Author: Danielle Levy

–The NYT initiated a news blackout about one of their reporter held hostage by the Taliban—A New York Times reporter has just escaped the Taliban after having been held hostage for 7 months. The NYT asked news organizations to not report on the item because they said it would endanger his safety. So for the last few months there has been no word about his kidnapping or his fate. Since his freedom, however, there has been discussions about how much freedom the press is to have, how did dozens of organizations covering news manage to agree, was there really cause for a news blackout, does a news blackout hurt anyone, was it warranted in this case, why was it abided? Of all the questions raised, thus far at least, no one has raised what may be one the most important one, why was a journalist treated differently in the press than any other hostage, any aid worker, UN official, doctor, or citizen being held hostage? Why does the life of a journalist appear more valuable than that of any other hostage? Why wasn’t there equal treatment? Asking the right questions is usually a prerequisite to getting the right answers.

–Thinking about internally displaced people or those who go hungry can help us gain perspective on our own lives—Two U.N. reports are worth noting. The first tells us that one sixth of the world now goes hungry, more than a billion people. The second draws our attention that there were 16 million refugees and 26 million internally displaced people uprooted by conflicts such as those in Pakistan, Sri Lanka or Somalia, a total number which is up from the previous year. In addition the displacements are being protracted and people can’t go home or can’t go back for longer periods of time. When one considers that these numbers translate into people, into families, into individual lives including children, those who are ill or elderly, the impact acquires a dimension of realism. It means people who are homeless, under threat of the elements, the future, political forces, people who undergo a number of deprivations, indignities, humiliations, whose lives are in perpetual danger, who have no access to basic necessities let alone simple pleasures. That realism can in turn be applied to our own lives. It’s not a matter of being Pollyana, nor even an exercise in gratitude. It is a means to put our lives into greater perspective and perhaps arrive at better conclusions about our problems. These people have real hardships. Do we? And if we don’t what does that say about us?

–Violence touches many victims besides the obvious ones, and we ought to include them in our thoughts– Erik von Brunn, the son of the man who shot the guard at the Holocaust museum, said he felt remorse and thought his father ought to have died instead of the 39-yer-old Mr. Johns. His statement also said that he did not share his father’s extremist views which had long burdened his family. Yes, Mr. Johns was the obvious victim, but Erik von Brunn is one also. Will be ever forget that his father killed an innocent man just out of hatred? How will he ever make peace with that?
Earlier today I spoke with a friend mourning the death of a dog her former daughter in law had, out of spite, let out of the house on Pacific Coast Highway because the dog belonged to her former husband with whom she is in a custody battle. “ I thought of the person who ran over the dog,” my friend said, “who probably couldn’t see it coming in front of the car and who will from now on always remember he or she ran over a dog.” It’s easy to put oneself in the place of that person. Accidentally killing a dog running across a highway is something that could happen to any of us. Even if we end up only a victim of circumstances instead of as in this case one of spite, we’re still caught in a web of violence.
There are so many forgotten and overlooked victims in so many crimes, acts of violence and accidents, people who deserve our thoughts and compassion just as much as those who are officially declared victims.

–A comment by an astronomer becomes a catalyst for thinking about looking at our culture–Frank Drake is a 79 year-old astronomer and astrophysicist, founder of the SETI project that looks for extraterrestrial transmissions, someone who approaches his field academically and not prone to some of the notions usually associated with ET seekers. In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel Drake said that daytime television might be aliens’ first taste of life on earth and that he found that scary. Aliens or anyone looking for us in space are likely to first see the soaps because the transmitted signals go into space first before they reach one’s TV set. The idea of those soaps and the notion they would give a scary image of who we are is provocative. We usually think of finding aliens, speculate on who they would be, but give little or no thought to what they might think of us. Extending that further, how often do we think of the image our culture projects? Are we as superficial as the image of daytime soap operas would indicate? Is that a picture of who we want to be? What would be a symbol of our culture? We watch so much reality TV would that be a better or worse image of who we are? And taking this exercise a step further, what is the idea of humanity we ought to cultivate and move towards?