When Jaeah isn't making mockups, researching, or blogging for Mother Jones, she's usually reading about foreign policy, climate change, or new dinner recipes. A lover of mass transit, she can pretty much navigate the New York City subway blindfolded.
Prior to joining Mother Jones, Jaeah worked as a research associate at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, focusing on China. Her writings have appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, Global Post, Huffington Post, Talking Points Memo, and Movements.org.
Liu Xiaobo, an imprisoned activist who was awarded this year's Peace prize for his "long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China," is best known for his participation in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and penning articles discouraging violence as a tool of pro-democracy Chinese dissidents. But according to his critics, he's also a fervent supporter of US-led wars.
Last Wednesday, Hong Kong-based professors Barry Sautman and Yan Hairong published a piece in The Guardian arguing that the Western media and Nobel committee have failed to recognize Liu's support of US war-efforts in Vietnam—and that Liu's imprisonment "was unnecessary," because "If Liu's politics were well-known, most people would not favour him for a prize, because he is a champion of war, not peace." To support this point, they cite a quote (translated below) from Liu's 1996 essay, "Lessons From the Cold War":
The free world led by the US fought almost all regimes that trampled on human rights...The major wars that the US became involved in are all ethically defensible.
Since an English translation of Liu's essay doesn't seem to exist, we read his essay in its original Mandarin, but we were unable to locate the quote Sautman and Yan mentioned. Just to be sure, we had another multilingual friend spot-check us, but he couldn't find it either. Looks like Sautman and Yan broadly misquoted the Nobel prize-winner at best. At worst, they deliberately fabricated his views about US involvement in the Vietnam and Korean Wars. One thing they didn't mention: Liu's essay was less concerned with the West's involvement in the Cold War, and is ultimately more interested in China's human rights failures [PDF], stating:
It was not the Americans that destroyed Communist authoritarianism, but that was caused by the self-destructive forces of this system's anti-human nature.
The publication of an email from Bill Sammon, managing editor of Fox News's Washington bureau, encouraging reporters to broadcast "wildly misleading" claims about climate science reminds me of my other favorite news-spinner: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Subject: friendly reminder: let's not slip back into calling it the "public option"
Please use the term "government-run health insurance" or, when brevity is a concern, "government option," whenever possible.
When it is necessary to use the term "public option" (which is, after all, firmly ensconced in the nation's lexicon), use the qualifier "so-called," as in "the so-called public option."
Here's another way to phrase it: "The public option, which is the government-run plan."
When newsmakers and sources use the term "public option" in our stories, there's not a lot we can do about it, since quotes are of course sacrosanct.
Sammon is not the first nor only person who has sent out such directives (Iran, Burma...) regarding wording of sensitive issues. One re-wording enthusiast of particular notoriety is the CCP, which routinely circulates instructions to the Chinese press, and which, in turn, journalists affectionately call "Directives from the Ministry of Truth."
The international climate change summit in Cancún wraps up tomorrow, and envoys are jostling over draft agreements into the eleventh hour. Cancún has been almost as disappointing as Copenhagen, but this week I came across a number of citizen-organized solutions that offer a glimmer of hope. They aren’t silver bullets. Still, definitely worth noting.
Beyond the blustering on Benghazi and the budget sequester, there are many serious issues facing the nation. Climate change, gun violence, immigration reform, drone warfare, human rights—Mother Jones is dedicated to serious investigative reporting on all of these. But we need your help. We're a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and our work is mostly funded by donations. Please donate 5 or 10 bucks to the Mother Jones Investigative Fund today to turbocharge our reporting and amplify our voice. Thanks!