THE FASTER LANE / TYLER BRÛLÉ
Missing the mark
Do you remember the TV programme Hollywood Squares or one of its international spin-offs – Prat I Kvadrat in Sweden or L’Académie des Neuf in France? In case you didn’t have a chance to catch these shows when you were at home sick during high school or were too busy being a progressive housewife, the format involved nine low to mid-level celebrities sitting in a three-by-three grid of squares, a pair of contestants, an over-enthusiastic host and a noughts-and-crosses strategy combined with some questions to give the whole thing some structure. I didn’t catch too many editions during the 1970s and early 1980s but on the odd snow or sick day in Montréal or Winnipeg, I enjoyed watching an array of seemingly sauced stars offering ridiculous answers to even more absurd questions.
Earlier in the week, shortly after President Biden addressed his nation, I was reminded of Hollywood Squares as some TV channels squeezed up to 10 commentators and correspondents on screen, while asking and answering questions that seemed more fit for Charo or Zsa Zsa Gabor. What was more difficult to watch? Images of desperation and chaos at Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul or journalists, analysts and spokespeople struggling to find the angles and language to put the events into context? On many outlets, the journalists and presenters seemed to be on the backfoot as much as the governments they were attempting to hold to account.
And just as the past two years have seen a narrowing of the stories that news channels choose to cover, so too has the available vocabulary to explain complex issues. Is “inclusion” really the best term a news presenter can muster when questioning the ambitions of a Taliban-governed Afghanistan? As I listened to various analysts discuss whether they thought that this new version of the Taliban would be more inclusive in their approach to women and human rights, I found myself wondering who booked these people to offer supposedly informed perspectives and whether too many newsrooms have completely lost touch with the fundamentals of covering human suffering in simple, gritty terms rather than applying language to the Taliban that makes them sound like the admissions office of a boarding school or the sensitivity committee at a sportswear company that no longer believes in the merit of competition.
What would the next segment offer? Someone from an eco-focused think-tank posing questions about the Taliban’s commitment to the UN’s sustainability goals? Or perhaps an employment activist raising questions about how the new government was going to deal with the stresses of post-coronavirus work-life balance in Herat and home-office compensation in Kandahar? Intelligence agencies might have failed to decipher the dispatches from their informants about the Taliban’s momentum but news outlets have also failed to shift from HR-speak to telling it like it is.
With many on a permanent state of high-alert sensitivity, just waiting to be scrambled to their keyboards to tell anyone who’ll listen how offended they are on behalf of another group (who, by the way, couldn’t care less about how their traditional dress was used in a fashion show or that their most famous national dish was cooked for commercial gain by someone not genetically from their corner of the world), we’re now residing in a world where newsrooms cower because they see a couple of angry posts on social media and end up curbing their coverage and/or losing all sense of proportion around the topic at hand because there’s nothing worse than being insensitive in a modern, round-the-clock newsroom.
If the US and its Allies have given up on Afghanistan, does this mean that we’ve also given up on questioning the Taliban’s approach to running their version of civil society? Is it appropriate for us to take issue with their treatment of women? Should we bother defending gay rights? After all, aren’t we being insensitive to the Taliban’s culture, their lived experience, by calling their values into question and comparing them to ours? Feels like it.