Having viewed other 'professional' blogs, I find Baghdad Burning to be one of the more impressive. The author of Baghdad Burning writes with exceptional English, in terms of both range of vocabulary used, and also the accuracy of her spelling and punctuation. From a less analytical point of view, she also writes very passionately. When reading her entries, you get a sense of what she's going through, and a slight insight into what life for her is like.
Compared to Where is Raed?, you find a regular document of her opinions and thoughts on daily life in Iraq. Salem Pax provides this to an extent with his entries for Where is Raed?, but whilst he includes in detail his experiences, it is harder to determine his opinion.
I can't help but question the validity/reliability of Baghdad Burning though. A post which exemplifies this perfectly, is 'Sunday, December 31, 2006: A lynching...'. In this post, the author comments, and casts her opinion on, the hanging of Saddam Hussein. The opinion I find fascinating to read. Writing from a western perspective, primarily, I do not understand the traditions and religious emphasis which thankfully is elaborated on and explained by the author. Secondly, living in the west, I have no comprehension for what these people have been through, so to read her reflections on both the past and the present with reference to the history and the religious undertone is enlightening.
However, my question regarding the reliability of Baghdad Burning comes through her criticism of the western media's coverage of Saddam's hanging. She claims that both CNN and the BBC are misrepresenting the actual events. I think her statements are intriguing, and well worth looking into as they could in fact be the actual accounts, but I cannot help but doubt her as well. I think this is a problem with almost all personal blogs though. Whilst you can build a sense of trust with the reader through your posts, I think it may be impossible to be fully trusted. That said, I don't trust all 'reputable' media sources either...
It is said that to meet their deadlines, the western media reporters had to file their stories before the hanging had even taken place. How can I trust one source over the other. One has a reputation behind it, but one was actually written AFTER the event had taken place. Granted, the western media then followed up with more reports, but in the rush to break a story in time, maybe the truth is lost. What trust can you place in that?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Good thoughtful post - it might have worked better if you'd actually linked to the post you look at in detail. You could also have pursued your point in detail by looking at the CNN story that Riverbend criticizes...
With stories like this, you need to be precise I think. Riverbend is highly critical of the way the Iraqi government tried to spin the execution. Clearly, the western media were initially spun, but the moble phone footage released onto the net undermined that spin...
But you raise some really key issues here re trust and the truth - I don't think there are easy answers but it's good to keep the issues in mind, and maintain a critical/sceptical viewpoint, whatever you read online.
Post a Comment