Abuse exposes media hypocrisy
Jonathan Gurwitz:
SAN ANTONIO
<font size=4>
DAYS AFTER THE SEPT. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the major TV networks decided to stop airing images of the planes striking the World Trade Center and of the towers collapsing.
On Sept. 11 itself, a decision was made not to broadcast images of the 200 or so people forced to jump to their deaths.
These images were judged were too disturbing, the American psyche too fragile, and the fear of retribution against innocent Muslim-Americans and calls for revenge against the terrorists' enablers too great for us to see the evidence of that fateful day.
Compare this paternalism with the media's treatment of the
photos of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib. These images have
headlined every major newspaper and led every national
newscast for more than a week, to say nothing of the
international media.
The knowledge that even more graphic images exist has
created a frenzy of journalists swarming to get their
hands on the latest evidence of American perfidy in Iraq.
News executives who suppressed the Sept. 11 images
evidently lack similar concerns about the Arab psyche,
retribution against Americans, or calls for revenge
against U.S. interests.
Pointing out this disparity in no way mitigates the
dastardly acts at Abu Ghraib. The treatment there of Iraqi
prisoners by Americans was despicable. Nothing can excuse
it, and every American leader from the president on down
has condemned it.
Moreover, we expect our society to hold its members to a higher standard of conduct, and we subject them to greater criticism than do societies in the Mideast and the Third World.
Nor is it necessarily an argument against publication of the images seen thus, or of more to come. As Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said last week, in testimony before Congress, reading reports of abuse is one thing; seeing photographs of it sparks outrage.
Acknowledging this disparity does, however, reveal
something about the motivations of those in the media who
practice this double standard. Abu Ghraib is the
realization of an anti-American fantasy, the embodiment
of "the Ugly American" in the post-modern age. Its images
are a montage of every perceived vice of American society,
and every grievance against it. Islamic fundamentalists
see the emancipation of women, homosexuality and sexual
decadence taken to its logical -- American -- end.
Arab and Third World nationalists see evidence of American
imperialism.
Multiculturalists see proof that American society is no
better than the societies that globalization and the
spread of democracy threaten to supplant.
Anti-war activists revel in a digital My Lai -- a final
reckoning of decades-old indictments of the American
military.
<font size=5>
When all the images have been broadcast, when all this
American self-flagellation is complete, perhaps the media
will finally show us the Americans tortured by flames and
forced to leap 100 stories to their death. Perhaps they'll
give us the images of the other incomprehensible crimes
that have occurred in the Mideast in the two weeks since
the Abu Ghraib photos emerged:<font size=4>
Of Tali Hatuel, an Israeli woman eight months pregnant who
was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist, along with her
four daughters, aged 2 to 11.
Of Nuran Halitogullari, a 14-year-old Turkish girl
strangled to death by her father and brother to salvage
their family's honor after she had been raped.
Of the naked body of an American dragged through Jeddah,
Saudi Arabia, behind a car driven by Islamic extremists,
who had killed him.
Of the decapitation of American civilian Nick Berg in Iraq.
Of the 1 million African refugees from Darfur, Sudan,
facing starvation, rape and murder by government troops
and government-supported Arab militias.
Perhaps Abu Ghraib has set a new standard for candor and
societal introspection around the world. Perhaps the media
will report unblinkingly the other, far worse atrocities.
<font size=5>
Perhaps -- but don't count on it.
<font size=3>
Jonathan Gurwitz is a columnist for The San Antonio Express-News. |
