Damascus.
The article provides this statement- "We hold Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who provide militants weapons to kill civilians, military personnel and journalists, responsible for the killing of Maya...Press TV will be pursuing the matter of the murder of Maya and will not let those who killed our correspondent feel like they can kill media people and get away with it." from Hamid Reza Emadi, Press TV news director.
The article went on to say that now 22 journalists have been killed in Syria.
I wanted to use this article to tie in my reflection from last week on social media.
According to the article, Nasser (TV correspondent) had been expressing, via Twitter and Facebook, that he was sympathetic with the Syrian government and did not view the rebels who backed the uprising in a positive light. He was not a violent man by any means however and would write with people of opposing views saying things like, "[I]t would be great to meet some day we both see Syria as priority we might disagree on the how but its normal."
Now that I have summarized the article...
Do those countries provide militants weapons?
Was the news director using this statement in some way outside of his concern for the death of his correspondent?
Why are war correspondents being targeted? past and present incidences
What role did the social media play is Nasser's death?
Does his sympathy for the Syrian government affect our sympathy towards his death?
Was Nasser a direct target?
The rebels are fighting for freedom. Maybe I am wrong to assume that they want the same freedom as we have in America, but by the United States definition of freedom--Nasser's comments through the social media would have been disliked but respected on some level for their non-violence or non-judgement.
Assuming that the rebels sniped Nasser, which i would not doubt to be true,
What did they hope to gain from this death? is he a message of some sort? or do they simply not like him.
As I was saying, I can't form an opinion quite yet on what is happening in Syria, but I would like to get there. I am very confused as to why people target journalists. When I read an article like this, I have a streamline of open ended questions.
If anyone has any thoughts or ideas on the article, please seek me out because I would really like to get a dialogue going on the subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment