Conversational highlight of the day, a confab with my colleague and namesake, historian Brian John, with regard to the unfolding events in Ukraine. Lots of agreement on a number of matters, but two in particular: this is all a lot more complicated than Fox News would have us believe (but then that's true of almost news story you care to mention); and we all should be not just worried but very worried indeed. (Oh, and it was blindingly obvious to us both that there are no goodies and baddies this time around, but surely any sensible person knows that?)
Brian had a number of illuminating things to say about gas and pipelines and I reckon that any analysis of what's going on and what the various players are up to needs to take account of the generation and supply of this commodity. And we both did a reasonable job of taking matters in the region back to the earlier part of the twentieth century, though we were both well aware there was an awful lot we weren't at all sure of that we knew to be important.
Actually BBC World and Sky News have been doing a pretty good job now and for quite some time in attempting to unfold some of the complexities involved. A very pithy and pertinent summary of the divisions within Ukraine a couple of weeks ago by the one of the Sky team was followed by a wonderfully laconic and honest reminder that he was making the situation all a lot more simple than it actually was to enable viewers to get some kind of handle on events. A reminder that there are some very good journalists and some very bad journalists out there - and it's helpful to recognise the difference between the two.
No comments:
Post a Comment