"World Opinion" Is Worthless (Its A Statement Of Media Moral Cowardice Alert)

Townhall.com ^ | 08/01/06 | Dennis Prager

[goldstategop]

If you are ever morally confused about a major world issue, here is a rule that is almost never violated: Whenever you hear that "world opinion" holds a view, assume it is morally wrong.

And here is a related rule if your religious or national or ethnic group ever suffers horrific persecution: "World opinion" will never do a thing for you. Never.

Supporters of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah Movement hold a poster of Abbas during a rally in support of his call for a referendum in the main square of the West Bank town of Ramallah, Monday, June 5, 2006. Just hours before a deadline, Abbas on Monday said he will not back down from an ultimatum to the Islamic Hamas group to accept a plan implicitly recognizing Israel. Abbas has given Hamas until Tuesday to accept the proposal, which calls for a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Accepting the proposal would require Hamas, which is sworn to Israel's destruction, to implicitly recognize the existence of the Jewish state. (AP Photo/Kevin Frayer) "World opinion" has little or nothing to say about the world's greatest evils and regularly condemns those who fight evil.

The history of "world opinion" regarding the greatest mass murders and cruelties on the planet is one of relentless apathy.

Ask the 1.5 million Armenians massacred by the Ottoman Turks;

or the 6 million Ukrainians slaughtered by Stalin;

or the tens of millions of other Soviet citizens killed by Stalin's Soviet Union;

or the 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis and their helpers throughout Europe;

or the 60 million Chinese butchered by Mao;

or the 2 million Cambodians murdered by Pol Pot;

or the millions killed and enslaved in Sudan;

or the Tutsis murdered in Rwanda's genocide;

or the millions starved to death and enslaved in North Korea;

or the million Tibetans killed by the Chinese;

or the million-plus Afghans put to death by Brezhnev's Soviet Union.

Ask any of these poor souls, or the hundreds of millions of others slaughtered, tortured, raped and enslaved in the last 100 years, if "world opinion" did anything for them.

On the other hand, we learn that "world opinion" is quite exercised over Israel's unintentional killing of a few hundred Lebanese civilians behind whom hides Hezbollah -- a terror group that intentionally sends missiles at Israeli cities and whose announced goals are the annihilation of Israel and the Islamicization of Lebanon. And, of course, "world opinion" was just livid at American abuses of some Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. In fact, "world opinion" is constantly upset with America and Israel, two of the most decent countries on earth, yet silent about the world's cruelest countries.

Why is this?

Here are four reasons:

First, television news.

It is difficult to overstate the damage done to the world by television news. Even when not driven by political bias -- an exceedingly rare occurrence globally -- television news presents a thoroughly distorted picture of the world. Because it is almost entirely dependent upon pictures, TV news is only capable of showing human suffering in, or caused by, free countries. So even if the BBC or CNN were interested in showing the suffering of millions of Sudanese blacks or North Koreans -- and they are not interested in so doing -- they cannot do it because reporters cannot visit Sudan or North Korea and video freely. Likewise, China's decimation and annexation of Tibet, one of the world's oldest ongoing civilizations, never made it to television.

Second, "world opinion" is shaped by the same lack of courage that shapes most individual human beings' behavior. This is another aspect of the problem of the distorted way news is presented. It takes courage to report the evil of evil regimes; it takes no courage to report on the flaws of decent societies. Reporters who went into Afghanistan without the Soviet Union's permission were killed. Reporters would risk their lives to get critical stories out of Tibet, North Korea and other areas where vicious regimes rule. But to report on America's bad deeds in Iraq (not to mention at home) or Israel's is relatively effortless, and you surely won't get killed. Indeed, you may well win a Pulitzer Prize.

Third, "world opinion" bends toward power. To cite the Israel example, "world opinion" far more fears alienating the largest producers of oil and 1 billion Muslims than it fears alienating tiny Israel and the world's 13 million Jews. And not only because of oil and numbers. When you offend Muslims, you risk getting a fatwa, having your editorial offices burned down or receiving death threats. Jews don't burn down their critics' offices, issue fatwas or send death threats, let alone act on such threats.

Fourth, those who don't fight evil condemn those who do. "World opinion" doesn't confront real evils, but it has a particular animus toward those who do -- most notably today America and Israel.

The moment one recognizes "world opinion" for what it is -- a statement of moral cowardice, one is longer enthralled by the term. That "world opinion" at this moment allegedly loathes America and Israel is a badge of honor to be worn proudly by those countries. It is when "world opinion" and its news media start liking you that you should wonder if you've lost your way.

[goldstategop]

As Dennis Prager points out, "world opinion" is really a statement of media moral cowardice. When you consider the two most hated countries on the planet are America and Israel, they should give up trying to win the PR war. They can't because the deck is stacked against them and "world opinion" is worthless. The only good it does is to provide further demonstration its always wrong. I'd begin worrying the moment the media started liking America and Israel and by extension, conservatives.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[dfwgator]

Yes, "World Opinion" in 1938 said is was ok to sell out Czechoslovakia to Hitler at Munich. Pardon my French, but World Opinion sucks.

[TeenagedConservative]

The only conservative who truly seems to be saying, (as should be said) "f" the world, is Mark Levin.

America and Israel and the only two countries on the face of this planet whose opinion matters a frog's hair. Well, occasionally Australia, but they're kind of the quiet kid on the block. =)

[onedoug]

DP (almost always) bump!

[dfwgator]

America and Israel and the only two countries on the face of this planet whose opinion matters a frog's hair. Well, occasionally Australia, but they're kind of the quiet kid on the block. =)

Britain deserves a voice too. Basically if it wasn't for the Anglosphere, we would be in another dark age.

[singfreedom]

Whoa, this is one FABULOUS article. Too bad none of the MSM slugs have the "moral courage" to mention it.....

The author has very concisely, and accurately, pegged "media" and its shortcomings.

Thanks for posting! I may be emailing this to FOX, even though it applies less to them than so many others. They are, probably, the only media outlet that might even mention it.

[mrsmel]

"World opinion" is generally moral blackmail,and those who are fighting for decency will be able to fight better once they loosen the chains of "world opinion". Let the "world"(most of whose opinion matters less than nothing) go circle jerk.

[Jameison]

"World Opinion" will stand by and let you get slaughtered by Islamofscists and genocidal dictators every time.
Israel had better remember the holocaust and finish the job of destroying Hizbullah as an effective fighting force. Screw "owrld opinion", the BBC, the EU and the rest of the craven Jew-hating vermin.

[SE Mom]

What an excellent piece- thanks for posting -Prager hit the mark with this one.

[.cnI redruM]

There is no pardoning the French. Particularly not in this instance. If I were the Muslims, I'd riot in the streets of Paris more frequently. It seems to improve their ability to generate concessions from the French Government.

[unionblue83]

"World opinion" and its value can be summed up in the fact that John Kerry constantly touted it during his campaign. 'Nuff said.

[DCPatriot]

Should be required reading for everyone....with a pop quiz afterward!

[prairiebreeze]

"World opinion" and its value can be summed up in the fact that John Kerry constantly touted it during his campaign.

And John Kerry is a moral coward. Good point.

[unionblue83]

Like the tagline. I get so sick of hearing the moronic left talk about "world opinion" and negotiations and diplomatic blah-blah-blah. Hizbollah needs human shields and I volunteer the American Left to go serve their country in this capacity!

[wita]

...and media news, which is not at all about facts, because the media has no way, generally, of knowing the facts, only what is fed them by those who actually know the facts, and the real facts may or may not fit in with the agenda of those controlling the "facts". Get it?

[Radix]

Most of us Americans and/or our forebears left every other corner of the planet precisely because world opinion and societal systems suck almost everywhere else.

[g'nad]

Liberalism and secular humanism, which is the dominant influences in "world"opinion are bastions of the moral and intellectual feeble...

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

television news presents a thoroughly distorted picture of the world. Because it is almost entirely dependent upon pictures, TV news is only capable of showing human suffering in, or caused by, free countries. So even if the BBC or CNN were interested in showing the suffering of millions of Sudanese blacks or North Koreans -- and they are not interested in so doing -- they cannot do it because reporters cannot visit Sudan or North Korea and video freely. Likewise, China's decimation and annexation of Tibet, one of the world's oldest ongoing civilizations, never made it to television.

"Half the truth can be a very big lie." - Winston Churchill

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. Theory of Moral Sentiments - Adam Smith

[Jim Noble]

The idea of "world opinion" is idiotic.

The only legitimate way to measure the opinion of any population is by voting. There is no such political community as "the world".

Most inhabitants of Earth can't vote. Most inhabitants of Earth would be killed by their oppressor if they ever even thought of voicing their opinion.

The only opinions that matter on this Earth are the opinions of the electorate of free countries, with those of our own citizens being far superior in importance to those of, say, the French.

World opinion? No such thing exists.

[E.G.C.]

Media bias bump.