ramblings~

Yijin + girls! '05

Xiz, Ms Wang + guys! '04
* 03S78
* hwachong junior college
* candice
* lifang
* yang
* xiaoxuan
* hilda
* quanyao
* xizhen
* sharon
* huiqi
* meiyin
* yijin
* yifan
* pear
* nwxiang
* weixin
* samuel
* ningqi
* pua
* yilin
* eliza
* wijaya
* ronnie
* weilei
* bong
* ryan shea
* wuwei
* r~linz
* hwachong!
* IVLE :)
* 30th Anniversary!
* HJC Council! :)
* our funky yahoogroups! :)
* winning thinkquest entry - i-Matrix
* blogger
* blogskins
* junior class!
* grandjuniors!
* 06s78
* 07s78
* 08s78
* dearly beloved ms wang!
* 03S77
* 03S75
* 03S71
* 03S7A
* 03A11
* 03A12
* 03S62
* 03S69
* 04S68
* 04S62
|
responding in an appropriate way
hello! just got back from aachen fr a CNY celebration with steamboat & movie-watching til 5:30am! haha :) was a gd gathering as usual yay :)
anyway, regarding this topic that ryan blogged abt, i've read abt it in the papers too. singaporeans are pretty used to sensitivity displayed by the media wrt race, religion esp, and it was for me quite shocking to read abt this. i also have an opinion abt this, but before that, let me maybe raise some food for thought..
1. anyone wondered what was the point of this caricature? according to my tchr (sorry didnt read this myself, so i really hope this is accurate), the danish caricaturist was commissioned to draw sth to the theme of - terrorists are using (or mis-using, or abusing) religion to further their aims. apparently this guy found no better way of expressing this.
2. the caricature came with an article abt the theme mentioned above. caricaturists probably don't sit ard at home and wait for some inspiration to fall fr the sky, and neither do they appear alone without an accompanying write up (which is the main point anyway)
3. freedom of expression & the press is a big deal to the west. they see it acceptable to voice their views - thru biased articles, suggestive cartoons - apparent from the fact that many papers are known for their slants (political especially) and nth is wrong with that.
the main problem i find is, that some parts of the media here are not aware of
1. differences in culture, society and a whole load of stuff btwn the west and other cultures. as a result, they do not know that what they find acceptable may be an insult to others. also, that every society places different values on things like freedom of the press, religious freedom, and respect for religious figures.
2. the self-regulating mechanism that's sposed to be present in media. alot of things are not against the law, but pple still don't do them because it causes hurt to others or it provokes an unwanted reaction.
what i thought would have been a suitable reaction by the western press is to explain to the islamic world that hey - look at the original point, it was not meant to be an insult, instead we're trying to illustrate a point, and please don't get all worked up and think that all europeans have this warped opinion that muslims = terrorists. and perhaps they could have also clarified that they just basically hold different values dear.. and of cos, perhaps the islamic world cud react in a less outraged manner, and try to use a more peaceful way to put across their points instead? and this way, the west can actually learn fr their mistake instead. yeah, i still think it was a mistake by the west, and i even felt hurt when i first read stuff abt this incident. but really, reacting in a violent manner doesnt serve the purpose, i think.
any other opinions?
xiz lived on 12:38 AM
- 03S78 forever -
<$BlogCommentDeleteIcon$>
|