Text – Page 21 – Citizen Reporter

Military Coverup of Female Deaths

Photo by US Army Korea - IMCOM on flickr

A growing number of women have, according to the military, died in non-combat situations. When grieving families ask for information about how their loved one died, they are frequently met with little detail, vague stories, and often kept from knowing what happened all together.

Investigative journalist John Lasker has looked into case after case of female military personel who have died non-combat deaths over the past few years. With each story he finds mounting evidence that there something more going on among the ranks of women in the US armed forces.

You can read his full article and help support his ongoing research on spot.us. On tomorrow’s edition on citizenreporter.org, John Lasker will be my guest and we will discuss the cases and his research into the larger issue of sexual violence against women in the military.

45 to 60 Days

The world is fixated on Egypt for the last 7 days and for good reason. However elsewhere in the world things are also changing in different ways and it is important that good journalists and critical minds don’t all converge in one place.

Just over two weeks ago much of the attention in the international press was focused on Tunisia, again, understandable considering the powerful and historically breathtaking images from the streets of Tunis. The departure of the president/dictator was a great victory for anyone who favors an open and democratic Tunisia. The event is hailed as the inspiration of Egypt and possibly a growing list of nations where iron fisted rulers are suddenly scared of what fate may await them.

You’ve heard about these things, but what of Tunisia since January 11? An acting President and a whole new slate of ministers, including a political party and cabinet member that had been banned and jailed under the tyrannical rule of Ben Ali. According to the constitution, in 45 to 60 days from the moment the acting president steps in, an election must be held. At this point no date has been set, but that doesn’t deter the questions of who will run, what parties will come forward, how will they work together in an eventual government, and what will be their program. I‘ve heard analysts say left of center, or islamic left, but I still wonder how it will all play out.

In the meantime there is word of many new freedoms, especially when it comes to the press. This is of course a great and essential development, but it is important in such a critical aftermath of a revolution, when the world’s short attention span has moved on, that critical and concerned observers not sit back and assume all will be well. Part of what ensures this process really takes place and has long lasting value, is that we keep asking questions, and keep up the pressure.

Complex Answers

Berlin, 2010 “You want it to be one way…” as the character Marlo Stanfield once put it. When we look out at the world or when we look to our various sources of information about what is happening to ourselves and to others, we seek explanations. Explanations into how and why, into who wronged who, and to what is a solution if there is a solution. Some like the long detailed explanations, while more seem to want summaries, short versions, and just the latest info. Often times, the more complex an issue is, the harder it is for us to grasp, and the lower the desire to take the time and energy to understand it.

From there come the simple labels, the us versus them, the quest to find who to blame, and the practice visualizing what side we want to be on. Liberals and conservatives; pro-life and anti-abortion; pro-war and anti-war; socialist and capitalist; hippy and yuppy; the list is far longer and spans the globe. Rare is the individual who can resist finding themselves in such a group, even more rare is one who can avoid being placed in such a group by others.

Why does this happen? The quest to simplify it all perhaps. The need to take a complicated issue and break it into basic parts in order to decide what we believe is to be done about it. This simplification is sometimes done after extensive or ongoing research, and sometimes it is done based on un-empirical influences. Whatever side you take, whatever facts you choose to use, in the end you can look at a conflict and say “this is where I am on this.” From there you can either sleep soundly, or spend your waking hours fighting like hell to communicate and bring to fruition the resolution you wish to see.

I thought of this phenomenon alot while I was in Afghanistan. But I think of it anytime I visit the US or even right here in the Netherlands as I watch socio-political debates on TV. Some Afghans will tell you they don’t want any foreign military in their country, but if you keep talking to them they will tell you they do want foreign military assistance. Some Americans who have read through the proposed new healthcare plan will tell you they don’t want this plan but they do want a universal healthcare plan. An experienced Dutch journalist working in Afghanistan can tell you she is in favor of the Dutch sending people to help with keeping and improving peace in Afghanistan but she will also tell you she’s not in favor of just any kind of Dutch involvement.

Yet it is more common, or perhaps just more visible in today’s massive public sphere, for people to tell you it is one way or the other in any of the situations listed above. Take most any conflict in any country these days, you’ll find a loud group of people saying it is one way, and a loud group of people saying it is the other. Anyone who points out the complexity and tries to explain it is somehow considered not as legitimate, perhaps because they’re often not waving a banner in front of governments or standing in front of a camera on prime time television.

One of the great dangers of our time, as I have seen in my short life and extensive travels, is this push to simplify everything so that it all fits in a box or a category and we don’t have to learn and appreciate the complexity of what is happening around us.

New Day in Tunisia

Photo from Tunis via AFP Friends around the world have been writing to me, urging me to cover the issue of the demonstrations and now revolution in Tunisia for some weeks now. I’ve responded that I’m watching it all unfold like everyone else; in mainstream media, on twitter, on activist blogs in and around the country. But as for covering it myself, I didn’t have anything new or helpful to add at the time. Maybe now that the amazing has happened.. I will be able to look into these extraordinary events in more detail, by talking to individuals who have been instrumental in making it happen.

For now, I leave it to Global Voices and their great correspondants around the world, to explain the new day that has come in Tunisia. Today’s headline from one blogger: Tunisia: Celebrations Welcome the End of Ben Ali’s Rule. (follow the link for details)

One more dictator down, a victory for the people of Tunisia and the world.

Your Personal Mayor

When looking critically at changes in democracy and politics around the world, much has been said about the personalization of politics. In many countries, where politics may have once been about the policies of a party and choosing between those parties at the ballot box, today it is increasingly all about the individual candidate.

Political posters feature huge images of the face of a candidate, either smiling or looking confident. Somewhere in smaller print is the party logo, in case you’re wondering about that. In many municipalities in the US, where one party automatically dominates, it is all about the individual candidates. But even on the highest levels, president, prime minister, these days we pay close attention to the policies, values, and personality of the individual, more so then the party. This has been referred to as the personalization of politics.

Yet right now there is another type of personal politics that has become a major force in many democracies thanks to the internet. It is the type of political relationship where the candidate or election official reacts and behaves based on your wishes. Bill Clinton’s staff used to do phone surveys after his speeches and TV appearances, to get a feel for what works and doesn’t work for potential voters. Adam Curtis laid out these and other activities in his fantastic documentary “The Century of the Self,” where he looks at how candidates would make changes to their policies and actions, based on what individuals wanted.

This might all sound well and good, people getting what they wish; a direct democracy perhaps? If we look at the phenomenon of Mayors who make use of twitter on a regular basis to communicate with the public, we find what is very much another example of this personalized representation. Many, including myself, have celebrated this development, as citizens are actively hearing about their election official’s daily activities, and providing real time feedback.

One of the greatest examples I follow has been my friend, Newark Mayor Cory Booker. Now in his second term as Mayor, much has been documented about how this young Mayor takes a different approach to politics and leading a city. Where some make speeches with their sleeves rolled up to look busy, Cory picks up the shovel during snow storms, pulls over drivers who litter, patrols the streets with citizens at night, and turns up more neighborhood parties than anyone in history.

It should be no surprise based on this description, that Mayor Booker is an avid twitter person. Tweeting a mix of inspiring quotes, personal observations, thank you’s, and daily city hall acitivies, he is not only widely followed but he also does a lot of following as well. I should know, I’m one of those he follows. As someone who keeps an eye on twitter and has the good nature to listen when citizens have a problem or concern, Cory receives many public twitter messages asking for help with issues in Newark. From large to small problems, citizens tweet their Mayor about streetlights being out, meetings being held, abandoned lots that get filled with garbage, and most of all at this time of year – snow not being shoveled on their streets. Unlike his counterpart Mayor Bloomberg of (admittedly much larger) New York City, Cory does not simply post a phone number and tell his followers to use it, almost 100% of the time he responds with a “sending a crew over now” or “we’re on our way.” Sure enough some hours later, you will be able to find a followup tweet from a citizen saying thank you or great job Mr. Mayor. Occasionally it will be a followup complaint if the street in question isn’t clean yet, to which he still takes the consideration to tweet a very polite “be patient, we will get to you.”

Once again many observers will say – Fantastic! A modern Mayor using modern means to cut out the middleman and communicate openly with the public. Indeed I never miss a chance to tell people about the good deeds the Mayor of the city of my birth does using twitter.

Yet as more snow falls, as more problems appear for the city of Newark (or any city for that matter), and more people join twitter to tell the Mayor something directly, the more it becomes a legitimate question if this is really as fantastic as it first seemed. The individual might rejoice because their complaint or demand has been addressed almost immediately, but taken together, is the energy spent satisfying the individual well spent, among all the tasks the elected official must perform. Beyond that, how can the Mayor be sure that these issues tweeted to him are as deserving of his attention as say, some other city hall business? At some point even Mayor Booker himself tells people with demands to “be patient”.

Naturally the work of the Mayor is more often in city hall and not on twitter, the responsibilities people entrusted him with by electing him to the office. Much of that work, as long has been true, occurs in the offline world, and sometimes unavoidably, out of the site of the general public. Citizens of course see and live the results of the Mayor’s work over time, which always results in approval, disapproval, or something in between.

The main question here is: Does this style of leadership, elected leadership directly active on twitter, signal something positive in the long run? Is it a breakthru in the practice of addressing the needs and concerns of citizens? Or at some point will it just be the individual speaking only for an immediate and personal problem, at the expense of the greater good.

Postscript: Mayor Booker became the focus of this post which I actually wanted to be about the bigger picture of politics and twitter. I know for a fact he does tons more offline and online to hear from citizens directly and man oh man do I admire him for that.

Roadrunner in Each of Us

It must have been spring of 2007 when I saw the incoming chat on my skype window: Dilip saying hello. A quick call – he’s in the US traveling around. Somewhere near New Orleans if memory serves. He asks me about my own travels and we disconnect pretty soon thereafter. The details of his adventures I would happily follow on his blog as I had since we first met online for a podcast interview some years before.

Photo by Dilip Dilip’s blog first caught my attention for both its style and its subject matter. Reading his words I recognized the thoughts of someone who could look critically and creatively at his own home country of India. He would also use this way of comparing specific regions or stretches of road in India, to places he had seen himself or heard about from traveling friends. Even beyond the critical analysis and the historical references, these were the words of a born traveler.

Over the course of 2010 I traveled with his book in my backpack. Through Siberia and Mongolia, hanging out in Vienna or Lisbon, on those sleepless nights in Tokyo, and when Kabul would go almost completely dark, I would slowly read and re-read chapters from Roadrunner.

I say slowly because having been raised on computers and the internet, I take forever to consume a book. But I say read and re-read because each chapter in Roadrunner is itself a story. One that I might tell a friend over dinner, or try to re-create on my next trip back to the US.

Roadrunner, by Dilip D'Souza Just like the writing style that I’ve long enjoyed on his blog, in his book Dilip combines stories from traveling in the US with stories from India. Two lands that on the surface are often said to be very different, but looking at it through his eyes, there is no shortage of similarities. And just as one can point out the social-political problems in India and the US, Dilip also constantly describes beauty that both places share.

Being that my own specialty and passion revolves around human stories, Roadrunner had my undivided attention with each unique individual Dilip would run into as he rambled into yet another forgotten American town. Good and bad experiences alike, his words taught me new things about the very country I was born and raised in, while also showing me things about a land I greatly admire and wish to visit one day soon – India.

When all is said and done, in Roadrunner, the never idle traveler in me immediately recognized the wandering words of another fellow traveler; tired, full of stories, and already thinking about the next adventure.