A people�s retort to the media�s detached �experts�
By Ramzy Baroud
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Nov 28, 2007, 00:38
What do an organic farmer from Spain, a union worker
activist from Brazil, and a human rights scholar living in London have in
common? They are all individuals who affect substantive change in their
communities, and they are also individuals who are overlooked by the corporate
media. The latter has its own lists of �experts� -- usually well-groomed males
with little involvement in the daily struggles of the unseen and unheard
multitudes of the world, yet able to influence their lives (most often
detrimentally) from a well-guarded distance.
So how does the business of expertise work? Why are those
qualified to address their own affairs so widely ignored by mainstream channels
in favour of intellectual middlemen who purport to have some sort of legitimacy
over a range of narratives, without any convincing credentials, let alone
first-hand experiences?
The phenomenon precedes the advent of network television and
satellite news. It is embedded in a Western tradition that was formulated
around imperial conquests: for a people to be conquered, they have to be
understood in a language that prioritises the interests of the colonialist over
the rights of the colonized. The latter�s identity is replaced by verbal and
textual reductionism. Thus Mohammed Abdullah Hassan, the Somali leader who
strove for 20 years to free his people from British and Italian colonialism was
termed �Mad Mullah� by the British. Hassan, of course, was as �mad� as Martin
Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and the vigorous leaders of
numerous struggles around the world. The list of these individuals is ever
expanding, as activists are written off by those in power, those whose �sanity�
preaches subscribing to the status quo and the inherent wisdom of the �system.�
This system serves not the majority of people living within
it, but rather the combined interests of those with the money and those with
the weapons: one funds the other�s military adventurism, and the other
guarantees unhindered access to cheap supplies, labour and markets. Without
Bush�s war in Iraq, Blackwater USA could not generate over a billion dollars of
extra contracts; the relationship is painfully obvious.
Of course neither Bush nor Blackwater executives are
imprudent enough to speak of their real motives, and it would be equally
imprudent for us to trust that Blackwater�s ultimate objective is to contribute
to the efforts of the US military to �protect� their country and its founding
principles. Unfortunately, though the deceptiveness of dominant rhetoric may
often be apparent, when repeated numerous times to millions of people
worldwide, it eventually gathers force, and even credibility. The process has
real and very deadly consequences: Blackwater mercenaries go on killing sprees;
endless media airtime is given to its executives and sympathetic �experts� who
�objectively� defend their company�s image; a congressional hearing of good
cop/bad cop is held whereby one congressman thanks Blackwater for protecting
the lives of Americans overseas while another gently reprimands it for not
using extra care. Extra care in gunning down innocent people? At this question
the story is shelved. By the time Blackwater kills again it is no longer even
newsworthy.
Many far from credible �experts� are employed in this way to
neutralise and effectually justify violence. Their roles are those of
apologists of state and corporate crimes, and as ideologues who tailor information
to fit political and economic agendas. They are dangerous because they have the
leverage of being presented as impartial observers, even when their very
identity should give away their partiality. Benjamin Netanyahu has managed to
reinvent himself to the US public as a �terrorism expert,� thanks to Fox News.
As for the former Israeli prime minister�s own crimes while in office, and his
close ties to the neoconservatives -- the �intellectuals� behind the Iraq war
-- and his persistent use of anti-peace language -- these are unimportant
diversions.
According to the corporate media and the selective samples
of humanity they endlessly feature and tout for their �expertise,� the world is
a convenient place that consists of big companies (and no workers, thus no
workers� rights), prison guards (no prisoners, thus no prisoners� rights), war
engineers (no victims, thus no accountability), celebrities (no ordinary
people, thus no widespread and urgent grievances). All those in brackets don�t
exist as actual, living and breathing individuals; they only exist as part of
skewed narratives, designed carefully by an expert and a think tank. That
�expert� needs not be there to understand, he needs only to speak in a language
that manipulates prejudice. The working women of India fighting globalization,
the lawyers of Pakistan fighting for judicial independence, the teachers of
Palestine fighting for survival amid siege and boycott, the millions of
uninsured Americans fighting for a doctor�s appointment -- these people simply
don�t exist as far as corporate media is concerned. Or worse, they exist but
don�t matter.
As those justifying violence on the basis of security,
justice and democracy work to make the world increasingly unsafe, unjust and
undemocratic, there seems an equally increasing need for a new kind of media,
one which requires a new kind of �expert.�
When I contacted Noam Chomsky, John Pilger, Arun Ghandi,
Ilan Pappe and many other intellectuals and activists from all over the world,
proposing an alternative to �expertise� in the media, I didn�t expect that just
a year later the discussion could evolve into JUSTmedia (JustMedia.net).
JUSTmedia is the first initiative to be launched by the
People Media Project, a global scheme that hopes to offer a different kind of
platform for discourse, dialogue and commentary by promoting the voices of
people from all walks of life. Supported by intellectuals who refuse to play by
the roles of the �mainstream,� the idea is to extend a bridge across cultural,
language, geographic and political divides to show and extend the possibilities
of true democracy and human rights in the media.
They say it is better to light a candle than curse the
darkness. After much darkness and much cursing, another kind of candle may well
be lit, one which only the efforts of ordinary people could keep alive.
Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian-American author and editor
of PalestineChronicle.com. His
work has been published in numerous newspapers and journals worldwide. His
latest book is The
Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People�s
Struggle (Pluto Press, London). Read more about him on his website: ramzybaroud.net.
Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor