October 2, 2007
Iranian leader deserved U.S. media scrutiny
If I may beg to differ with my colleague Karen Adams (“On the Issue” Sept. 27), American media don’t need to treat Mahmoud Ahmedinejad or anyone else “with diplomatic respect.” The news media in their opinion pages and electronic equivalents are free to express their disrespect or disgust – or their admiration – for him as emphatically as their wordsmiths can muster. It’s not the job of opinion writers to smooth ruffled feathers. For those reporting the news, respect can denote a kid-gloves sort of censorship, especially when you’re talking about political speech. It’s not a factor that journalists take into account in seeking to be fair and accurate in such circumstances.
As for Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, I thought his defense of free speech in an academic setting was brilliant. However, his attack on Ahmedinejad on matters beyond Iran’s mistreatment of scholars allowed the Iranian president to act the victim. I think the problem is that Bollinger was wearing two hats. As the host of a man with a divisive viewpoint, to say the least, he should have let the visitor’s words and actions speak for themselves, and not put his thumb on the scales in his introductory remarks. As a scholar in the Western liberal tradition, repulsed by Ahmedinejad’s stated position on the Holocaust and other hot-button issues, he had every right to face the man down. By conflating those roles, he confused a lot of people. I agree with Karen that in the short run, at least, Bollinger’s attack may have given Ahmedinejad a PR boost. But in the long run, I think we’ll be glad someone had the guts to publicly challenge some deeply disturbing notions and actions – with speech, not with bombs.
Clem Work
School of Journalism
This story has been viewed 118 times.
Comments
There are no comments for this story yet.
