I just got back from giving a lecture on the role of the media in US society to a group of diplomats and their spouses. The program is called The Hospitality and Information Service, and about fifteen fascinating individuals from countries such as Australia, Belarus, China, S. Korea, Turkey and the U.K. comprised the class. They all had some very strong views on the US media, and some interesting comparisons to make with media back home. (For example, asked to choose a newspaper or online media, I said with no other methods to measure the source that I trust newspapers over something posted online; the Belarussian said his view of newspaper reporters is one of paid propogandists, and that at home it's only on the Internet one finds those not afraid to speak the truth.)
My friend Laurence Jarvik, who teaches the class, invited me to participate, and I then invited my wife to participate; I was a reporter for years but she's still in the media and is far more important than I ever was. I've spoken in the past on the Fourth Estate, but never before a crowd like this before. I learned at least as much as they did. I also think it's great this program exists. It's designed for spouses of ambassadors, but embassy personnel apparently like to participate as well.
You know you've participated in a stimulating conversation when it has ranged from Founding Fathers such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, to a case where Apple sued a 13-year-old boy for posting a trade secret on his web site.
Oh, and I was informed that very few people in the world like the US, and that the US media doesn't report this nearly enough. My response? "The media is supposed to report news. It's not exactly news everyone hates us. Now if Chirac suddenly said something nice about the US, that would be news!"
ADDENDUM: See more thoughts on the class discussion, and possible legal and constitutional threats to the US media, in my follow-up here.
Comments