Face Value: what we think we see and hear

We have come to a point in post-modern history where the assumptions of honest, accurate, and truthful media presentations are non-existent. No longer can we wander into the realm of mainstream media and drift ignorantly on the presumptions of accurate face value presentation. With growing vertical and horizontal monopolization and the permeation of corporate conglomerates and multinationals, media reports are continually being marked (and rightly so) with heightened suspicion and skepticism. We, as citizens of a democracy, are finding ourselves incessantly questioning and doubting the information spewed out by the dominant beholders (Yes, I am speaking to you Leonard Asper). Ulterior motives and underlying agendas are becoming customary assumptions that we all necessarily have to be mindful of; it is idealistic propaganda at its best.

Consider two diverse examples as points of clarification and demonstration.

Firstly at the most frivolous and one may say insignificant level, consider the story of Richard Branson and his conflict with British Airways. For those of you who have seen the latest Bond flick, you are most likely aware of the cameo role that Mr. Branson plays. Furthermore, you are likely to known that Richard Branson- billionaire- is the owner of Virgin Airlines (among many other things with the prefix “Virgin”). This is where the conflict takes place. Recently, British Airways, while playing the latest Bond film on one of their national flights, decided to travel into the audacious world of selective presentation. Justified under the title of “conflicting interests”, British Airways airbrushed the scene where Branson has his 15 seconds of fame; they completely removed his presence from the film. Moreover, they blurred out the Virgin Airlines logo that appears on one of the jets. They claimed that they did this with their shareholders in mind; in other words, they didn’t want to piss anyone off. As an anonymous employee of British Airways bluntly put it, “We screen all films before they're used on our aircraft so that we can control the content of what is displayed. We have full control over what is shown."

Wonderful to hear, how reassuring (sarcasm intended); here I am thinking that it was only the Asper family deciding what we see and don’t see in mainstream news media, but movie culture as well; shit, not just movie culture but tampering with Hollywood, as many of their followers would say, “SNAP”.

Importantly, it must be said to validate my point, that I say the above not because of some deep admiration for Virgin Airlines or some underpinning animosity towards the owners of British Airways, I present this case to simply demonstrate the extent of selective presentation and the surreptitiousness by which it is done. In no way were the passengers of the airline notified of this intentional content tweaking nor where their interests ever considered. Come on people we should know by now: stock holders always find themselves at the top of the hierarchy of care.

A further example that clearly displays the fabrication of presentation and hence, need for greater skepticism can be extrapolated from the recent March conflict between Iran and Britain. Throughout this entire confrontation we as ignorant viewers where bombarded with images that we assumed as fact, yet were later conflicted with further images and tales; there was a never-ending cycle of presentation, confliction, and rebuttal.

The standoff began when Iran seized 15 British Royal Navy personnel from what they claimed where “Iranian waters”. Resultantly, they were taken into the custody of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and temporarily detained in Tehran. For the next week, diplomatic efforts were furious. Back and forth, Iranian and British authorities were attempting to resolve the dispute in a non-violent diplomatic way. During this time, we were shown various images of the detained Naval personnel; whether it was a taped confession to their entering of Iranian waters or the seemingly humane and benevolent treatment they were receiving, news media around the world unremittingly presented these clips. At face value, one may have originally interpreted the detainment as simply that, a detainment with no torture or inhumane care. The naval personnel seemed content and even nonchalant about the whole thing. Furthermore, during the release of the naval personnel (or what Ahmadinejad called a “gift” to Britain) we were presented with the iconic images of the soldiers in well-suited garments jovially conversing with Ahmadinejad. At one point he even jokingly claimed to one soldier, “You ended up on a compulsory visit, didn’t you?” A saddened and distraught face was not to be found, the 15 British soldiers seemed as though they were transfixed in an unequivocal admiration for the Iranian President. As expected, it was not soon after that British authorities labeled these displays as pure propaganda; an attempt by Iran to manipulate the minds of all by providing misinformed and falsified images to the major media networks.

Once again, as expected, Britain responded to this claimed manipulation of the conflict (more specifically, the detainment) as their armed forces decided it was their turn to play the role of information beholder. By means of employing a calculative and strategic method, they allowed the 15 British soldiers to tell their stories for the world to hear. Tactically positioned and semantically contrived, the soldiers went on to label their treatment as “interrogative; mistreatment”. Words like “rough handling” and “aggressive questioning” were peppered throughout as the British media seemed to unquestioningly accept what the soldiers had to say (despite its clear contradictory nature). The picture painted by the British soldiers during this conference can be best summarized by the following: interrogative tactics; forced confinement; and consistent mistreatment. Leading to the ultimate question, who are we to believe?

I do not know the answer to the aforementioned question, nor do I believe it is of critical concern. The crux is simply to say that, indicative by the above tales of clear contradiction, taking information or the stories of others at face value can no longer be. It will not suffice for media to play the role of personal tape recorder and simply regurgitate what they have been told (as the British media seemingly did). Skepticism and rigorous investigation must be revived from its place of suppression back into the minds of all. For quite simply, the idea of accurate, truthful, and honest face value presentation is virtually extinct.

"endings" are never truly the end

You lied to me and the evidence is as lucid as ever. Clearer than that imaginary light bulb flashing over one’s head in a moment of brilliance, it is undeniably plain and simple. What, did you think I would never notice? Am I that gullible when perceived through your eyes of indifference and apathy? This is how you got to where you inevitably did, isn’t it? You self-interested, cunning, manipulative prick; do I not have a soul, a heart and conscience worth fostering? Even if I was not worth your minute ounce of mortal considerateness, what about the rest? Did you honestly believe you were going to be able to get it past them as well? I suppose personal justification, no matter how erroneous it is, can alleviate the guilt from the most unemotional and impenetrable soul. And this is the most frightening aspect; the fact that you actually and dare I say, honestly believe that what you have been doing is right. Your choices of personal gain and intolerance are without question seen as logically appropriate and utterly acceptable through your eyes. It is the only deducible conclusion I can draw for a man that continues to walk with a stature of pure confidence and assurance; ignorance in its most self righteous form –no one can put on an exterior wall of fabrication to this proportion, it is not doable.

Fortunately, for every single decent person on this planet, your time is nearly at a close. Life under that ostentatious and cocky smirk is done. No longer will we have to stare into those monotonous squinty eyes of seeming poise that are in actuality, masking your true essence of incompetence, confusion, and ineptitude. Nevertheless, your legacy or should I say, path of terror and destruction will never totally be gone. In my lifetime, its residual effects will continue to be apparent; undoubtedly, thousands of innocent people will continue to die under your name, your cause. And yet, you will sit indifferent to it all. You will remain steadfast in all your previous choices and decisions for as we all have been told (and unrelentingly been shown), confliction, reflection, and true personal honesty are all values that are readily reviled; acts that form a mold of weakness and debility that we do not want to see from those in authoritative roles.

Ultimately, I simply want to know one thing: How do you sleep at night?

The Mother's Day Celebration: Have we got it all wrong?

Arise, then, women of this day! Arise all women who have hearts,whether our baptism be that of water or of fears!

Say firmly: "We will not have great questions decided byirrelevant agencies. Our husbands shall not come to us, reekingwith carnage, for caresses and applause. Our sons shall not betaken from us to unlearn all that we have been able to teachthem of charity, mercy and patience.

We women of one country will be too tender of those of anothercountry to allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs. Fromthe bosom of the devastated earth a voice goes up with our own.It says "Disarm, Disarm! The sword of murder is not the balanceof justice."

Blood does not wipe our dishonor nor violence indicate possession.As men have often forsaken the plow and the anvil at the summonsof war, let women now leave all that may be left of home for agreat and earnest day of counsel. Let them meet first, as women,to bewail and commemorate the dead.

Let them then solemnly take counsel with each other as to themeans whereby the great human family can live in peace, eachbearing after their own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar,but of God.

In the name of womanhood and of humanity, I earnestly ask that ageneral congress of women without limit of nationality may beappointed and held at some place deemed most convenient and atthe earliest period consistent with its objects, to promote thealliance of the different nationalities, the amicable settlementof international questions, the great and general interests of peace.

Julia Ward HoweBoston 1870


The above poem is the work of one Julia Ward Howe, American social activist and poet. She wrote this piece in the year 1870 as a response to her devastating experiences as a mother in the middle of war; specifically, the American Civil War and the Franco-Prussian War. Deeply motivated by the endless plight and destruction apparent throughout these times, Julia Ward Howe was determined to take a stand, unite mothers and women alike, and appose all forms of war while promoting peace. According to most historians and relevant documentation, the above proclamation represents the seeds of the Mother’s Day tradition; the birth of Mother’s united and their movement and call for peace. As you probably well know from you own personal experiences, today’s conceptualization and tradition of the Mother’s Day celebration is a far cry from this early message. Present day, this time is marked by an intrinsic drive to buy mom a bountiful bouquet of flowers (usually on the way back from the golf course or your friends at the local market) or some meaningless yet (conceding) delectable box of chocolates; Julia Ward Howe’s original message is nowhere to be found. Our capitalist inclinations to take the easy way out and buy, buy, buy has resulted in little time being spent reflecting on the important role that mothers play in the broader contexts of society. All of this is occurring notwithstanding the numerous examples of ravaged warfare that are currently reeking havoc and utter destruction on our planet. Accordingly, I encourage you to implement some of the following initiatives in you future Mother’s Day celebrations: show your gratitude and thankfulness that you have the mother that you do; do not simply display this on the second Sunday of every May, express it and convey it everyday of the year; promote and discuss the values and principles that mothers (and for that matter, all women) bring to our world; put them into a broader societal context, outside of your personalized home; consider the plight that war is currently causing and the startling fact that we still withstand it and are complacent with it to this day; (for the mothers) unite together once again, and take a stand against your sons and daughters fighting wars unworthy of the human soul, undeserving of one who holds your own flesh and blood. Let us bring back the true roots of the Mother’s Day tradition and put an end to the capitalization of what once was a day that manifested the meaningful values of social activism and peace.