Ghost-in-the-shell-induced musing

The Ghost in the Shell films based on the manga created by Masamune Shirow, is a futurist police thriller centered around the exploits of covert security forces unit Section 9. The events which occur circa 2030 revolve around "Major" Kusanagi, Batou and a few other members of the division, who are part cyborg, to varying degrees. The Major in particular has only parts of her brain, and a segment of her spinal chord which are still organic (real). The films and subsequent series have all dealt with the dilemnas of the characters as they try to figure out their exact nature. What is real? What makes a person real? Where does the essence of a human being reside? What happens to a mind without a body? Can the identity/individuality be maintained whole if only alive in the network? If we consider Marshall McLuhan's view of media as an extension of man, this movie (and the subsequent sequels and series) offer an interesting illustration of the the current modern world, where our increased connectivity renders us practically cyborg. The networking/information distribution is the key component of Ghost in the Shell, along with the issues of identity/individuality. The ultimate power is wielded by the Hacker, not the military. Who is now in control? The army on the ground? Or the people who control satellites and can scan/document/distribute information from a secure location, not necessarily anywhere the ground in question? The concept of "stealing" is also redefined. When previously, a theft took an object from one place to another, a hole was created, something would be missing. It would be easier to spot, and easier to find. The stealing of data/information/identity in modern times is interestingly never "stealing". The information does not disappear. Instead of an absence of information, there is a multiplication of information. (Brings back Benjamin's copy vs original to mind, but we're also beyond mechanical reproduction). The nature of that theft makes it harder to spot. How do you find stolen information, when everything remains in place? The focus then shifts from content to control, and access again.

The Listening Post: Media Freedom across the world

Listening Post is the media watch program on Al-Jazeera English. This report (from Nov 14) examines media freedoms across the world, based on the annual report of Reporters Without Border.

Part 1



Part 2

Abstract III: Naomi Sakr & Transnational Media in the Middle East

Naomi Sakr addresses the proliferation of satellite television in the Middle East, assessing their effects within the broader concepts of globalization and democracy. Her study, which spans the Arab world from Morocco to the Gulf, focuses on the 1990s as the decade that saw the creation and development of satellite channels in the region. Sakr challenges the general assumption that satellite media, by transcending national borders, is capable of providing the impetus for more liberal political practices throughout the region. Indeed, the idea that satellite television is less prone than territorial television to censorship, as typical of government-controlled media are in the Middle East, is misleading. Sakr demonstrates that for the exception of Al-Jazeera, (whose controversial programming has made it a pariah of governments and many an advertiser) most satellite channels are still state-owned, or affiliated to powerful political parties, and thus content-controlled. In terms of globalization, Sakr states that the research is inconclusive: if globalization is meant as a single politico-economico-cultural ideology, the study reveals resulting cultures of resistance, and reorientation, as well as integration into a system. In terms of globalization’s potential to unify society, Sakr shows that although a bigger mass of people is reached, this group is divided in terms of program preferences. In subsequent chapters, and via elaborate research that draws on articles, books and conferences, covering fields as varied as media, sociology, politics, Arab history, popular culture, international law, NGOs, advertising and marketing, economics, international and regional policy-making, Sakr seeks to define the various forces at play in the satellite television scene. Her research shows that power, money and ideas in satellite media are still widely linked to the power structures in the political arena (ex: MBC-Saudi royal family, Future TV-Hariri family, Nile Channels-Egyptian government). Many stations perceive their role as intrinsically propagandist, showing the “good” side of Arab culture, to attract investors, and are tools for governments or politicians to resolve domestic issues, or devise (foreign) policy. Even NGOs, which could play a unifying role at civil society level by promoting freedom of expression and human rights, are mostly denied access to satellite presence, furthering the point that globalization via satellite media is yet to be achieved. As such, Sakr suggests that it is more accurate to describe satellite channels in the Arab World as ‘transnational’ rather than ‘global’. Although Sakr’s extensive research includes many statistics and numbers, she frequently points out that accurate quantitative studies are sorely lacking in the Middle East. Some arguments provided by Arab media experts, are actually merely educated guesses on their part to fill in gaps. The study would have surely contained these numbers, had they been available, but this also raises interesting questions as to whether these studies can ever be performed. Sakr’s work is very effective in defining the context in which satellite television developed in the Middle East and offers a very comprehensive introduction. Political events that have followed the publishing of this book have however greatly affected the media scene, and given birth to new news players (Al-Manar, Al Arabiyya), have given higher credibility to some (Al-Jazeera), and have changed the focus of others (Future Television). It would be interesting to compare and contrast the state of satellite media in the Arab world today, in its second decade of existence, to discover whether the great pace of change in both technology and politics have managed to achieve any perceptible differences at television level, and the development of a more truly global arena of communication.

Sakr, N. (2001). Satellite realms: Transnational television, globalization and the middle east. London: I.B.Tauris

Intellectual Autobiography

Communication. My first and foremost interest in life. Because of it, I learned to speak four languages. My undergraduate degree was in Graphic Design, or the field of visual communication. It was an exploration of a new medium, one that did not necessarily require words, as much as color, photography, illustration etc…
After my graduation in 1999, I pursued a career in commercial advertising, as art director and copywriter. During those years I developed strategies and techniques to sell a product, create an image, and pass on a message, whether through traditional print media such as posters and print ads, television and radio, but also for new ones such as the internet and other alternative ambient media. Designer Paul Rand once said: “If you can’t make it good, make it big. If you can’t make it big, make it red.” His point was that some ideas that are too difficult to be effectively transmitted in their elaborate complexity, can be put forth “loudly enough” if they are literally given more volume, or are strikingly underlined. Unfortunately, that is often the case in advertising, when in order to sell to the biggest number of consumers, advertisers tend to chose the smallest common denominator, and work a whole campaign from there. This is not to undermine the amount of research and thinking that goes into the initial processes of advertising campaigns, but it does however taint the result. The smallest common denominator is never nearly enough to convey a full message, or paint a whole picture. As a citizen of the Middle East, I have been acutely aware of the incomplete representation of the complexities of the region, whether culturally or politically, that has been afforded us. My own complex background - of (exiled) Palestinian and Jordanian descent, Lebanese, Christian, not a minority in my country - is always received with some astonishment in the West. What has been advertised of this forever turbulent part of the world is a jumble of big, red clichés. I feel compelled, as an able communicator, to change or, at least, readjust the misguided perception.

Political Media. The effect of local and international politics has been tremendous in the shaping of my character and interests. As a person who has lived in a war zone for the greater part of my life, I have been a constant and diligent consumer of news (see Timeline Mapping and News Sources attached). Each war or conflict brought with it a new media, which relayed the news to me. And although news stations claim factual reporting, it is a fact that different media sources will relate the same information differently. Marshall McLuhan said: “The medium is the message”. Nowhere is that more obvious than in the actual case of news media. Al-Jazeera and CNN are as much the message as the report they are broadcasting. They disseminate news, form opinions, offer perspectives, and they are also the message of their backers and funders’ agendas. The array of political news stations currently available offers an interesting interplay of forces. The media represent political trends and perspectives which are conflicting, even if they stem from the same region. Al-Jazeera is based in Qatar, and Qatar is currently playing a bigger political role than it used to in the region (the last bout of civil unrest in May in Lebanon was ended by a deal brokered by the Qatari government). This is a new development as the peace brokers were traditionally the Saudi Arabian government who have a lot of money invested in Lebanese real estate and companies. A lot of the credibility of Qatar stems from Al-Jazeera, and its soi-disant free press, and its fresh, progressive perspective. It is an interesting case study, because Qatar not unlike its Saudi neighbors, has great American military facilities on its land, and would generally be mistrusted by some of the parties involved. Yet its media was enough to create a shift in perception, at the level of the mass audience but also at the level of political leaders. The complex interplay between politics and media is why I applied for Media Studies at the New School. I intend to get a deeper understanding of the way political media work, and learn to approach them objectively and critically. My previous experience is very relevant, and I do have much to say about the matter, however, my first spontaneous reaction is always subjective. I need to be able to look at media workings from an academic, researched, perspective, one which is not solely based on my emotional appraisal (as an Arab, misrepresented, misconstrued, resisting, anti-westerner etc…).

Media in Conflict Resolution. Semiologist (political critic) Noam Chomsky has prefaced many a book of his with the anecdote that whenever he is asked to write an article or an essay about the region, the title “The Current Crisis in the Middle East” is always an apt one. Indeed, this is a region that has been ablaze with wars throughout my life. And what I can say about it, and to quote the famous Edwin Starr song, “War. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.” As a person who believes in communication, I believe that we have reached a point in time and in civilized development where other mediums than arms should be used to resolve conflicts. People beings might be of different cultures, but that does not mean there should be total communication breakdown. We all value the same things, individual happiness, safety, health, love, music, only differently. I would like to take advantage of my time in the New School to learn more about how to engage in a conversation about differences and similarities, discuss war and peace, raise public awareness to social and political causes through media. I believe that by exploring how media works, how it is created, and why, I will be able to use it more effectively in solving what I find to be the most pressing causes worldwide, namely war, and abuse of basic human rights. Media (and here I mean film and documentaries) are also Art, and art is, or at least can be, a universal language, a universal communication tool. And artists as media experts, are even more adept at getting a message across. Some would argue against art being engaged. Art should be for art’s sake, as an experiment in heightening human consciousness and intellect. But I find that if human consciousness is still at the level of accepting and engaging in wars, then perhaps it is up to the artists to help change and shift perceptions.

Influences. I have always admired artists and writers who have broken a status quo, who have challenged perceptions, or offered radical new views, moved the conversation forward in their respective fields. In literature, Kurt Vonnegut Jr. wrote books that are essentially virulent critiques of war, yet in a style that is simple, (almost naïve), humorous, full of humanity and forgiveness, even supplemented with drawings and doodles. Surrealist writers in France (Breton, Eluard, Aragon) freed written prose from its rigid structure (punctuation for example), and promoted a more psychic intuitive connection between thoughts in their poetry. In art, Picasso chose to break down traditional perspective, one that was celebrated as Humanity’s “Renaissance”, to create Cubism. He offered multiple perspective at the same time, opening up the debate of the modern world, the camera, the speed, the need for new material, the immediacy, the instantaneity of art and opposed it to his use of traditional paint on canvas – his approach being all the more contrasting with the Impressionist movement which preceded his, as it was a very rational as opposed to emotional. In cartoons, Naji El Ali, Palestinian cartoonist narrated the Palestinian exile’s struggle and adventures, in simple and elegant black and white drawings, which transmitted all the nostalgia, confusion and defiance inherent in the Palestinian cause. (see http://www.najialali.com/ and http://www.handala.org/)
In film, Stanley Kubrick’s now iconic movies (A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey and Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb) have been controversial, yet always engaging. Dr. Strangelove is a “comedy” about a nuclear holocaust, a very a-typical way of approaching a very hot theme in the 1960s. Kubrick deserves a more elaborate analysis, but suffice to say that he was very meticulous artist, who valued all the details of a film equally (colour, set design, sound design, music, he even created a camera lens to satisfy his lighting needs in Barry Lyndon) and who knew the intricacies of the how and why of his movies, and as such is a very inspiring film director. Documentaries had traditionally been thought of as dull as history lessons, but a new approach in documentary making has sparked renewed interest in them and their subject matters. Baraka (Ron Fricke), the Qatsi trilogy (Godfrey Reggio , and music by Phillip Glass) have revolutionized the meaning of documentary by making it a worthy art piece, as much as it offers documentation, criticism and analysis.
The above-mentioned artists have convinced me that it is possible to create messages that can be more interesting than dreary political debates, and that can slowly but surely drag the viewer into a conversation, one where he/she has not already taken sides. I am at this point inclined to pursue an academic research approach about news media, but I believe that I will, and should be also promoting peace and understanding and that through the making of films and documentaries, inspired by the artists I mentioned (and ones I am sure I forgot to). There is still a lot left unsaid in the issues of the Middle East, and I intend to find the best and most expressive way to do it and to bring about change.