[TLDR (too long didn’t read): If you are reading this, chances are you care about HR. This Reader is about how the information we are fed makes too many lose critical wisdom and how this media domination affects our getting through calls for human rights action. For a quick overview, just read the bolded text]. Note: You can easily translate the Readers to many languages, Use the app deepl.com and it is done instantaneously. It takes seconds to download the app into your computer or phone and translations are of high quality.

As consumers of information, we are constantly led to lose our compass

The media (especially the social media), by and large, are giving us a spectacular proof of a lack of professionalism: All is event, practically no process. (Roberto Savio)

1. The present state of the Internet has profound implications for the public worldwide — in particular, for identifying credible local news sources; and when communities lose their trusted local news sources, levels of civic participation suffer. Vaguely worded legislation or overly lenient penalties for fake Internet content have proven not to work. Consider the aggravating factor of increasing cases of online news service blocking and hacking of various media websites, as well as illegal monitoring and spying on journalists. (UNESCO)  

2. No newspaper or on-line service is free of biases and mistakes, but some of these make an honest effort to find out the truth whereas others are brainwashing machines. (Yuval Harari) The result is Babel: Babel is a metaphor for what is happening not only to the public opinion,* but also within universities, professional associations and even families. Babel is a metaphor for what some forms of printed and social media have done tonearly all of the groups and institutions most important to our future. (The Atlantic)

*: Do not be fooled: ‘Public opinion’ does not exist. (Pierre Bourdieu). [It is as vague a concept as ‘the international community’].

Are we drowning in information, while starving for wisdom? (E.O. Wilson)

3. The prevailing extreme ideological polarization makes it impossible for counter-current thought to carry the day. It is, for instance, not acceptable to keep quiet when in the media one is exposed to true violence and atrocities, because they are happening far away from us, particularly when the controlled media sensationalize the facts and do not allow dissenting views to air. (Boaventura de Sousa Santos) …Have you watched TV news lately?

4. Be further keenly aware: More data/information on human rights (HR) in itself will not automatically address the structural and historical inequalities that are responsible for HR violations. These data can provide a linear conceptualization for data-driven decision making, but overlook that all policy making is based on particular values, interests and power imbalances –and that while evidence is important for policy making, ‘data’ is only one limited kind of evidence that goes into policy making.

5. Decision-making must be inclusive and rights-based ensuring the participation of those most affected. (Let me ask you: Is virtual participation enough??) There is a worrying conflation between ‘data’, ‘evidence’ and ‘knowledge’ for policymaking in a way that ignores the latter two categories. Instead, diverse forms of data (digital sequence information, statistical census data, big data from the internet of things, etc.) are blurred together without elaborating the risks and governance issues raised by a mechanical use of distinct forms of data. (Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples Mechanism, CSIPM)

So, does human rights-relevant information appeal primarily to those who are already interested? 

6. If yes, how then, can this silo’s boundaries be broken to reach others?: In order to reach a wider audience that can put HR contents to use, at the same time contributing to strengthen common sense around HR, it is necessary to also resort to other communication strategies, i.e., a sort of translation that can convey the fundamentals in an appealing way.

7. Podcasts and audiovisual formats that seek to make connections with everyday life can be produced to bring a cumbersome, technical, and often tedious subject to an inquisitive audience –but without using professional or academic language. The main challenge is to find a way to ‘translate’ technical HR concepts and terms, historical contexts, and even economic theories into colloquial, pleasant and direct language without losing rigor when explaining processes and providing data and information. (I have always hoped these Readers do that, that is, document and provide a critical voice against global injustices).

8. In short: Beyond content, format is key to reach other audiences and to replicate easily in progressive social networks. (Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky et al, Open Global Rights).

9. Furthermore, ponder this reflection: There is an increasing tendency to disregard, sideline and silence those voices and analyses that do not support what I consider to be a non-sensical, yet by now hegemonic, narrative of the 21st century. Markets have been deregulated and reregulated in the interests of big, including financial, corporations. So, in this environment, the media ought to be urgently printing and posting broader analyses of the political determinants of the situation we are in, HR included. Why critical voices in the sustainable development arena have not attacked and prevented this hegemonic discourse is for me a puzzle. Standing in the way of progress in HR is the lack of transparency and overly close relationships of our public institutions and important personalities with transnational corporations, venture philanthropies, and the World Economic Forum. These relationships need to be exposed. Neoliberal restructuring of the media-scene, including ownership of media by billionaires or heads of states, stands in the way of critical reporting by reputable media. Moreover, many people are today primarily reading whatever news are selected by their mobile-phones instead of paying for, or subscribing to, reliable print or e-media. (However, I remain alarmed to learn that important media outlets such as the New York Times, the BBC, the Guardian, as well as the German weeklyDie Zeit have been accepting funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation**). (Judith Richter)

**: Gates should probably be one of the most investigated people on earth –not the most quoted, interviewed and admired. (Tim Schwab)].

Bottom line

10. We live in times of total media domination. Any good news, no matter how insignificant, has worrisome little chance to become news. (Oleg Yasinsky) …wither good HR news.

Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City

Your comments are welcome at schuftan@gmail.com

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *