Aljazeera Proves Me Wrong

well... either proves me wrong or supports my point.

In my post yesterday (not the one about the palm tree, the other one... I know - too many posts in short succession - maybe I'll take a little hiatus after this) I talked about being annoyed with hearing only one narrative in relation to the conflicts in Sudan.

The day before that Tendai Marima wrote this excellent piece for Aljazeera: Sudan: Half the Horror Remains Untold. It is very much worth reading. The tag line (is that what you call it? I don't know, I'm not a journalist) reads: "As the south prepares to declare independence, western media incorrectly frame current violence as entirely one-sided."

Further quotable moments include:

"[A]udiences suffer from War Attention Deficit Disorder - a Sudan conflict story has a life cycle of thirty seconds"

and

"And more specifically, conflict reportage is often constructed through the limited lens of "good vs bad" - and for Sudan, the baddie's role has already been taken by the "car-azy Ay-rab Mooozlim" in the north, so it would be difficult to start framing the "Dinka Christian dude" as a baddie, too."

and

"An African proverb says: When two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. In southern Sudan it seems as though there are ten elephants tussling and trampling on the population, continually dashing all hope of South Sudan's secession ever being peaceful"

Thanks for shedding light on a few of the complexities Tendai, I surely do appreciate it.