People's Opinions

After reading my blog post on people's thoughts being influenced by various means - news articles, family, friends, books, editorials - rather than by what candidates say, a friend asked me what was a good example of something that could influence people. That reminded me of a recent documentary I had seen.

I had picked up the "Voices of Iraq" from the local library, happening to see it when I walked by. "Filmed and Directed by the People of Iraq" the cover said, interesting me at once. My long years with Asha and similar organizations had exposed me to the critical importance of listening to what people had to say. Nothing can come close to what the people have to say about themselves, their lives, their travails, their goals. In the Asha's context it is the people whose children we are trying "educate", but it applies everywhere. This is the basis premise of projects like "Kids with Cameras" (www.kids-with-cameras.org) which gave cameras to children in a red-light district giving the opportunity of expressing themselves, and is also the reason why digital story-telling is rapidly catching on.

So I picked up the DVD immediately, thinking this would be a great documentary to see. Learning about the situation in Iraq from the Iraqis themselves - nothing could be closer to the truth. The producers had distributed 150 video cameras in the entire country of Iraq, to "enable everyday people - mothers, children, teachers, sheikhs, even insurgents - to document their lives and their hopes amidst the upheavel of a nation being born". I was going visit my parents that weekend, and they would enjoy it too.

We sat down to watch the video, and it started by presenting the perspective of people living in the marshes who had been persecuted under Saddam's regime, then described how the poor did not have access to education under Saddam and about how some had been very poor, it showed various injustices some had had to undergo under that regime - all described by the people themselves. It was moving. Saddam indeed had been a tyrant ......all these people had suffered so. And there was hope that came through in the film - that with Saddam out of the way, there was real hope of a truly democratic nation being born, of a better life for them and their children. The thought crossed my mind - had I realized how brutal Saddam was till I heard the Iraqi people themselves speak? I guess not. There was excellent footage about the Iraqi countryside, Iraqis celebrating their festivals, having fun, living their way of life.

Halfway into the documentary several Iraqis applauded the US government for ridding them of Saddam. I began to think that there might be some who think that way, but did they all? Weren't there some who did not like the US government's actions? Maybe not, if all 150 film makers across the country liked what the US government had done. This was a new view for me - I had not realized that so many Iraqis felt this way. Then Abu Ghraib came up. "People who were tortured and humilitated deserved it, since they were the jailors in the prisons under Saddam's rule", said one. That didn't somehow ring true. Really? I had not heard that before (keeping aside the question of whether that made torture OK). It then began to dawn on me ...... that the voices of the Iraqi people were the voices of _some_ Iraqi people. Was it really a representative sample? Didn't seem like it. Who were the cameras given to? How were they selected? Were other differing opinions edited out? As the documentary progressed, it became more and more obvious that this was convervative propaganda - that it was a documentary put together to put forth one point of view, the view that the US did the right thing in invading Iraq and "freeing" the people from the dictator Saddam. But the way it was done was diabolically clever. I would never, never, never have doubted anything that proclaimed itself as being the 'voices of Iraq'. I would have never have attributed anything but the finest of motives to something that gave video cameras to people so that they can tell their story their own way. I was stunned that even I, who was opposed to every reason the US gave for invading Iraq, could get fooled for a whole hour. It was so convincing, so well done, seemed so representative of what the man on the street felt that it was hard to believe it was propaganda, except for some obvious falsehoods in the second half of the documentary.

I was mad. I wanted to write a strong note to the public library for carrying such a documentary without saying it was propaganda. I was annoyed that propagondists would use methods which are honored by grassroots activists as means of giving people a voice.

Here is how public opinion can be influenced.