Archive for
October 7th, 2008
Stories
Arabeyes: Here Comes the One-Eye Veil
From a veil which covers the face but allows women to show their two eyes, an Islamic scholar from Saudi Arabia is now calling for a veil which shows one eye only. Bloggers from the Arab world react.
Writing in Mideast Youth, Bahraini Esra'a notes:
In order to remedy his disturbing temptations, Saudi cleric Muhammad al-Habadan proposes a highly convenient solution for women: one-eyed veil.
She continues:
Great! I’ll start drilling a hole in my bed sheets right away.
But in all seriousness, such disturbing calls only further objectifies women, inviting “religious” clerics to harass and disrespect them in ways that are no longer acceptable.
I have a more fitting proposal for clerics in favor of this bogus call; gouge your eyes out with a tack hammer if you wish to refrain from being seduced. Women should no longer pay the price of your disturbing and sickening mentalities.
From Morocco, Myrtus is fuming, describing the ruling as an ‘Islamically incorrect fatwa.' She also asks:
I wonder how many women would like to poke Sheikh Mohamed's other eye out for his asinine fatwa.
Palestinian Haitham Sabbah describes the one-eye veil as ‘ridiculous.'
He says:
This is just getting out of hand. Ridiculous…
He continues:
Why don’t they enforce full-face cover and kill the issue? What do you call this? Religion and Islam? No Way!
Oh… by the way… anyone knows which eye should be covered? Left of right? (I assumed left because they keep on telling us to do things with our RIGHT thing… Ah… now I’m getting the rule. “Do the Right things with the RIGHT things only.” This is where the Human “Rights” came from and here we see it in action.
Long live “One-Eye Veil.”
Sabbah also posts pictures of how women wearing the one-eyed veil would look like here.
India: Attacks on Christians a challenge to the secular state
In the last two months, radical Hindu nationalist mobs have rioted and attacked Christians in a number of Indian states, claiming that lower-caste Hindus and tribal peoples are being forcibly converted to Christianity. More than 30 people have been killed, and thousands have taken shelter in government camps or in forests. Churches, prayer halls and Christian institutions have been vandalised, and nuns and priests have been attacked and beaten; one nun was stripped naked and gang-raped. It has been described as the most serious violence against the Christian community in India in the last 50 years.
There are approximately 24 million Christians in India, 2.3% of the population, belonging to diverse denominations. Indian Christians include Roman Catholics (approximately 70% of the total Christian community), Protestants, Orthodox Christians, and today, a growing number of evangelicals. Christianity has a long history in India (it is supposed to have been introduced by St Thomas the Apostle), and is visible because of numerous Christian educational institutions, social services, and hospitals. Nevertheless, in recent times it has come to be viewed by hard-line Hindu nationalists as a foreign influence and a threat to the Hindu nature of India.
The recent attacks on Christians began in the eastern state of Orissa, after a Hindu religious leader, Swami Laxamananda Saraswati, was murdered. He was associated with the right-wing Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). Hindu nationalists accused Christians of killing him, even though a Maoist rebel faction (whose members include Christian tribal people) claimed responsibility for his death; they say they killed Saraswati because he was forcing tribal people to convert to Hinduism. Right-wing Hindu groups, such as the VHP, its youth wing, the Bajrang Dal, and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) accuse Christian groups of converting Hindus, particularly from lower castes and tribal groups. It is alleged that Hindu activists in Orissa have tried to intimidate Christians to reconvert to Hinduism.
Blogger Raj in Chennai is disgusted by recent events:
In recent months, there is a new plague spreading like wildfire in different parts of India. This vile disease threatens to destroy the very spirit of India, its soul of tolerance. […] The greatest threat that India faces today is the curse of religious fascism.
First, it was savage violence unleashed on thousands of Christians in Orissa by mobs of disgusting thugs. […] Then the violence spread to other states in India like Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand. All these states have governments run by the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). […] The government in Orissa is a coalition government in which the BJP is the junior partner. The scum […] are emboldened to carry out attacks on Christians in states ruled by the BJP because they believe the administration will be deliberately slow to respond in containing the violence. In some places in Mangalore, the police even beat up Christians who were protesting against the violent attacks with lathis (long wooden batons).
Christian leaders accuse Hindu nationalist groups of engineering the attacks to increase support for the BJP, the main opposition party, in next year’s national elections. The BJP became a major party through pro-Hindu policies and exacerbating communal divisions, and analysts expect anti-Christian violence to increase. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called the violence a ‘national shame', but has not suspended state governments for failing to stop the violence.
The radical Hindu groups accuse Christians of bribing tribal peoples and low-caste Hindus to convert, while Christians argue that if people convert, they do so willingly, and wish to escape the Hindu caste system. Catholics deny attempting to convert Hindus, but evangelical Protestant groups such as the New Life Church are doing so openly, and there are television evangelists who attack other religions and present converts from Hinduism.
Kim, writing at Desicritics, can't believe what is going on:
What the hell is wrong with our country and its people? […] Today morning between 9am and 10am, Bajrang Dal activists attacked and destroyed 4 churches in Mangalore City. Why? Because New Life members distributed pamphlets which said “Do not Worship Hindu Gods”. While I admit that this could be an incendiary statement, does this justify attacking people and churches who do not even agree with the methods used by the New Life preachers?
Then she protests official apathy:
Why are Christians being given the short end of the stick? Religious Christian institutions have a large role to play in education, medicine, caring for the orphans, abandoned, old and dying in India. Christians have been one of the most tolerant minorities in India (imagine what would have happened by now if by chance the Bajrang Dal hooligans had desecrated a mosque this morning) who have contributed immensely to the growth of the country. […] Do they deserve a government that is apathetic to their religious sensibilities being trampled upon? […] Why are these atrocities against Christians being downplayed in the media?
However, there are many bloggers who are unhappy with the privileges they believe Christians receive in India. Pseudo-secularism says:
The church is behaving as if it has a divine right to proselytise. As if it is part and parcel of the special minority rights. […] Do the minorities believe that they are super citizens? […] The Christians are on an offensive. […] This is politics, not religion. The provocation came from evangelists. The blasphemous literature they distributed was reported widely in the press. […] These actions strike at the idea of India and harm the country immensely. […] India is the only country that has always protected the minorities. But the definition of minorities in India is strangely distorted. Here the minorities are better off than Hindus and were the ruling class for centuries.
Sandeep B can see why things have reached this point:
The literature that is being used to propagate Christianity is repulsive: Denigrating Hindu gods and goddesses has become the standard practice of preachers flush with foreign funds. […] The following are excerpts from New Life’s Satya Darshani (View of Truth): “Urvashi — the daughter of Narayan — is a prostitute. Vashishtha is the son of this prostitute. He in turn married his own mother. Such a degraded person is the guru of the Hindu god Ram.” … “It was Brahma himself who kidnapped Sita. Since Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva were themselves the victims of lust, it is a sin to consider them as gods.” […] That said, the proper response to defamatory literature is certainly not violence. But, more fundamentally, the correct question to ask is why indulge in wilful defamation of other religions? […] The gruesome murder of Swami Lakshmanananda Saraswati in Orissa and now the events in Karnataka are but logical consequences, and neither will they be the last unless concrete steps are taken to stop religious conversions.
Catholic writer George Menezes, who controversially was once a member of the BJP, believes that Indian Christians need to come together and create a strategy:
When I was a member of the BJP’s National Executive Council, I found it difficult to convince friends in the RSS and the BJP that no conversions were taking place. […] Disassociating myself from fringe Christian activity did not help. Let it be clearly said that the present violence against us and our institutions and Churches by the VHP and Bajrang Dal is no different from the bombs of terrorists in our cities. Both are expressions of anger, humiliation, discrimination and hurt. Some real, some perceived. It should lead us to wake up to the reality of a changing India. A shared vision, […] political savvy, and fresh strategies and goals to deal with a horrific situation is the need of the hour. We must do this without conceding our rights as citizens of this country.
Blogger kochuthresiamma p.j. in Kerala says that the ‘truth' should be handled carefully:
I got many forwards after the attack on Christians began in Orissa [that] talked about how tolerant and secular Hindu India is, how tolerant India is ‘cos Indian culture is Hindu culture. They pointed out that India has had Muslim Presidents, Christian Defence Ministers, a Muslim on the board of trustees of a Hindu temple, Muslim chief ministers.[…] I agree with every claim and am proud to belong to a model secular state. But I did not forward these forwards as requested. I deleted them instantly.
And then another set of forwards [that] listed the number of Christian Churches destroyed, details of people who lost lives and property in the anti-Christian riots, [and] highlighted how 15 million students of all castes and creeds pass thru Christian educational institutions every year – but the percentage of conversion is nil. […] I agree with every claim and am proud to belong to the Christian community. But I did not forward these forwards as requested. I deleted them instantly.
For I believe that the net should not be used to polarize the nation. […] Speaking the truth but not the whole truth, then interpreting it to inflame passions – that’s mischievous. I do not want to be a party to this virtual propaganda which is doing no good to this beautiful nation that is mine.
Russia: Remembering Anna Politkovskaya
Oct. 7 marks two years since the assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya. No one has been jailed for the crime so far, but three men are expected to go to trial soon for their suspected involvement in the murder.
Below is a selection of today's commemorative posts from the Russophone blogosphere.
LJ user emarinicheva wrote (RUS):
Anna Politkovskaya was killed two years ago. I remember that the day of the funeral was just like today - rainy. Many, many people came to the cemetery. Familiar faces, recognizable. To some extent, it was comforting to be next to them… Why was it so painful? People like Anna stood against trouble, lies and hypocrisy that were coming upon us (and which have eventually prevailed). She didn't fit into the “new world order” in this one country STYLISTICALLY. Now we live just like that, without Anna, without her existence on the earth. It is tough. […]
LJ user viking-nord wrote (RUS):
Two years ago Anna Politkovskaya was murdered. A true Journalist and a real Citizen, a Patriot of Russia.
In general, we have an extremely perverted and, I'd say, a wild notion of what patriotism is. Many people consider it patriotic to beat up a Caucasus native in the street, to bomb Georgia, to show [their] behinds to the USA. No, that's not patriotism, that's husk, which will be causing nothing but shame in our offspring.
What Anna Politkovskaya was doing was patriotic. It is patriotic to tell the truth, to expose the liars among officials, to fight for world peace, to walk alone through a mob of crazed thugs who have small and great power, and, the main thing, not to be scared of them. The bullet was the only thing that they could stop her with. Because she didn't need to make a career, nor did she need the regime's favors, the status of a courtier or a pocket [tamed] journalist, all she needed was just to tell the truth. And it was impossible to ask her to be silent, impossible to bribe or intimidate her.
I didn't agree with her on everything, but I respected her as a Journalist, and as a Patriot. The best thing we can do to honor the memory of Anna Politkovskaya is to win the fight for freedom of speech, for the priority of human rights, for the democratic state. This is the only way to honor the memory of this person.
We remember…
LJ user gengri posted an announcement of a memorial rally to take place at 7 PM in St. Petersburg today - and pointed out (RUS) the reason why the event has not been approved by city officials:
[…] It appears that from 7 to 9 PM some maintenance work will be taking place in the park at Troitskaya Square. The city administration's Committee on the Issues of Legality offered to hold the event not by the [Solovki] Stone, but in the 50th Anniversary of October Park at Prospekt Metallistov. What kind of people are these…
According to LJ user shoorman, the St. Petersburg rally was expected to take place by the Solovki Stone despite the official ban - the blogger cited a local politician (RUS) who had made a media statement about the upcoming rally:
[…] Nevertheless, the memorial for Anna Politkovskaya will take place at the traditional spot - by the Solovki Stone at Troitskaya Square. “Anyone can come up to the stone whenever he or she wishes to. Despite the blatant cynicism present in the actions of the city authorities, we will still come at this time and on this day to the Solovki Stone to honor Anna Politkovskaya's memory. It's not just our right, but it's also our duty to her. And it does not require approval of any committees. Everything will be quiet and peaceful, the way it has to be during minutes of grief,” commented one of the event's organizers, the leader of St. Petersburg branch of Yabloko Party, Maksim Reznik. […]
LJ user tupikin wrote (RUS) about his expectations for the rally on Pushkin Square in Moscow - and for the outcome of the investigation into Politkovskaya's murder:
Today, Oct. 7, 2008, marks two years since the murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was writing articles that made someone in the North Caucasus and (possibly) in Moscow uncomfortable. The investigation should determine exactly who [they were making uncomfortable]. But it is unlikely that it will. Not in this country, not at this time.
If a million people showed up for today's rally in her memory in Moscow, maybe the truth would be told, who knows. Or perhaps two million are needed for that, or three? What kind of rally should gather for the regime in the country to change?
A meeting is actually starting in memory of Politkovskaya in Moscow, at this very moment at Pushkin Square. How many people will take part? I don't think there'll be more than 500. And since it's raining heavily - maybe the total of 300.
Some of those who are late, by the way, will probably still be able to make it there. Maybe I'll make it there, too. We'll see.
LJ user pesnyasolveig wrote (RUS) that this year she did not want to attend the memorial rally in Moscow. Here is why:
I don't know whether I'll go to the rally in memory of Anna Stepanovna [Politkovskaya]. Up until now, I have been attending all the events. But today I don't feel like it. Last time, at the end of August, on [Politkovskaya's] birthday - I was listening to [Garry Kasparov] - and it hurt a lot. It hurt because they've started to trade in memory. They made a show where there shouldn't have been one, it wasn't proper, wasn't human. I just remember. And I want everyone to remember. Today is October 7. The day to remember Anna Politkovskaya. Two years without…
LJ user aleshru, who did attend the Moscow rally, posted (RUS) a photo of smiling Mikhail Kasyanov, ex-member of the opposition coalition “The Other Russia.”
LJ user posmixator posted two pictures (UKR) from a tiny memorial event at Kyiv's Independence Square.
LJ markgrigorian wrote about (RUS) and posted pictures from the RAW in WAR Anna Politkovskaya Awards 2008 event, held at the Frontline Club in London on Oct. 6:
The annual Anna Politkovskaya Awards ceremony has taken place at the Frontline Club in London.
This is the second event of this kind already. This time the award went to the Afghan activist Malalai Joya. A totally amazing woman - fearless and clever. Just think of it, she has been courageous enough to stand up against corruption in Karzai's government and against the Taleban movement.
After that, even though she has become a parliament member, she is receiving threats and is forced to constantly hide, change her location. She has been chased out of parliament.
Malalai is not tall, but full of energy and fearless.
She burst into tears when she received the award, and then delivered a passionate speech against the U.S. and Britain.
[…]
[photo of Joya]
Natasha Estemirova, a journalist from [Chechnya's capital] Grozny, was there, too. She received the award last year. This time, she talked about the events in Ingushetia. Very briefly, but very passionately.
[photo of Estemirova]
It is indeed very difficult in Ingushetia now. Some politicians and experts are equating the situation there with civil war. They are talking about power gap there, chaos, constant murders, blood feud…
Anna Politkovskaya's sister, Yelena Kudimova, was there as well.
[photo of Kudimova]
And, finally, Marianna Katsarova, the organizer and the inspiration behind both the award and the annual meeting, a human rights activist and a feminist. She is the head of the RAW in WAR (Reach All Women in War) organization.
[photo of Katsarova]
It turned out to be a very emotional evening. Kudos to Marianna!
LJ user tapirr posted a selection of links to Russian-language resources on Anna Politkovskaya - including Masha Novikova's documentary about Anna Politkovskaya: “Anna, Seven Years on the Frontline” (in Russian, with English subtitles).
LJ user l-dream posted a Feb. 2006 photo of Politkovskaya and wrote (RUS):
This is what she looked like the last time I saw her.
Japan: Street View and Public Space
The debate about Google's new Street View service in Japan, which sparked criticisms following its launch over a perceived lack of cultural sensitivity, has come back into the spotlight with the recent visit to Tokyo by Google vice president Kent Walker [ja]. At a press conference on September 29th, Walker was bombarded with questions about the service [ja], spending nearly all of the 30 minutes alloted for a question and answer period to answering them.
Responses at the press conference about how to request that images be removed from Street View in particular raised some eyebrows. An ITmedia article [ja] reported that Google Japan director Kōichirō Tsujino [辻野晃一郎] had stated that people who could not check Street View themselves and confirm whether there were problems (i.e. people who do not have Internet access) should contact their regional administration office or consumer center. (Lack of Internet access is common among Japan's older generation, who may have only heard from friends that their home appears in Street View but never actually used the service themselves.)
One blogger who has been investigating Street View in great depth, security researcher Hiromitsu Takagi [ja], found it hard to believe that such a statement could actually have been made. He wrote on September 29th:
これには目が点になった。こんな発言がされたとはにわかに信じ難い。どうしてグーグル社の勝手な写真に対して行政が対応しなければならないのか。
Takagi took the step to call Google Japan directly and find out whether Tsujino had actually made the statement, and what exactly was meant by the “regional administration contact point” [地域の行政窓口] to which people were apparently supposed to go for assistance. According to the person who answered the phone, as recorded in the transcript posted at Takagi's blog [ja], Tsujino had indeed made the statement. When probed further, however, the Google representative was not able to specify in concrete terms where to go (beyond “commercial centers” and “regional administration offices”). ITmedia later appended a note apologizing and claiming that Tsujino had never in fact made the statement in question, leaving some with doubts about what had happened behind the scenes [ja], and the underlying question still left unresolved.
Letter handed over by Google driver. Text version here [ja]. Takagi notes that the letter is not well translated into Japanese.
This debate had only just ended, however, when another started. In a follow-up entry [ja], Takagi reported that someone had contacted him about their experience bumping into a driver of one of the Google cars back when the photographs were originally being taken:
情報提供者によると、集合住宅でグーグルの撮影車が駐車していたため、運転手に「公道私道の区別はついているのか」と問い質したところ、答えずに図1の文書を手渡され、会社に問い合わせるよう言われたのだそうだ。その際、運転手は逃げようとして急発進し、あやうく轢かれそうになったとか。
The letter explains that the Google car is driving along public streets taking photographs of the scene that ordinary people can see from the road, and informs the reader that if they have further questions they can contact Google directly. According to Takagi, this person later called Google twice, first on August 28th and next on September 3rd, to find out if Google had in fact distinguished at all between public and private roads. It was during the second call that the caller got their answer:
情: 法律関係の人間に答えを聞きますという返答を頂いて、それで電話したんですけども、
グ: あー、そうですか、あの、公道私道というのもとくに法律で定められているものではないかと存じますので、とくにその必要もないかと思うんですけども。
情: 法律で定められてますよ。
グ: あはは、そうなんですか。あは。はい。
The apparent lack of distinction between private and public roads seems to line up with the company's position in the U.S., but as in cases elsewhere, it didn't go down well with many who heard about it. Hiroyuki Fujishiro [藤代裕之] at Gatonews, in an entry called “Google, the anti-social corporation“, traced the problem to the attitude of Google as a corporation [ja]:
通常企業の広報は話題になっている案件について情報共有を行い、回答について対策を行っています。この問い合わせは8月末のようですが、Googleは8 月5日の会見でストリートビューのプライバシー問題については問われているので、認識していないはずがありません。にもかかわらずこのような回答をするというのは、カスタマーサポートや広報・法務部、対応した個人の問題ではなく、Googleが企業としての姿勢がそうであるということを示しています。日本での問い合わせにまともに対応する気などないのでしょう。
A blogger at Hatena's AnonymousDiary, on the other hand, came to exactly the opposite conclusion, arguing that Google should not be criticized as a company for breaking the law “somewhat”:
法律守んないとか何とか言ってるけど、じゃあP2Pはどうなんだと。
批判してる人の中には、自動車の速度の上限が制限速度を大幅に超えてるから、winnyで金子氏を逮捕するなら、
自動車メーカーも取り締まれって言ってた人もいるんじゃないかな？
どうして、googleのストリートビューが法律を多少破ってるからって、google事態が批判されないといけないのかな？
Among those who criticize [Street View], there are people who hit speeds in their car well over the speed limit, so if they arrest [Winny developer Isamu] Kaneko for Winny,
then there must be people who would say that the car makers should be arrested as well, no?
Why is it that just because Google Street View violates the law somewhat, Google itself must be criticized?
One of many areas Takagi has investigated. This is a map from Google Street of the area in Yokohama shown in this link.
Yokohama city map of same area above, according to Takagi demonstrating that the Google car trespassed into private land in taking photographs. (Explore the area yourself here.)
Hatena user id:test600 expressed disappointment over Google's attitude after reading in Takagi's blog entry:
こんなん読んじゃうと、Googleっていい加減な会社ぽいなって思っちゃうよね。
応対もあんまりだし。
でもトリートビュー自体は面白いと思うんだよね。
実際に近所とか良く知ってる場所の道路が青くなってると、ちょっと嬉しい。
見切り発進だったかな。Googleさん。
It's hardly even responding.
But actually I think Street View itself is interesting.
I'm kind of glad when I see that neighborhoods or places I know are actually colored in blue.
Overconfident with their launch, I guess. Google-san.
Although Hiromitsu Takagi has written a great deal about Street View in Japan, he is not a lawyer, as some have pointed out. There are lawyers, however, have been reading Takagi's posts. At the Hanamizuki Law Office blog of lawyers Masahiro Kobayashi [小林正啓] and Miyuki Sakurai [櫻井美幸], for example, the following comment was made on earlier cases Takagi has raised about license plates [ja] and camera height [ja]:
もちろん，プライバシーの問題は間違いなくある。グーグルは自動的にぼかされているというが，容貌に限らず人物を特定する画像や，人家の内部がたまたま撮影された場合は，プライバシーの侵害になりうる。ただ，この問題は本質的な問題とはいえないのではないか。高木浩光氏は，「ストリートビューに写った自動車ナンバーは機械判読され得るレベル」であるとか，撮影用のカメラの目線が高すぎて，通常の歩行者には見えない高みからの映像になっているとか主張している。これらの指摘はそれぞれもっともな点を含む。法的に反論しうる点もある。しかし，何となく，この不気味感の本質とは違うような気がするから，高木氏の主張の当否を論じても，ポイントからずれていってしまうような気がする。もし，高木氏が指摘するプライバシー上の問題が全て解決されたとしたなら，この不気味感は解消されるのだろうか？
Another law blog that has discussed the street view debate is KSTK, which has featured a detailed multi-part series (part 1 [ja], part 2 [ja], part 3 [ja]) on different legal aspects of the case. In part two of the series, the following comment is made about the protection of personal information:
私の価値判断からすると，塀に囲まれた（注）個人の住宅・邸宅内部（敷地を含む）の写真は，通常，本人が,自己が欲しない他者にはみだりにこれを開示されたくないと考えることは自然なことであり,そのことへの期待は保護されるべき情報であると思います。特にGSVの場合，ただ画像のみが公開されているのではなく，その住所も併せて公開されていることに留意すべきでしょう。
Note: The blogger emphasizes that this should not be taken to imply that photographing residences without fences is okay, just that the case is clearer when there is a fence or other enclosure.
Finally, in a postscript to an entry about criticism leveled at him, Takagi posted the following remark about his motivations in blogging about Street View, arguing that what he is doing is really the job of journalists:
日記に書いたことは、私が発見したのではありません。2ちゃんねる等に既にたくさん指摘が出ていたことです。表に出てこないから表に出す作業をやっただけです。この種の問題がやっかいなのは、困っている人が声をあげるとその人自身が不利益を被る構造であるため、匿名掲示板でしか不満の声が出ないことです。本来、ジャーナリズムがこれを適切に表に取り上げて、世間に知らしめることですが、日本にジャーナリズムはありません。しかたがないので、覚悟を決めて嫌々私が目白地域の家を訪ねて実態を表に出しました。私道に入っているという件も同じです。本来はジャーナリストの仕事でしょう。私の仕事ではありません。
今必要なのは、グーグルの日本法人が日本向けの適切なローカライズをさぼったことに対する非難と改善交渉です。プライバシーとは何かなどという一般論を議論している場合ではありません。
Update (10/8/2008):
Earlier entries about Street View in Japan:
- Global Voices Online » Japan: Letter to Google about Street View
- Global Voices Online » Japan: Debate over Google Street View continues
- Global Voices Online » Japan: Street View’s Missing Streets
- Global Voices Online » Japan: The true revolution of Google Street View
- Global Voices Online » Japan: Who can you call about Google Street View?
- Global Voices Online » Japan: Google, the anti-social corporation
Thanks to Gen Kanai for the suggestion that led to this entry.
Korea: How the President can have communications with the people.
On the first of October, former President Roh Moo Hyun, who settled down in the countryside after his term and who has been more popular and received more attention from people than during the time of his governance, came to Seoul. In order to mark the first anniversary of the Oct.4, 2007 Inter-Korean Summit Declaration, he had a lecture and commented on the current politics and criticized stiff policies toward North Korea of the current government in public for the first time. Many netizens are still focusing on the former President’s activities.
While his appearance into the public and his political opinions are criticized by current politicians, Internet is used for the other side.
노무현 전 대통령이 어제 10.4 남북선언을 기념하는 식장에서 현정부의 대북정책을 비판한 것을 두고 여야 정치권은 설왕설래 말들이 많은 모양이다. 박희태 한나라당 대표는 ‘노무현 대통령의 말에 지난 5년간 시달린 것으로 충분하다', ‘전직 대통령은 정치 초월적 발언을 해야한다, 현실정치에 뛰어들어 오는 것을 국민들은 싫어한다'며 직접 공세에 나섰고, 이회창 선진당 대표도 ‘노무현 정권은 전형적 친북좌파정권이라며, 그런 대통령하에서 대한민국을 보존했다는 것이 다행'이라며 불편한 심기를 감추지 않았다.
그러고 보니 지난 5년간 노무현 대통령은 그의 직설적이고 독설적 발언으로 인해 꽤나 많은 비난을 받았었다. ‘대통령 답지 못한 발언이다.', ‘대통령이 그렇게 말하면 안된다', ‘대통령이 현안에 대해 직접적으로 관여하면 여지가 없어진다', ‘대통령은….', ‘어떻게 대통령이…' 등등등. 그의 발언을 까는 대부분의 요지는 그의 언행이 ‘대통령 답지 못하다'는 데에 촛점이 가 있었다. 그러다보니, 그의 발언은 그 유효성이나 가치여부에 대한 평가를 받기도 전에 매도당하고 실제 논의의제로 조차 오르지 못한적이 많았다. 워낙 발언 초기부터 말투나 뉘앙스에 트집이 잡혀버린 경우가 많았던 탓이다. 어제 그의 발언에 대한 반응도 지난 시절과 많이 다르지 않다. 박희태 대표가 얘기했듯이 그들은 ‘이제 더이상 노무현식 발언에 시달리기 싫다'고 말하고 있다. 대놓고 ‘노정권은 친북좌파'로 정의해 버렸으니, 어제의 그의 발언에 대한 평가는 이미 물건너 갔다. 그들은 아에 취급을 하지 않으려 하는 것이다. 내놓고 말은 하지 않지만, 반쯤 정신나간 사람으로 치부해버리고 싶을지도 모른다.그러면 그들이 말하는 ‘대통령 다운, 그리고 전직 대통령 다운' 행동과 발언은 어떤것일까? 구체적 잘잘못을 지적하기 보다는 뜨뜻미지근하게 좋은게 좋다는 식으로 두리뭉실 넘어가는 것? 아래 사람들이 그 발언의 진위를 파악하기 위해 진땀을 흘려가며 다들 모여 소설을 써야할 정도로 애매모호한 언급? 자신의 속내는 드러내지 않고 이사람이 와도 허허, 저사람이 와도 허허 하면서 ‘국가의 융성을 위해 정파를 떠나 모두가 협력해야 한다는 부처님 말씀? 뭐 이런식의 발언을 해야만 대통령 답고, 전직 대통령 다운 것인가? 거듭하여 말하거니와 많이 생각하지 않고 많이 공부하지 않고, 역지사지의 경험이 없는 사람들은 자신이 가지고 있는 가치판단의 틀이 만고불변하는 진리인 양 믿고 행동한다. 좋게 보면 굳건한 신념의 소유자이지만 우리는 그런 사람들을 꼴통이라 부른다. 이 땅위에 군림했던 정권들..박정희, 전두환, 노태우, 김영삼이 지배했던 그 시절이 좋았던 사람들이 많이 있다. 그들에겐 그 시절 팽배했던 모든 사회가치는 절대善이요 불변의 진리이다.[…] 그들 주류는 이사회의 여론을 통제한다. 조중동이라는 효과적 무기를 앞장세워서…그렇게 효과적으로 통제된 언론은 그들의 목소리가 마치 이사회의 보편적 상식인 것처럼 부풀려서 확대 재생산한다. ‘대통령 답지 못하다'는 아무런 근거나 부가설명이 필요없는 이 한마디로 ‘노무현'은 쉽게 정의내려져 버렸었다. 그렇게 5년을 시달렸던 그는 ‘민주주의 2.0′을 들고 다시 돌아왔고, 예의 그들은 돌아온 노무현을 ‘전직 대통령 답지 못하다'는 말 한마디로 씹어내리고 있다.
Looking back, the last 5 years President Roh Moo Hyun was criticized due to his direct speeches and his stinging tongue. ‘It was not like a speech as the President,’ ‘The President should speak like that,’ ‘The President should not be directly involved with pending problems because it doesn’t give any room,’ ‘The President….,’ ‘How could the President…’ and so on. The main point to criticize his speaking was ‘He doesn’t behave like the President.’ Therefore, before we judge whether his speaking is effective or worth, it was denounced and some of them were not raised as agendas as a matter of fact. Reactions about his speech yesterday were not so much different from the past. As the representative Park Hui Tae said, they say ‘We don’t want to be afflicted by Roh’s speaking.’ They even designated that ‘Roh party is the pro-North Korea and left-wing.’ Therefore, we even lost a chance to valuate his speech. They are not willing to disregard it. They might treat his speaking as what a psycho blurted out. Then what do attitudes and speaking ‘as the President, as the former President’ mean? Does that mean ambiguous attitudes, such as not checking which is right or wrong? Or speaking not to show what he thinks and accept all opinions like the Buddhist ‘for the wealth of the nation, we should not think about factions and should concern about cooperation’? Is this what they think of attitudes and speaking as the President and the former President? I would like to mention that people who don’t ponder over, don’t study so much, and don’t think about when the shoe is on the other foot behave like their thought is absolute and it is the universe truth. It could be interpreted as a person having a firm belief, but as a dangerous person on the other hand. I know that some people miss the times of Park Jung Hui, Chun Doo Hwan, Roh Tae Woo, and Kim Young Sam. To those people, the main value of society is the absolute truth and virtue.[…] The mainstream control media backing up with Cho-Joong-Dong (three major conservative media-editor). The media that has been controlled effectively for their own sakes expand and re-generate that their voices are common sense. Roh Moo Hyun was judged by such a controlled media as ‘the person who is not like the President.’ He came back with ‘Democracy 2.0’ after being afflicted by the main media for five years and as expected those main media chew him ‘as one who is unworthy of the former President.’
Comparisons between the former President Roh Moo Hyun and the current President Lee Myung Bak in many aspects are easy to find in posts and blogs. Basilica talks about how they communicate with the people.
전 현직 두 대통령의 국민 소통법
전 현직 두 대통령이 미디어를 통한 국민들과의 직접 소통에 나섰다. 국가의 큰 정치 지도자들이 국민들과 직접 소통을 나누겠다는 의지를 보이는 것은 반가운 일이다. 그런데 흥미롭게도 전 현직 두 대통령의 스타일만큼이나 국민 소통법에서도 꽤나 큰 차이가 엿보인다. 노무현 전 대통령이 선택한 미디어는 역시 인터넷이다. 지난 9월 18일 ‘민주주의 2.0’이란 토론 사이트를 오픈했다. 이미 수많은 네티즌들이 이 사이트에 방문해 각종 사회 이슈들에 대한 의견과 토론을 거침없이 쏟아내고 있다. 노무현 전 대통령 본인도 ‘노공이산’(盧公移山)이란 필명으로 직접 게시글과 댓글을 올리며 열심히 활동 중이다. 때로는 네티즌 논객과 한판 논쟁을 펼치기고 하고, 또 때로는 정치권을 향해 쓴 소리를 날려 논란을 불러일으키기도 했다. 흥행성 측면에서 보면 지금까지는 아주 성공적이다. 반면 이명박 대통령은 촛불집회 이후 계속 제기되어 왔던 정부의 대국민 소통 문제를 라디오를 통해 해결하려는 모양이다. 최근 청와대가 월 1~2회, 15분 정도 분량의 라디오 프로그램을 통해 대통령이 직접 현안에 대한 정책 설명을 하겠다는 구상을 발표했다. 1930년대 미국 프랭클린 루즈벨트 대통령이 뉴딜정책에 대한 국민 지지를 호소하기 위해 시도했던 라디오 프로그램 ‘노변담화’(爐邊談話 • Fireside chat)를 모델로 삼았다고 한다.
노무현 전 대통령이 택한 인터넷과 이명박 현 대통령이 택한 라디오는 꽤나 대조적인 미디어이다. 세계적인 미디어 학자 마샬 맥루한은 미디어를 크게 두 가지 유형으로 분류한 바 있다. 메시지의 충실도는 높지만 수용자의 참여도는 낮은 미디어를 ‘핫(Hot) 미디어’, 반대로 메시지의 충실도는 낮지만 수용자의 참여도가 높은 미디어를 ‘쿨(Cool) 미디어’라고 명명했다. 맥루한의 방식을 따른다면 라디오는 핫 미디어, 인터넷은 쿨 미디어에 가깝다. 일방향적 정보제공에 강조점을 둔다면 핫 미디어인 라디오가, 그리고 쌍방향 소통에 초점을 맞춘다면 쿨 미디어인 인터넷이 더 적합한 미디어라 하겠다. […]하지만 이명박 정부는 성공적인 대국민 소통을 위해 어떤 미디어 채널을 선택하는가보다 훨씬 더 중요한 문제가 있음을 알아야 한다. 바로 소통에 대한 올바른 자세이다. 국민들에게 메시지를 전달하려 하기보다는 국민들의 메시지를 먼저 들으려는 자세, 그리고 쓴 소리조차도 기꺼이 달게 들으려는 겸허한 자세 말이다. 이것이 없다면 노변담화 역시 결국엔 부질없는 정책 홍보 이벤트에 그칠 뿐이다.
The former and current Presidents will start having conversations with the people through media. It is a good news that the biggest political leaders are willing to talk with the people. An interesting part is different styles for how they deal with that. Media chosen by the former President Roh Moo Hyun is the Internet. On the 18th of September, he opened a debate Internet website, ‘Democracy 2.0.’ Many netizens already visited the website and pull out opinions and debates about various social issues. Roh Moo Hyun with a penname ‘Roh gong yi san’ also expresses his opinions on the Internet. Sometimes, he has hot debates with netizens and expresses what he thinks about current politics. In terms of a commercial part, it has been very successful. On the other hand, Lee Myung Bak seems to use radio. Since a series of candlelight vigils, the way he takes the people’s opinions has been regarded as a problem. Recently, the Blue House announced that for 15 minutes every one or two times per month the President will explain policies about current issues through a radio program. In the 1930s, the American President Franklin Roosevelt had a radio program, Fireside Chat, in order to appeal supports from the people about the New Deal Policy.
The choices that they had, the Internet and radio are very different media. Marshal Mcroohan, media scholar, distinguished media in two types. The first is ‘hot media,’ which fidelity of messages is good, but users’ participation is low. The second is ‘cool media,’ which fidelity of messages is low, but users’ participation is high. According to his interpretation, radio is hot media and Internet is cool media. If you focus on conveying information, radio is more appropriate. If you concentrate on mutual communications, the Internet is more fit.[…] The important problem is a right attitude about communication. Rather than conveying messages to the people, listening to messages from the people is more important even though they are sometimes harsh comments. Without it, what the current government plans is like a PR event.
Links for Tue, 2008-10
Iman's Constant Cravings, from Palestine, asks: “If animals could speak.. I wonder what they'll have to say about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.”
From Jordan, A Different Perspective takes a walk down memory lane, and describes how she fell in love.
Arabs and Globalisation reports: ‘Just like the Greeks did, when they sued French dairy farms (and won) for using the word “Feta” to describe the cheese they sold, Lebanon is gearing up its own litigation forces to sue Israeli companies over marketing Hummus, Falafel, and Babaghanouj as “Israeli products.”‘
Israellycool reports: “The Jerusalem Post reports on a test drug that could be the answer to preventing Yom Kippur headaches.”
Palestine Free Voice reports about a tunnel collapse outside Rafah.
Mideast Youth will be hosting a Skype teleconference call with American students in a US high school, writes Bahraini Esra'a.
This site is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
Please read our attribution policy.
Preetam Rai1627 posts 
Mario Blanco3 posts 
Tarek Amr61 posts 
Gayle Pescud6 posts 
Rodrigo Peñalba13 posts 
Adil Nurmakov1295 posts 
Tharum Bun36 posts 
Gina Cardenas4 posts 
Judith Townend4 posts 
Hoa Quach8 posts 
Nicholas Laughlin229 posts 
John Kennedy740 posts