Archive | May, 2008

Nepal, a harbinger of things to come

Nepalese republic bornCongratulations to the Nepalese nation on their joining the modern democracies voluntarily. Congratulations on declaring themselves a republic, one in which the promise is held for a better and more inclusive way of life.

239 years under absolute monarchist rule came to an end yesterday and Nepal became yet another of the Himalayan countries to eschew monarchist rule to one of the people. Even the last country which prides itself by measuring their success by happiness rather than the more usual product has instigated democratic rule by parliament.

If these are not indications that due to the whole world opening up and for people to realise that windows of opportunities are passing them by as they are beholden to undemocratic and despotic rule, and for those despots also to realise that their days are numbered regardless of the futile machinations they adopt to subjugate their people, the better it will be for everyone concerned and the more peaceful the transition will be.

We in the Gulf – and the larger Arab world too – constitute the last bastion of absolute rule. I predict that within this generation we shall see intrinsic changes to how our countries are governed by the sustained introduction of democratic systems in which the populace will have the ultimate say in how our countries are run. If the current rulers do not make plans themselves to inaugurate that change, I am fairly sure that plans will be made for them to exit the scene of power, instituted not only by their very own people, but by world opinion and pressure too.

It is the cusp of a new era, one with its own dynamic which is unwitnessed in human history. If not handled properly, there will be a lot of chaos which will whittle away our energies needlessly.

It’s time for responsible governance.

Will our people rise to the challenge and grasp at this opportunity, or will we continue to descend into the nothingness we have so far existed in? Or should we just wait for yet another promised saviour who will remove our shackles and lead us to nirvana, while we ourselves make further excuses to condone our continued incarceration.

Congratulations to the people of the Democratic Republic of Nepal. May you live for ever.

The Assassination of Barack Obama

No he’s not. Yet. And I hope that he never falls as a victim of violence of any sort, as I wish the rest of humanity. This is just a hypothetical question as I have heard it repeated over the last few days as it seems people are flabbergasted at the possibility of a black man becoming the most powerful man in the world. Above all of that, is the hint that that person has a relationship to Islam, distant and tenuous I grant you, but a thin familial and cultural connection to the fastest growing religion in the world, or at least, the one that was supposedly responsible to the downing of the twin World Trade towers in New York and and countless other atrocities.

I don’t particularly care for Hilary as I do not have a shred of respect for Bush – both of them – as they both have stumbled into their position, the Bushes that is, yet, they were chosen by their people; hence, I have no qualms at all with that process.

Although I believe that Hilary would actually be better for the Middle East than Barack would – simply because I have a feeling that he would be “more royal than the king” in that he will have to go over-the-top in proving that he is distant from our culture and religion – I am opposed to Hilary taking the mantle because she would create a hereditary relationship so far absent from the United States but much prevalent on our shores. Bush – Clinton – Bush – Clinton will not be a good precedence for the nation which should be emulated for their respect of their citizens and which their enemies fear. Should she actually win the toss, America would become much closer to the ways of our beloved Arab world, and that is not something I look forward to.

So it’s a toss: I am more in favour of Obama than I am for Clinton? The other way around? I must confess that I am not very sure yet. Looking at my own selfish motives; I would have either rather than that foot-in-the-grave-not-committed-to-anything-whiny-voice McCain! But what if I think that all three are bad for the world?

I guess I would vote for Obama if I could. At least he is much more charismatic than Hilary could ever be. And I would not descend to the level of others who suggested that as she couldn’t satisfy her husband, how could she satisfy a nation?

Good luck America whoever you eventually choose. But for goodness’ sake choose wisely, the person you are choosing to lead will lead the whole world and not just your own patch.

Good luck.

Collective punishments

There are a few things that suggest that our society is in a desperate state. The indicators are probably best exemplified by the exclusionary standards our parliamentarians and their electorate take. Both are quick to condemn whole peoples, nations and even civilizations due to isolated incidents without taking one second to reflect on our own shortcomings and our non-exclusive ownership of basic human values.

Some might attribute this collective psyche as a result of the insular lifestyle attributed to island communities, but the irony is that people of these islands until very recently were an awful lot more tolerant and receptive to other cultures than its current breed is.

What happened? Why is it that the more open to the world they get the more insecure they become? What could explain this other than in terms of a severe inferiority complex?

If you talk to Bahrainis fortunate enough to have lived in the 70s and before, they will categorically tell you that they have never experienced anything like this, they will confirm that they didn’t give their neighbour’s race or religion much importance. They will further tell you that they habitually interacted with each other in various ways; they visited, conducted business and even fought the British occupation together by forming and maintaining a cohesive multi-cultural front that crossed confessional divides. The common denominator was their Bahraininess which surpassed every other consideration. They celebrated their differences, rather than diligently work at finding the chinks to exploit in each others’ armor.

The stark contrast between that era and now could not be more evident. What we now have is an acutely insular society with impenetrable walls propped up by suspicion and hatred of the other. This “us and them” atmosphere is condoned by the government – regardless of how many denials we hear from their higher echelons – evidenced by the selective employment policies, the conditional awards of constitutionally guaranteed citizen benefits and the disparity in economic circumstance.

It has unfortunately become our way of life. So much is this in evidence, it is no wonder to witness the parliamentarians’ reactions; whether it be the condoning of the use of chemical weapons against their own society simply because in the current state of affairs demonstrations are mounted by the opposing sect, or their continued theft of their electorate’s personal freedoms or even their demand to expel and ban whole countries’ nationals due to the isolated incidences of the few.

We are all shocked and saddened by the unfortunate and violent recent demise of Mr. Dossary, as we are of Mr. Abbas Alshakhoori and the others who have fallen victims of unusual circumstances, but those incidents, painful as they are, hardly illicit the demand for the application of the collective punishment demanded by a major political society. Identify and punish the criminals by all means and make examples of them by fairly and fully applying the law, but those incidents should never be allowed to colour our psyche to the extent that we allow our own elected representatives to exercise their myopic beliefs without even a smidgeon of objection. And it is even worse when the government itself acts in such an unwarranted and unstudied kneejerk reaction as to impose such a ban on its own recognizance without any regard for its international obligations or even basic diplomacy.

Let us remind them that their role is to ameliorate differences and protect the national unity, and not diligently and wantonly work at exacerbating them. The demand to expel and ban Bangladeshis because of the unfortunate result of a single person’s moment of anger is tantamount to our agreement to the entrenchment and even encoding xenophobia as our main Bahraini trait.

M.Report S01E26 – Friends and an Interview with RSF

The last two days were very fruitful. I have had the privilege of interacting with an excellent group of people whose main concern is to share their views with the world, and expose the wrongs in their societies in order for those to be addressed and corrected. Although I cannot say that the correction has been effected by society and/or governments, but at least they have been brought out in the open and the hope is that they will be tackled, ultimately.

Today’s presentations were a bit more technical in nature where we discussed how to popularise your blog, how to use the available tools and sites to spread your message and how to monetise your efforts.

RSF's Clothilde Le Coz I also took the opportunity to interview Clothilde Le Coz, of RSF’s Internet Freedom Desk who shared her views and explained her role in the organisation. She also provided some insights on how RSF goes about its business.

Now that the formal part of the workshop is over, and the M.Report has been uploaded, it’s time to shower, change and go out to have dinner in the world famous Rick’s Café with some new and old friends. Should be quite fun!

M.Report S01E25 – The Intersection between Citizen Journalism and Traditional Media

This is my contribution to the journalism workshop I am attending at the moment where I was privileged to be on the panel discussing the intersection between the old and new media. On the panel with me were Emmabenji (emmabenji.canalblog.com, tunisia), Mohammed Zainabi (zainabi.com, morocco), Yazid Haddar (psycho.dzblog.com, algeria) and Daoud Kuttab (ammannet.net, jordan – visiting professor at Princeton Uni).

Considering that the basic human activity of communication, has been with us since the first human painted on cave walls, it’s surprising that when it comes to a modern activity of writing on a largely personal online diary, illicits such a need as to pigeon-hole people and their generated thoughts into categories such as “journalism” or any other adjectives.

This – I feel – has been given rise by society and maybe mainstream media in particular, to distinguish themselves as “the” source for news and valid opinion, while any other is simply invalid or at least less worthy of consideration.

History tells us that this is the same reaction when the radio first started its mainstream transmission with the reaction of newsprint, and also when television was first introduced and it received its fare share of ridicule by newsprint, radio and even the theatre!

Maybe by pigeon-holing, mainstream media think they can “wheedle out” the good from the bad, again thinking in that ubiquitous “black and white” methodology, a condescending approach by assuming that they alone can select what is good for us.

But with such a huge platform, it is impossible to apply these methods. Old metrics simply won’t do. What we have now is a huge crowd-sourced material, terabytes of information which is published every single day, and with the way that the fusion of communication methods currently experienced – text, audio, video, animation, and photographs – this trend will only escalate.

Yes, traditional media is supposed to have the safeguards to at least distinguish between fact and opinion, but in today’s connected world this is not so critical.

The point; therefore, is not simple to try to draw a line between a blog and main-stream media to achieve distinction and simple categorisation, but employ critical thinking and other skills to evaluate what is being presented, regardless of source.

What blogs provide is a huge base of crowd sourced information. Sifting through that information and evaluating it is not a small exercise, but categorising it with the old “journalistic standards” will not achieve much. We have to recognise that with this wealth of published information, decision makers have a new tool that they can employ which they never had access to before:

What we have now – thanks to the explosion of blogging – is an ocean of raw data, one if mined properly, could give them an excellent understanding of the feelings and needs of “normal people” – the street – that traditional media with its inbuilt sanitorial control could never give them.

How one uses that facility, it is up to them.