http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/14/opinion/14kristof.html?scp=5&sq=raped&st=cse
"Mukhtaran Bibi is a woman who was sentenced by a tribal council in Pakistan to be gang-raped because of an infraction supposedly committed by her brother. Four men raped Ms. Mukhtaran, then village leaders forced her to walk home nearly naked in front of a jeering crowd of 300." She was supposed to have committed suicide but she could get help from local Islamic leader and testify againt her attackers. She also built two schools, one for boys and the other for girls, thinking that the best way to overcome this harsh abuses was through better education. However, the authorities put Ms. Mukhtaran under house arrest to stop her from speaking out. Moreover, whenever she tried to go outside, police pointed their guns at her and she was barred from leaving her country. This is because the Pakistani government fear that "she might malign Pakistan's image."
The purpose of this editorial is to urge President Bush to take action against the Pakistani government's unfair treatment towards Ms. Mukhtaran. The author believes that President Bush's favorable attitude toward the "bold leadership" of the President Musharraf (Pakistan) caused Pakistani government to carry out such wrongful action against Ms. Mukhtaran. The purpose is very clearly represented in the editorial as the author stated "So, Mr. Bush, how about asking Mr. Musharraf to focus on finding Osama, instead of kidnapping rape victims who speak out? And invite Ms. Mukhtaran to the Oval Office - to show that Americans stand not only with generals who seize power, but also with ordinary people of extraordinary courage."
The limitation of this kind of media lies in the fact that an editorial writer builds on an argument and tries to persuade readers to think the same way she/he does. The following shows how personal and opinionated the editorial is.
"I've been sympathetic to Mr. Musharraf till now, despite his nuclear negligence, partly because he's cooperated in the war on terrorism and partly because he has done a good job nurturing Pakistan's economic growth, which in the long run is probably the best way to fight fundamentalism. So even when Mr. Musharraf denied me visas all this year, to block me from visiting Ms. Mukhtaran again and writing a follow-up column, I bit my tongue."
After reading this editorial, I cannot help but agree with the writer's viewpoint. However, since the editorial is intended to persuade readers to think the same way the writer does, it is a natural phenomenon that I support the writer's opinion. Although the writer of this editorial did a good job in explaining the harsh situation of Ms. Mukhtaran, he discredited Pakistani government without solid ground. Since he is in favor of Ms. Mukhtaran, he only wrote things that benefit her and degrade the government. It would have been better if he wrote what kind of difficulites are faced by Pakistani government to show that the editorial is unbiased and equally considers both sides. Moreover, I found it kind of ironic that Ms. Mykhtaran herself is drawing a clear line between man and woman. Although she speaks out for women's right, when she built two schools, she separated girls from boys. I wonder why she did not put them together in one school.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Raped, Kidnapped and Silenced - New York Times." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 6 Sep. 2008
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기