It's hard to believe that I've reached the end of the normal 10 week State Department internship period. This week I did further work on the Early Alerts, attended a multilateral meeting at NATO, and sat in on a media training for State Department employees.
Every day this week continued coverage of the Libyan crisis in the Early Alerts was joined by coverage of the crisis in Ivory Coast. A civil war broke out in the country in March 2011, and this conflict has its origins in a disputed election. An election was held in Ivory Coast on November 28, 2010, in which President Laurent Gbagbo faced opposition leader Alassane Ouattara. The election was characterized by a strong north/south divide in the country – Gbagbo has a strong base of support in the south, and Ouattara in the north. The various rounds of the election were characterized by increasing tension and some violence. On December 2nd, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) declared that Ouattara won the runoff election with 54% of the vote, but the Constitutional Court declared these results to be invalid and later declared Gbagbo the winner. As the dispute continued, sporadic outbreaks of violence increasingly took place between supporters of the two candidates, and by March the conflict had exploded into full-scale civil war. Well over a thousand people have been killed so far, and over 100,000 refugees have fled to neighboring, and also quite poor, Liberia. While Ouattara has greater legitimacy in the sense that it seems clear he was the legitimate winner of the 2010 elections, the European reporting I read made clear that forces on both sides have committed atrocities.
As tragic as the situation is, like our sections on Japan a few weeks ago we looked at Ivory Coast from a narrow angle. Our coverage of the conflict in Ivory Coast focused on calls for the West to take action in Ivory Coast and on the role of the UN there. On April 4th, in response to attacks by pro-Gbagbo forces on UN Peacekeepers, the UN retaliated with helicopter strikes, officially “in self-defense and to protect civilians.” The French military also intervened, launching strikes against pro-Gbagbo military installations. Given how passive the UN has been during past massacres, such as in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda, this was quite the unprecedented development. By and large, the European press was quite pleased with the UN taking a stand. For instance, Financial Times Deutschland said, “There is a good side to this UN intervention. It signals to other despots on the [African] continent that they cannot cling to an office that they no longer have without impunity.” A handful of outlets were critical, however: for instance, Russia's Nezavisimaya Gazeta complained that "The peacekeepers, in effect, violated their mandate, and so did the UN Secretary General, if he ordered that attack.
On Monday, I had the opportunity to sit in on a multilateral meeting at NATO. While I did not understand all of what was being discussed, it was quite interesting to see how an international organization like NATO functions on a day to day basis.
After the Early Alert on Wednesday I attended a media training lead by a former journalist, which consisted of the correspondent giving general advice to several State Department officials on how to prepare and perform in broadcast interviews. The correspondent mentioned a number of ways one should prepare for interviews. You should first find out the background of the reporter and publication that is asking for the interview, to get a sense of whether they are a reputable outlet and what kinds of questions they might ask (i.e. a business channel might ask very different questions than a day-time news organization). More generally, he mentioned that you should do all the thinking about the interview beforehand, quoting a phrase that went something like “there are no original thoughts in the studio.” That said, he cautioned that you can’t rehearse everything, and you can only plan what ideas you want to leave people with. He emphasized that that you want to get those in right at the beginning of an interview and if possible again at the end. He also said that research on what people remember from TV says that 80% is what they see and 20% what they hear. Or, to use an image, you can’t point a camera at “an issue”, but you can, for instance, show a boy throwing a stone or film with certain backgrounds in mind (i.e. conducting an interview on economics with a stock market in the background, etc) to illustrate an issue.
Something that stood out to me was the correspondents’ emphasis on not giving your interviewer a sense of evasiveness (i.e. you shouldn’t say “no comment” in response to a question). If you do that, journalists will assume you are covering up something and will pursue it. To avoid this, you have to give a reason: perhaps the issue is still in progress, or maybe you say you aren’t going to speak about it because it is being discussed at an upcoming forum, or so on. You should then go on to stay “What I can tell you is …” to give the image of wanting to help. If asked a question outside your subject area, the correspondent said that if you’re asked in a one on one context, you can just simply say you don’t know. On a TV interview, of course, you don’t want to do that; rather, you can just say a brief couple sentences overviewing the topic. If the interviewer follows up with further questions on that subject, then you can say that you don't work in that subject area and as a result you simply don't know or aren't qualified to answer the question. Since you gave them what they expected, you give off the positive impression that you have both breadth and a particular expertise.
All in all, I’m really glad I had a chance to attend the afternoon media training session. Granted, broadcast interview skills aren’t really relevant to me, the intern, at the moment, but certainly someday I hope to be in a position where someone might ask me for a TV interview. Some of the tips I learned – especially to avoid giving an impression of evasiveness, and of the three colors not to wear on screen (black, pure white, and bright red) – I will definitely remember.
Friday the Hub and the Mission to the EU's public diplomacy department threw a farewell party for me and another intern who is also leaving. The party was great, though it makes coming in to help out for two extra days next week a bit awkward.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Michael: Week 9 – March 28 to April 1
During my 9th week at the Mission to the European Union I continued on the Early Alerts, sat in on a brainstorming meeting for an upcoming conference, attended parts of a USEU 'Town Hall' meeting led by the Ambassador, and heard parts of a digital conference between students in Afghanistan and various officials from the State Department.
This week Libya still received the bulk of our attention for the Early Alerts, but for the first time in a while it was bumped from being the top story on Tuesday by sections on the reactions in Europe to President Obama's speech on the Libya intervention. In the background each day were protests in Syria, where protests have been gaining strength amidst strong crackdowns by the government. Our Libya coverage focused on divides within NATO, particularly over the question of whether to arm the Libyan rebels, and some continued speculation over the overall endgame in Libya.
Otherwise, on Monday I observed a discussion between the Media Hub and the USEU Mission’s press office on how to cover a State Department’s official who will be participating in a conference during the EU’s refugee resettlement awareness day, with the aim of discussing the US’s long-standing experience with refugee resettlement programs. Officials from the two press departments discussed what themes to cover, what the primary message for video clips should be, and the logistics of when/how to interview people at the conference, as there is only a few small windows of opportunity when we can pull a person aside (lunch breaks, etc). Not having a media background myself I only observed the meeting, but it was fascinating to see what kinds of questions media people tackle while preparing for interviews – it’s certainly not a simple affair.
Wednesday I sat in on parts of a USEU Town Hall meeting led by the Ambassador and attended by a large audience of Mission employees. The Ambassador discussed the situation in Washington and other internal issues concerning employees at the Mission. Just being an intern most of what was discussed was not relevant to me, but nevertheless it was useful for the Early Alerts to get a sense of what policies and topics are being most discussed in Washington.
On Thursday, I attended part of a digital conference between students in Afghanistan and various officials from the State Department. The quality of the call wasn't the best, but I did get a sense of some of the person-to-person diplomacy conducted by the State Department.
This week Libya still received the bulk of our attention for the Early Alerts, but for the first time in a while it was bumped from being the top story on Tuesday by sections on the reactions in Europe to President Obama's speech on the Libya intervention. In the background each day were protests in Syria, where protests have been gaining strength amidst strong crackdowns by the government. Our Libya coverage focused on divides within NATO, particularly over the question of whether to arm the Libyan rebels, and some continued speculation over the overall endgame in Libya.
Otherwise, on Monday I observed a discussion between the Media Hub and the USEU Mission’s press office on how to cover a State Department’s official who will be participating in a conference during the EU’s refugee resettlement awareness day, with the aim of discussing the US’s long-standing experience with refugee resettlement programs. Officials from the two press departments discussed what themes to cover, what the primary message for video clips should be, and the logistics of when/how to interview people at the conference, as there is only a few small windows of opportunity when we can pull a person aside (lunch breaks, etc). Not having a media background myself I only observed the meeting, but it was fascinating to see what kinds of questions media people tackle while preparing for interviews – it’s certainly not a simple affair.
Wednesday I sat in on parts of a USEU Town Hall meeting led by the Ambassador and attended by a large audience of Mission employees. The Ambassador discussed the situation in Washington and other internal issues concerning employees at the Mission. Just being an intern most of what was discussed was not relevant to me, but nevertheless it was useful for the Early Alerts to get a sense of what policies and topics are being most discussed in Washington.
On Thursday, I attended part of a digital conference between students in Afghanistan and various officials from the State Department. The quality of the call wasn't the best, but I did get a sense of some of the person-to-person diplomacy conducted by the State Department.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Michael: Week 8 – March 21st to 25th
My 8th week interning at the State Department was a bit less eventful than the previous week, but besides the Early Alerts I met with exchange students from Hawaii and attended a conference by the Carnegie foundation on Egypt.
Early Alerts this week again centered on Libya. On Saturday, March 19th, UN Security Council Resolution 1973 was passed, which called for using "all necessary means" to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas from attack, imposed a no-fly zone, called for an immediate cease-fire, and strengthened travel bans on members of the regime, arms embargoes, and asset freezes. Allied airstrikes against Qaddafi’s forces began later that day. As a result, starting Monday we dealt with the reaction to the Security Council Resolution and the start of allied intervention. One of the main themes we covered was perceptions of the role of the US. Many highlighted that President Obama, mindful of the US already being involved in two wars in Muslim-majority countries, purposefully was “keeping the US out of the spotlight” (Italy’s Corriere della Sera).
More generally, we discussed the divides in NATO. Britain and France were the main supporters of intervention, the US eventually joined them to push for the above Security Council Resolution, and Italy reluctantly followed suit. However, alongside the ‘BRIC’ countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), Germany – a rotating member of the UN Security Council – abstained from the vote on Resolution 1973. This dramatic break from Germany’s NATO allies was widely noted – unlike the lead up to Iraq, where France and Germany took identical positions and whose leaders were very vocally against the war, today regarding Libya France and Germany, which are core of the European Union, are presently taking very different positions.
With the US seen as not stepping up to take command, and with Britain and France leading separate operations, many turned to NATO as the natural vehicle to coordinate and lead the intervention. However, some commentators worried that bringing in NATO was risky, as the organization is seen in much the same light as the US in the Muslim world. At any rate, on Friday everyone reported that “NATO takes military control in Libya” (La Razon), on the model of NATO’s role in Afghanistan. Still, if anything is clear from all the editorials and commentaries this week on Libya, it’s that the endgame of the intervention remains very much in doubt
On Monday, I met with staff and students from the University of Hawaii who were studying in Belgium. They came to the Media Hub to shoot interviews promoting the US-Belgium student exchange program. Unfortunately, as their visit coincided with crunch time for the Early Alert, I didn't get to do much with them other than introduce myself.
Tuesday afternoon I attended a conference hosted by Carnegie Europe called “Consolidating Egypt's Revolution.” It featured Amr Hamzawy, an Egyptian political scientist who is the research director and senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Hamzawy overviewed the situation in Egypt, and mentioned several major changes he sees in the country since the start of the revolution. Since 1952, Egypt’s political system was based on pushing people away, but starting January 25th citizens reentered the political process, and the fact that many millions participated in the recent constitutional referendum proposing a way forward is a hopeful sign that citizens will remain involved in politics. The Egyptian people also discovered that the Egyptian state, which was thought to be strong, in fact turned out to be quite weak – indeed, after a few days or weeks of protests the system collapsed, and only the military was able to propose a way forward. And for whatever reason, during the revolution Egyptian society was able to push aside sectarian tensions, social class divides, and other divisions to protest in a unified and civilized manner. But since pushing out Mubarak these tension are returning – between social classes (i.e. rising numbers of strikes) and between social groups (i.e. the recent violence against Christian Copts in the north). That said, while Hamzawy acknowledges that Egypt is a poor country with social and economic crises, he believes that energy unleashed by the revolution will remain a part of Egypt’s political culture and help enable solutions to these problems.
Amr Hamzawy also discussed some of the challenges that lie ahead for Egypt. A looming political question is what electoral system Egypt should adopt – should it conduct elections on an individual candidate system, which in the past produced weak legislatures and enabled corruption, or will it shift to a mixed system of party lists and individual candidates, like a simplified version of what Germany has? The second challenge is whether political groups and movements, especially those just now trying to organize and establish themselves, will have enough time to compete in the upcoming elections. That is the main reason why Hamzawy voted against the aforementioned referendum, which committed Egypt to having elections within 6 months from now. In his view, the only two parties that are ready to compete at the moment are the Muslim Brotherhood and what remains of the former ruling party, the National Democratic Party. Besides these two, parties in Egypt fall into two categories: legal opposition parties, which were limited in the past and now are finding it hard to adapt, and the new parties that are now trying to assemble. Unless these parties acquire the necessary resources and organization, then the former ruling party and the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood will dominate and shape the new parliament. This is a worrying prospect, especially since the parliament will have a major role in the future constitutional assembly. As Hamzawy concluded, an imbalance parliament is bound to create an imbalance constitution.
The third challenge for Egypt over the next 6 months is navigating what Hamzawy termed Egypt’s “red lines” as the constitutional debate takes off. These are basically the “hot button” issues in Egypt, which to some are irrelevant, but for others are the most important issues. For instance, under the current constitute Islamic law, or Sharia, is officially the principle source of all legislation. Liberal Egyptians might be in favor of removing this, but other groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood, are vehemently opposed. Indeed, Hamzawy pointed out that the Brotherhood and other religious groups campaigned in favor of the referendum by claiming that if you vote no, then this article declaring Islam to be the state religion would be forfeited. That was not at all the case, of course, but according to Hamzawy it gives a sense of how tough addressing these red lines will be.
After having spent so much time writing about European press coverage of the revolution in Egypt I found it fascinating to hear from a person very much 'on the ground' in the country who is observing and to some degree shaping events there first hand. The meeting also gave me a preview of the type of conferences I might be helping to organize over the summer as part of an expected internship with a think tank in Washington.
Wednesday and Thursday weren't hugely eventful outside of the Early Alerts, and I left work early on Friday after completing the Early Alert to catch a flight to Bucharest, Romania for the weekend.
Early Alerts this week again centered on Libya. On Saturday, March 19th, UN Security Council Resolution 1973 was passed, which called for using "all necessary means" to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas from attack, imposed a no-fly zone, called for an immediate cease-fire, and strengthened travel bans on members of the regime, arms embargoes, and asset freezes. Allied airstrikes against Qaddafi’s forces began later that day. As a result, starting Monday we dealt with the reaction to the Security Council Resolution and the start of allied intervention. One of the main themes we covered was perceptions of the role of the US. Many highlighted that President Obama, mindful of the US already being involved in two wars in Muslim-majority countries, purposefully was “keeping the US out of the spotlight” (Italy’s Corriere della Sera).
More generally, we discussed the divides in NATO. Britain and France were the main supporters of intervention, the US eventually joined them to push for the above Security Council Resolution, and Italy reluctantly followed suit. However, alongside the ‘BRIC’ countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), Germany – a rotating member of the UN Security Council – abstained from the vote on Resolution 1973. This dramatic break from Germany’s NATO allies was widely noted – unlike the lead up to Iraq, where France and Germany took identical positions and whose leaders were very vocally against the war, today regarding Libya France and Germany, which are core of the European Union, are presently taking very different positions.
With the US seen as not stepping up to take command, and with Britain and France leading separate operations, many turned to NATO as the natural vehicle to coordinate and lead the intervention. However, some commentators worried that bringing in NATO was risky, as the organization is seen in much the same light as the US in the Muslim world. At any rate, on Friday everyone reported that “NATO takes military control in Libya” (La Razon), on the model of NATO’s role in Afghanistan. Still, if anything is clear from all the editorials and commentaries this week on Libya, it’s that the endgame of the intervention remains very much in doubt
On Monday, I met with staff and students from the University of Hawaii who were studying in Belgium. They came to the Media Hub to shoot interviews promoting the US-Belgium student exchange program. Unfortunately, as their visit coincided with crunch time for the Early Alert, I didn't get to do much with them other than introduce myself.
Tuesday afternoon I attended a conference hosted by Carnegie Europe called “Consolidating Egypt's Revolution.” It featured Amr Hamzawy, an Egyptian political scientist who is the research director and senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Hamzawy overviewed the situation in Egypt, and mentioned several major changes he sees in the country since the start of the revolution. Since 1952, Egypt’s political system was based on pushing people away, but starting January 25th citizens reentered the political process, and the fact that many millions participated in the recent constitutional referendum proposing a way forward is a hopeful sign that citizens will remain involved in politics. The Egyptian people also discovered that the Egyptian state, which was thought to be strong, in fact turned out to be quite weak – indeed, after a few days or weeks of protests the system collapsed, and only the military was able to propose a way forward. And for whatever reason, during the revolution Egyptian society was able to push aside sectarian tensions, social class divides, and other divisions to protest in a unified and civilized manner. But since pushing out Mubarak these tension are returning – between social classes (i.e. rising numbers of strikes) and between social groups (i.e. the recent violence against Christian Copts in the north). That said, while Hamzawy acknowledges that Egypt is a poor country with social and economic crises, he believes that energy unleashed by the revolution will remain a part of Egypt’s political culture and help enable solutions to these problems.
Amr Hamzawy also discussed some of the challenges that lie ahead for Egypt. A looming political question is what electoral system Egypt should adopt – should it conduct elections on an individual candidate system, which in the past produced weak legislatures and enabled corruption, or will it shift to a mixed system of party lists and individual candidates, like a simplified version of what Germany has? The second challenge is whether political groups and movements, especially those just now trying to organize and establish themselves, will have enough time to compete in the upcoming elections. That is the main reason why Hamzawy voted against the aforementioned referendum, which committed Egypt to having elections within 6 months from now. In his view, the only two parties that are ready to compete at the moment are the Muslim Brotherhood and what remains of the former ruling party, the National Democratic Party. Besides these two, parties in Egypt fall into two categories: legal opposition parties, which were limited in the past and now are finding it hard to adapt, and the new parties that are now trying to assemble. Unless these parties acquire the necessary resources and organization, then the former ruling party and the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood will dominate and shape the new parliament. This is a worrying prospect, especially since the parliament will have a major role in the future constitutional assembly. As Hamzawy concluded, an imbalance parliament is bound to create an imbalance constitution.
The third challenge for Egypt over the next 6 months is navigating what Hamzawy termed Egypt’s “red lines” as the constitutional debate takes off. These are basically the “hot button” issues in Egypt, which to some are irrelevant, but for others are the most important issues. For instance, under the current constitute Islamic law, or Sharia, is officially the principle source of all legislation. Liberal Egyptians might be in favor of removing this, but other groups, like the Muslim Brotherhood, are vehemently opposed. Indeed, Hamzawy pointed out that the Brotherhood and other religious groups campaigned in favor of the referendum by claiming that if you vote no, then this article declaring Islam to be the state religion would be forfeited. That was not at all the case, of course, but according to Hamzawy it gives a sense of how tough addressing these red lines will be.
After having spent so much time writing about European press coverage of the revolution in Egypt I found it fascinating to hear from a person very much 'on the ground' in the country who is observing and to some degree shaping events there first hand. The meeting also gave me a preview of the type of conferences I might be helping to organize over the summer as part of an expected internship with a think tank in Washington.
Wednesday and Thursday weren't hugely eventful outside of the Early Alerts, and I left work early on Friday after completing the Early Alert to catch a flight to Bucharest, Romania for the weekend.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Michael: Week 7 – March 14th to 18th
Besides the Early Alerts, during my seventh week at the Media Hub I received a tour of the Consular Office, attended a press briefing and conference on eVehicles, and was shown around the Public Diplomacy section of the Bilateral embassy.
This week we continued to focus on Libya for the Early Alert. Many continued to debate the merits of a no-fly zone in Libya, and bemoaned the lack of leadership in the West, with Europe divided and the US taking an equivocal position. Early in the week many were still skeptical of whether the UN would ever endorse the imposition of a no-fly zone, but on Friday all the papers noted that the “UN gives the green light to use force against Qaddafi in Libya” (El Mundo).
We also discussed for several days the earthquake in Japan. Of course, there was a ton of coverage of the crisis in the European press, but most of it was irrelevant for us. This is because Washington wants us to focus on just three main angles for the Early Alert: what the European press is saying on the US, what it is saying on the EU/European policies, and what rifts, gaps, alliances, etc they are seeing within Europe, between the US and Europe, and between the US/EU and other parts of the world. For that reason we limited our press analysis to discussing the strengthening of anti-nuclear sentiment in Europe that resulted from the crisis. As Spain's Publico put it, across Europe “The nuclear debate explodes.” Coverage primarily centered on Germany, where public opinion against nuclear energy was quite strong even before the crisis, but in many other countries governments also made sure to announce new safety measures or safety reviews. We also wrote a few general sections on speculation about the potential impact of the earthquake on the global economic recovery.
On Tuesday morning Todd Stern, the United States Special Envoy for Climate Change, came into our office for a video interview, but since I was busy working on the Early Alert I didn’t have a chance to meet him or see much of the interview. The next day I did get a chance to sit in on some interviews – in this case, of former Peacecore volunteers.
On Thursday I had the opportunity to get a tour of the American Consular office in Brussels and sit in on a couple of interviews with people seeking visas. Officially, the Consular Office's top priority is assisting Americans. For instance, they help if someone loses their passport, they return bodies in cases of Americans dying abroad, they provide assistance to Americans arrested abroad, and in the event of emergencies they help evacuate Americans. All that said, what winds up taking up most of the Brussels Consular Office’s time is screening visa applications from non-Americans. Those applying for such visas generally are not Belgians, as Belgium is part of the US visa waiver program (meaning that after completing a quick online registration most Belgian citizens can travel to the US for up to 90 days in a 180-day period without a visa). Instead, most of those who come to the Consular Office for US visas are non-EU citizens who are for whatever reason in Brussels. Besides security checks, for these applicants, the bulk of whom come from third world countries, the main task of the Consular Office is to evaluate whether they are likely to return to their home country or whether there is reason to suspect that they will illegally overstay their visa to remain in the US.
Especially since it wasn’t what I was expecting, I found my visit to the Consular Office very rewarding, and perhaps will try to go back there to sit in on more visa applicant interviews (my time on the 17th was cut short by needing to return early for the Early Alert, which is still due an hour early because of Europe hasn’t yet moved to daylight savings time). I’m not sure whether I would like doing consular work myself, but if I do pursue a career in the Foreign Service I would essentially be required to complete at least one tour of Consular duty. At any rate, I imagine it must be pretty satisfying to have a job where each day you assist overseas Americans and aid non-Americans in visiting the US, while protecting the country against possible threats.
Thursday afternoon I sat in on a press briefing at the Hub. Press briefings are off-the-record meetings between journalists and officials that allow officials to give journalists background information that can't be published. The point of this is to help journalists better understand the situation in question so that they can ask better questions of interviewees. The press briefing I attended featured the Department of Energy's Advisor on eVehicle Technologies, Keith Hardy. Mr. Hardy currently leads the Grid Interaction Tech Team – a joint Department of Energy, auto industry and utility team to address technical issues of the electric vehicle-grid interface – and leads the International Cooperation task.
Later in the afternoon, Mr Hardy hosted a public workshop with his EU counterparts and industry leaders in a meeting room across from the Media Hub to discuss US-EU technical cooperation on eVehicles and continuing efforts in the U.S. to meet the climate, clean energy and oil dependency challenge through the use of innovative technologies. I found this conference very interesting, particularly as there was a strong transatlantic-angle I wasn’t expecting beforehand. Everyone present emphasized that US-EU agreement on regulations and standards makes life much easier for manufacturers on both ends of the Atlantic, and in the eVehical context this concurrence has the added bonus of speeding the development and adoption of eVehicle technology in America and Europe. Fortunately, the message I took from the discussion was that we don't really need to worry about harmonizing eVehicle standards between the US and EU, as the two have been working in close cooperation. However, they are quite concerned at the lack of agreement between the US/EU and Asia (specifically, China). Part of this disconnect comes from the fact that while the government is the sole body behind creating standards in China, in the US and EU standards are followed voluntarily, and companies, rather than governments, take the lead in developing them (because, after all, it makes more sense to leave the development of industry standards to the experts, the manufacturers).
Another interesting point was that officials in both the US and EU agree it's a good idea to share technology when it doesn't adversely impact market competition – for instance, Mr Hardy showed at the conference a standardized “smart meter” developed jointly in the US and EU that can be used in eVehicles in all markets (though at the moment China is pushing its own very similar but slightly modified so as to be incompatible smart meter). The development of this smart meter fits in with the goal of governments helping to accelerate the adoption and proliferation of eVehicles. Overall, harmonization of eVehicle standards is a good example of the type of transatlantic issue that doesn’t receive much attention (certainly isn’t as notable as a major trade or political dispute), but nevertheless has a major impact on Americans and Europeans – and if done right, will help speed the adoption of eVehicles in both the US and EU.
Friday was a rather bizarre day in the office, as half-way through working on the Early Alert the Microsoft Outlook server crashed, thereby cutting off our access to State Department email. Luckily we had already received submissions for the other embassies, so we could still complete the Early Alert, but when it came time to submit it we could not access the usual distribution list. Instead, we used Gmail to send copies to a few senior officials whose emails we had saved outside Outlook. Eventually when the server came back on online I submitted the report to the rest of our distribution list.
While the server was down, Friday afternoon I went on a tour of the Public Diplomacy (PD) section for the bilateral embassy above the Media Hub. Something interesting that I hadn’t really thought about before is that Belgium is unusual in having two separate media markets – one in French and one in Dutch. As a result, the PD staff is split between those who cover the French media and those who cover the Dutch media. English-language content on Dutch TV is generally subtitled while on French-language media they are generally dubbed over – meaning that French TV has to have time to prepare an audio translation of what the Ambassador or other officials say, while Dutch TV, only needing to produce a transcript to provide subtitles, doesn’t mind conducting English-language interviews. As the French press often takes a pass on non-French language speakers, this results in US officials receiving much more exposure and coverage on in the Dutch-language press in Belgium.
The PD department is split between press and cultural sections. Something I learned is that, far from only doing stereotypical cultural exchanges, the cultural section has increasingly been focusing on policy work, and in fact winds up working on pretty much any issues that isn't explicitly media-related. Part of this is outreach to locals. The goal isn't to try and completely convince everyone of the US position, but rather to nuance the debate, emphasizing that the US is not monolithic. For instance, on the Kyoto climate change protocol several years ago, there was a negative reaction to the US position and a perception that America is not doing anything. In response, the PD section made an effort to show that in fact the US does have many policies in place to protect the environment.
Overall, I really appreciated having a chance to visit the bilateral public diplomacy section, and gained a better sense of how the more traditional country-specific media sections operate. After the Outlook server came back online and I was able to send out the Early Alerts, I left the Hub a bit early to attend the ECON section's happy hour, thrown in advance for the last day of its intern.
This week we continued to focus on Libya for the Early Alert. Many continued to debate the merits of a no-fly zone in Libya, and bemoaned the lack of leadership in the West, with Europe divided and the US taking an equivocal position. Early in the week many were still skeptical of whether the UN would ever endorse the imposition of a no-fly zone, but on Friday all the papers noted that the “UN gives the green light to use force against Qaddafi in Libya” (El Mundo).
We also discussed for several days the earthquake in Japan. Of course, there was a ton of coverage of the crisis in the European press, but most of it was irrelevant for us. This is because Washington wants us to focus on just three main angles for the Early Alert: what the European press is saying on the US, what it is saying on the EU/European policies, and what rifts, gaps, alliances, etc they are seeing within Europe, between the US and Europe, and between the US/EU and other parts of the world. For that reason we limited our press analysis to discussing the strengthening of anti-nuclear sentiment in Europe that resulted from the crisis. As Spain's Publico put it, across Europe “The nuclear debate explodes.” Coverage primarily centered on Germany, where public opinion against nuclear energy was quite strong even before the crisis, but in many other countries governments also made sure to announce new safety measures or safety reviews. We also wrote a few general sections on speculation about the potential impact of the earthquake on the global economic recovery.
On Tuesday morning Todd Stern, the United States Special Envoy for Climate Change, came into our office for a video interview, but since I was busy working on the Early Alert I didn’t have a chance to meet him or see much of the interview. The next day I did get a chance to sit in on some interviews – in this case, of former Peacecore volunteers.
On Thursday I had the opportunity to get a tour of the American Consular office in Brussels and sit in on a couple of interviews with people seeking visas. Officially, the Consular Office's top priority is assisting Americans. For instance, they help if someone loses their passport, they return bodies in cases of Americans dying abroad, they provide assistance to Americans arrested abroad, and in the event of emergencies they help evacuate Americans. All that said, what winds up taking up most of the Brussels Consular Office’s time is screening visa applications from non-Americans. Those applying for such visas generally are not Belgians, as Belgium is part of the US visa waiver program (meaning that after completing a quick online registration most Belgian citizens can travel to the US for up to 90 days in a 180-day period without a visa). Instead, most of those who come to the Consular Office for US visas are non-EU citizens who are for whatever reason in Brussels. Besides security checks, for these applicants, the bulk of whom come from third world countries, the main task of the Consular Office is to evaluate whether they are likely to return to their home country or whether there is reason to suspect that they will illegally overstay their visa to remain in the US.
Especially since it wasn’t what I was expecting, I found my visit to the Consular Office very rewarding, and perhaps will try to go back there to sit in on more visa applicant interviews (my time on the 17th was cut short by needing to return early for the Early Alert, which is still due an hour early because of Europe hasn’t yet moved to daylight savings time). I’m not sure whether I would like doing consular work myself, but if I do pursue a career in the Foreign Service I would essentially be required to complete at least one tour of Consular duty. At any rate, I imagine it must be pretty satisfying to have a job where each day you assist overseas Americans and aid non-Americans in visiting the US, while protecting the country against possible threats.
Thursday afternoon I sat in on a press briefing at the Hub. Press briefings are off-the-record meetings between journalists and officials that allow officials to give journalists background information that can't be published. The point of this is to help journalists better understand the situation in question so that they can ask better questions of interviewees. The press briefing I attended featured the Department of Energy's Advisor on eVehicle Technologies, Keith Hardy. Mr. Hardy currently leads the Grid Interaction Tech Team – a joint Department of Energy, auto industry and utility team to address technical issues of the electric vehicle-grid interface – and leads the International Cooperation task.
Later in the afternoon, Mr Hardy hosted a public workshop with his EU counterparts and industry leaders in a meeting room across from the Media Hub to discuss US-EU technical cooperation on eVehicles and continuing efforts in the U.S. to meet the climate, clean energy and oil dependency challenge through the use of innovative technologies. I found this conference very interesting, particularly as there was a strong transatlantic-angle I wasn’t expecting beforehand. Everyone present emphasized that US-EU agreement on regulations and standards makes life much easier for manufacturers on both ends of the Atlantic, and in the eVehical context this concurrence has the added bonus of speeding the development and adoption of eVehicle technology in America and Europe. Fortunately, the message I took from the discussion was that we don't really need to worry about harmonizing eVehicle standards between the US and EU, as the two have been working in close cooperation. However, they are quite concerned at the lack of agreement between the US/EU and Asia (specifically, China). Part of this disconnect comes from the fact that while the government is the sole body behind creating standards in China, in the US and EU standards are followed voluntarily, and companies, rather than governments, take the lead in developing them (because, after all, it makes more sense to leave the development of industry standards to the experts, the manufacturers).
Another interesting point was that officials in both the US and EU agree it's a good idea to share technology when it doesn't adversely impact market competition – for instance, Mr Hardy showed at the conference a standardized “smart meter” developed jointly in the US and EU that can be used in eVehicles in all markets (though at the moment China is pushing its own very similar but slightly modified so as to be incompatible smart meter). The development of this smart meter fits in with the goal of governments helping to accelerate the adoption and proliferation of eVehicles. Overall, harmonization of eVehicle standards is a good example of the type of transatlantic issue that doesn’t receive much attention (certainly isn’t as notable as a major trade or political dispute), but nevertheless has a major impact on Americans and Europeans – and if done right, will help speed the adoption of eVehicles in both the US and EU.
Friday was a rather bizarre day in the office, as half-way through working on the Early Alert the Microsoft Outlook server crashed, thereby cutting off our access to State Department email. Luckily we had already received submissions for the other embassies, so we could still complete the Early Alert, but when it came time to submit it we could not access the usual distribution list. Instead, we used Gmail to send copies to a few senior officials whose emails we had saved outside Outlook. Eventually when the server came back on online I submitted the report to the rest of our distribution list.
While the server was down, Friday afternoon I went on a tour of the Public Diplomacy (PD) section for the bilateral embassy above the Media Hub. Something interesting that I hadn’t really thought about before is that Belgium is unusual in having two separate media markets – one in French and one in Dutch. As a result, the PD staff is split between those who cover the French media and those who cover the Dutch media. English-language content on Dutch TV is generally subtitled while on French-language media they are generally dubbed over – meaning that French TV has to have time to prepare an audio translation of what the Ambassador or other officials say, while Dutch TV, only needing to produce a transcript to provide subtitles, doesn’t mind conducting English-language interviews. As the French press often takes a pass on non-French language speakers, this results in US officials receiving much more exposure and coverage on in the Dutch-language press in Belgium.
The PD department is split between press and cultural sections. Something I learned is that, far from only doing stereotypical cultural exchanges, the cultural section has increasingly been focusing on policy work, and in fact winds up working on pretty much any issues that isn't explicitly media-related. Part of this is outreach to locals. The goal isn't to try and completely convince everyone of the US position, but rather to nuance the debate, emphasizing that the US is not monolithic. For instance, on the Kyoto climate change protocol several years ago, there was a negative reaction to the US position and a perception that America is not doing anything. In response, the PD section made an effort to show that in fact the US does have many policies in place to protect the environment.
Overall, I really appreciated having a chance to visit the bilateral public diplomacy section, and gained a better sense of how the more traditional country-specific media sections operate. After the Outlook server came back online and I was able to send out the Early Alerts, I left the Hub a bit early to attend the ECON section's happy hour, thrown in advance for the last day of its intern.
Monday, May 16, 2011
May 2-6, The death of Osama bin Laden
In DC the death of Osama bin Laden had a huge effect: there were celebrations in front of the White House, a sudden burst of patriotism, and security was multiplied. The day after I heard the news about his death, I was presented with several different viewpoints about what it means for the US, whether our reaction was appropriate, and what they think will be happening in the future. This is something I wrote while I was explaining how the event impacted me.
For the past two days I have been reflecting on the death of Al-Qaeda founder and national enemy Osama bin Laden and what it means for America. After hours of reflection, I am still unable to understand the depth of the emotions that it has engendered in me.
For the past two days I have been reflecting on the death of Al-Qaeda founder and national enemy Osama bin Laden and what it means for America. After hours of reflection, I am still unable to understand the depth of the emotions that it has engendered in me.
This death confounds me because it is impossible for me to conceptualize the levels of hatred that prompted 9/11. It is difficult to accept that killing Osama bin Laden will do nothing in bringing those who were lost on that day back; that their families will continue to live with the gaping holes of their absence. It is hard to deny that ridding the world of one of the most deplorable human beings does not bring us unfettered satisfaction because of the despair that is innately part of the story. I believe that the confusion toward an appropriate response does not signal that I am un-American, but that I am trying to understand the event in terms of the fabric upon which America is built- the idea of taking the high road, of avoiding violence and destruction whenever possible. Of having a conscience that sees moral qualms with taking human life in all cases. The continuation of the tragedy of 9/11 reopens a well of emotion that is still incomprehensible to many people. It ignites emotions in us that we do not want to feel; of hatred, of despair, of darkness. It recalls one of the worst days in American history.
Our culture has learned the hard way that savagery only begets savagery. This is why Americans try to reject the impulses that often come along with loss and fear- from racism to marginalization to radicalism. Violence and destruction vex us, regardless of the legitimacy of the cause, and it is hard to accept when that is this only way.
Our culture has learned the hard way that savagery only begets savagery. This is why Americans try to reject the impulses that often come along with loss and fear- from racism to marginalization to radicalism. Violence and destruction vex us, regardless of the legitimacy of the cause, and it is hard to accept when that is this only way.
It is because I am not wired to deal with the amount of hatred that the situation has confronted us with that I hesitate. The statement “I am so happy we killed him” is counter intuitive. It feels strange to say, because the statement in and of itself is against our cultural inclination to mourn death and destruction, to regret the pervasiveness of it in our society. It does not adequately express the reaction that while we are happy that bin Laden is gone, we are overwhelmed with sadness that the events passed the way they did, starting on September 11 of 2001 but stemming back for years before that.
Bin Laden is better off dead. Indeed, it seems that the world would be better if he had never lived. However, it is not this thought that torments me. It is the act of killing, of possibility of engendering an even more violent response, of the fact that he may now be martyred by his followers and used as a justification for more violence, that I struggle with. It is the fact that it seemed to be the only solution to the problem. It is the fact that the tragedy happened at all.
I support America and the American troops in the decisions made regarding the death of bin Laden. I doubt that many people in the international community will understand the visceral reaction of celebration that many Americans felt- a reaction that can only be understood when one witnesses the horror of a deliberate attack on their country- their friends, their families, their lives- their understanding of the world as a whole. It is a reaction that can only be understood when one risks his or her life, and the eternal heartbreak of his or her family when they decide to serve our country. The impulse to cheer or to cry both stem from the tangle of emotions that each person associates with the day that delineated pre and post 9/11 America. The onslaught of emotion that Americans experienced was the result of 10 years of a new way of life, of a new fear, of a wound that will never fully heal. The death of bin Laden will not heal the wound, but I hope that it will begin to give closure to the families that have been rasped by the incomprehensible devastation of 9/11. If reflection on the past events fills you with confusion, let it, because to feel the gravitas of the act, to question why it happened and to mourn the destruction in its wake, and to try to understand how it can be avoided in the future is to be truly, unequivocally American.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Michael: Week 6 – March 7th to 11th
During my 6th week at the State Department, I continued on the Early Alerts, sat in on a meeting of section heads at the bilateral embassy to Belgium, and observed a digital media conference between the several Media Hubs and Washington.
Like last week, our main focus for the Early Alerts this week was the continuing crisis in Libya. Each day, many editorials and commentators focused on the big question of whether America and Europe should intervene against Colonel Qaddafi. Most days we were able to write two sections clearly contrasting the arguments of those in favor or against some sort of Western intervention. Those in favor feared that, absent an intervention, Qaddafi might massacre his people, and warned of the regional impact of Qaddafi being allowed to win out against the rebels – which would have clear implications for other Arab leaders contemplating how to react to growing protests and demonstrations. Those opposed to intervention cautioned that the proposed no-fly zone might not be all that effective against Qaddafi’s predominately land-based mercenary army, and that a Western intervention could delegitimize the rebels and turn Arab opinion against the West. Gaining the UN’s green light would clearly help in this regard, but that was seen as unlikely given Chinese and Russian opposition to a military intervention.
Besides the Early Alert, on Wednesday I had the chance to sit in on a meeting of section heads at the bilateral embassy, just as I did previously with the USEU meeting. As before, they briefed the Ambassador on the status of their sections, and the Ambassador briefed the group on overall goals and concerns. Not even working in that embassy, yet alone having the necessary background, I couldn’t follow all of what was being discussed, but it was interesting to see how the Ambassador, who besides being the public face of the US in Belgium is also a manager of a large office, coordinates and supervisors his subordinates. In particular, I observed that the Ambassador both came to the meeting to be briefed by his subordinates on their progress, but also to brief them on the overall mission of the embassy. In short, he functioned as the “big picture” person, pulling together data from the various parts of the embassy to develop an overall idea of where things should be going.
On Thursday, I attended parts of a digital media conference (i.e. over webcam) between people in Washington and the various regional Media Hubs to discuss best practices and more generally how the Hubs should operate between Washington and the various country-specific embassies. The meeting itself, and talking with my supervisors beforehand, gave me a better sense of the position of the Media Hub vis-à-vis other branches of the US government – namely, that the Media Hubs are supposed cover entire regions, rather than countries. For example, you wouldn't have the press section of an individual country embassy cover a large multilateral conference in Asia; instead, the Asian media hub would report on that meeting.
Like last week, our main focus for the Early Alerts this week was the continuing crisis in Libya. Each day, many editorials and commentators focused on the big question of whether America and Europe should intervene against Colonel Qaddafi. Most days we were able to write two sections clearly contrasting the arguments of those in favor or against some sort of Western intervention. Those in favor feared that, absent an intervention, Qaddafi might massacre his people, and warned of the regional impact of Qaddafi being allowed to win out against the rebels – which would have clear implications for other Arab leaders contemplating how to react to growing protests and demonstrations. Those opposed to intervention cautioned that the proposed no-fly zone might not be all that effective against Qaddafi’s predominately land-based mercenary army, and that a Western intervention could delegitimize the rebels and turn Arab opinion against the West. Gaining the UN’s green light would clearly help in this regard, but that was seen as unlikely given Chinese and Russian opposition to a military intervention.
Besides the Early Alert, on Wednesday I had the chance to sit in on a meeting of section heads at the bilateral embassy, just as I did previously with the USEU meeting. As before, they briefed the Ambassador on the status of their sections, and the Ambassador briefed the group on overall goals and concerns. Not even working in that embassy, yet alone having the necessary background, I couldn’t follow all of what was being discussed, but it was interesting to see how the Ambassador, who besides being the public face of the US in Belgium is also a manager of a large office, coordinates and supervisors his subordinates. In particular, I observed that the Ambassador both came to the meeting to be briefed by his subordinates on their progress, but also to brief them on the overall mission of the embassy. In short, he functioned as the “big picture” person, pulling together data from the various parts of the embassy to develop an overall idea of where things should be going.
On Thursday, I attended parts of a digital media conference (i.e. over webcam) between people in Washington and the various regional Media Hubs to discuss best practices and more generally how the Hubs should operate between Washington and the various country-specific embassies. The meeting itself, and talking with my supervisors beforehand, gave me a better sense of the position of the Media Hub vis-à-vis other branches of the US government – namely, that the Media Hubs are supposed cover entire regions, rather than countries. For example, you wouldn't have the press section of an individual country embassy cover a large multilateral conference in Asia; instead, the Asian media hub would report on that meeting.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Patrick: Week 9 (March 14-18)
This week was a short one at the office given that my boss was only in town for a few days amidst back-to-back development and fundraising trips. Whenever my boss is away on such trips, he never fails to return with a sizable number of new contacts in the form of business cards. Translation: I spent much of these few days entering potential donor and faculty contact information into our MS Excel databases. As you can probably guess, this job is a tedious and thankless one. However, I take solace in the fact that, without accurate and ever-growing mailing lists, we would not be able to continue prospecting for the ever-critical donations that keep our doors open and our lights on every day!
Other than these and various other data entry tasks, I also worked this week on getting charter bus quotes. We are hoping to possibly bus a group of students to a premiere of the film adaptation of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged in Chicago. If the Chicago premiere option falls through, I will be working on getting a private screening of the film here in Champaign for donors, faculty, students, and other interested parties to attend. My boss and I are going to try and coordinate the showing of the film with presentations and discussions from some of our faculty fellows. I am really hoping that we are able to carry out this event to full fruition without any "deal-breaking" snags. This event seems to me to be an opportune vehicle through which we can increase student, faculty, and general public awareness of our organization! At the very least, I need to get reading. I must admit I have yet to read Ayn Rand's seemingly timeless novel.
I hope everyone is well. Best wishes for a great weekend!
Other than these and various other data entry tasks, I also worked this week on getting charter bus quotes. We are hoping to possibly bus a group of students to a premiere of the film adaptation of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged in Chicago. If the Chicago premiere option falls through, I will be working on getting a private screening of the film here in Champaign for donors, faculty, students, and other interested parties to attend. My boss and I are going to try and coordinate the showing of the film with presentations and discussions from some of our faculty fellows. I am really hoping that we are able to carry out this event to full fruition without any "deal-breaking" snags. This event seems to me to be an opportune vehicle through which we can increase student, faculty, and general public awareness of our organization! At the very least, I need to get reading. I must admit I have yet to read Ayn Rand's seemingly timeless novel.
I hope everyone is well. Best wishes for a great weekend!
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Patrick: Week 8 (March 7-11)
This week, my boss was away on development trip to Arizona. His absence meant that I worked in the library throughout the week. Not working from the office certainly did not bring a week that was any less busy, however. It was actually quite exciting given that I got to take the lead in putting together an important presentation about the Academy that will be shown at a donor luncheon later this year. Aside from gaining the satisfaction of playing a lead role on a project that will be important to the Academy's future fundraising success, I also gained a new sense of both where the Academy has been in the past and where it is going in the future. More specifically, via researching for the presentation, I had the opportunity to learn about older, more experienced organizations with missions and goals similar to those of the Academy. Taking account of where these organizations are today, I became more hopeful that the Academy can experience similar levels of success.
Looking back at the first paragraph I just finished writing, I realize that I may need to clarify what I meant by my becoming "more hopeful" concerning the Academy's success. By saying that I became "more hopeful," I certainly did not mean that I felt little hope for the Academy's success to begin with. To both clarify and speak candidly, I really did not know what to expect when I decided to serve as the Academy's first-ever intern. Being the optimist that I am, I guess I thought that with the Academy being the infant organization that it is (with only one official employee on payroll), I would be given the opportunity to leave an indelible mark on the Academy's foundational projects and operations. Don't get me wrong; in many ways, I have been able to do so---quite literally. For evidence, refer to my past entries where I detailed setting up office phone lines, Internet connections, as well as organizing a new donor database in MS Excel. Yet, on the other hand, there are very defined downsides to interning for an infant organization. One is that I might get the chance to work on ambitious book projects, conference proposal research, or event planning research. Yet, due to lack of partner organization interest or time constraints, many of my assigned projects have never been carried out to full fruition. As a result, I often find it hard to imagine the Academy experiencing large-scale, macro-level success when there still seems be so much room for improvement at the micro level. At the end of the day though, I guess every project (regardless of the stage to which I am able to carry it) sheds new light on the true realities (i.e. both the highs and the lows) of non-profit management. Being exposed to these realities will---at least I hope--prepare me for the similar future realities I am bound to face as an entry-level professional of any variety.
Looking back at the first paragraph I just finished writing, I realize that I may need to clarify what I meant by my becoming "more hopeful" concerning the Academy's success. By saying that I became "more hopeful," I certainly did not mean that I felt little hope for the Academy's success to begin with. To both clarify and speak candidly, I really did not know what to expect when I decided to serve as the Academy's first-ever intern. Being the optimist that I am, I guess I thought that with the Academy being the infant organization that it is (with only one official employee on payroll), I would be given the opportunity to leave an indelible mark on the Academy's foundational projects and operations. Don't get me wrong; in many ways, I have been able to do so---quite literally. For evidence, refer to my past entries where I detailed setting up office phone lines, Internet connections, as well as organizing a new donor database in MS Excel. Yet, on the other hand, there are very defined downsides to interning for an infant organization. One is that I might get the chance to work on ambitious book projects, conference proposal research, or event planning research. Yet, due to lack of partner organization interest or time constraints, many of my assigned projects have never been carried out to full fruition. As a result, I often find it hard to imagine the Academy experiencing large-scale, macro-level success when there still seems be so much room for improvement at the micro level. At the end of the day though, I guess every project (regardless of the stage to which I am able to carry it) sheds new light on the true realities (i.e. both the highs and the lows) of non-profit management. Being exposed to these realities will---at least I hope--prepare me for the similar future realities I am bound to face as an entry-level professional of any variety.
Monday, April 25, 2011
April 18-22: Geospatial mapping!
The week of April 18th was a pretty interesting week for me at Amnesty International. Aside from my daily administrative tasks (which I have explained several times and will not bore you with again) there were a few things that particularly stood out to me.
The first one was when I got to sit in on the taping of a press video about Amnesty International's collaboration with The Center for Ethics in Science and Technology on their work in geospatially mapping Yodŏk, a concentration camp in North Korea.
Geospatial mapping is the practice of using satellite imagery to map out a region that can not be accessed to be mapped manually. Geospatial mapping has been used for several years, and it is now being used by Amnesty International to find out information about Yodŏk, which is a high-security camp for political prisoners in North Korea that has been the site of deplorable human rights violations. Amnesty began creating geospatial maps of Yodŏk in 2001, and since then the camp has grown exponentially. Through the development of bigger work farms, gold mines, and guards' quarters Amnesty has inferred that Yodŏk is housing larger amounts of prisoners. Meanwhile, the North Korean government - Kim Jong-il - continue to deny that the camp exists.
The press video was about the work that Amnesty has been able to do in assessing the state of human rights violations in the camp with the help of the geospatial capabilities of The Center for Ethics in Science and Technology. The human rights violations are very disturbing, and have been expounded upon partially by the few prisoners who have been able to escape from the camp. It was really interesting watching a scientist explain the maps and their significance to an Amnesty representative, and it was exciting to be able to watch progressive research in the field.
This week I also had a conversation about the fact that there is nothing on the street level to indicate the Amnesty office and nothing on our office doors. I never thought much of that, aside from the fact that since we aren't a store or trying to solicit business that there is no need for a noticeable presence. However, while listening to the representative explain Amnesty's work with mapping the concentration camp, I wondered if the lack of signage was also a deliberate attempt to keep the Amnesty office unnoticeable. I asked my supervisor about this, and she said that was a large part of it. In addition to the lack of distinction for the office, there are fire-proof/bullet-proof doors and panic buttons. These safety precautions do not surprise me, and are becoming more and more utilized by all types of businesses. However, some of Amnesty's goals are particularly controversial and have engendered threatening behavior in the past. This reminded me of the CLP trip to the Anti-Defamation League last spring where the staffer explained to us that any organization that defends rights and criticizes the actions of governments or individuals often receives threats. This idea is present in a lot of Amnesty's work, but seemed particularly relevant while watching the scientist and the Amnesty representative explain the geospatial research of the area that North Korea has tried to keep completely secret.
Another interesting conversation that I had this week was with a fellow U of I alum who is working as a lawyer in Arlington. I was put in contact with him from another U of I alum who I actually met at the Cline Symposium! He asked me how my time was going in DC, if I felt that I had had a successful professional experience, and if there was anything that he could do to assist me with my goals before the end of my internship. I explained to him my desire to do international writing, and he said that he thought it was an attainable goal and gave me tips of concrete steps to work toward it. I especially appreciate when people provide specific, succinct advice. It was really encouraging to hear advice from someone who is fairly versed in the journalism industry and knows a lot about the market in DC. I was happy that the Cline Symposium had provided me with the opportunity to meet these alumni.
Amnesty has gotten much busier in the past few weeks (as I mentioned in the last post) and this has resulted in me taking signficantly more requests from journalists for interviews with different sources. I really like being able to set up an interview between a journalist and the appropriate Amnesty contact. I know that the interviews get Amnesty's message out to the public, and I am glad that I can have a role in facilitating that. The most remote call I have received to date was a British journalist calling from her post in Qatar.
I will end this post with how Easter went! I had originally planned on going home for Easter, but since I went home a few weeks ago I decided it would be better to stay in DC. I ended up going to Mass with a few of my friends here, and then we spent the perfect, sunny day outside. I have a history of interesting Easters, especially the Easter of 2009 while studying abroad that I spent in Stockholm. Have a great week everyone!
The first one was when I got to sit in on the taping of a press video about Amnesty International's collaboration with The Center for Ethics in Science and Technology on their work in geospatially mapping Yodŏk, a concentration camp in North Korea.
Geospatial mapping is the practice of using satellite imagery to map out a region that can not be accessed to be mapped manually. Geospatial mapping has been used for several years, and it is now being used by Amnesty International to find out information about Yodŏk, which is a high-security camp for political prisoners in North Korea that has been the site of deplorable human rights violations. Amnesty began creating geospatial maps of Yodŏk in 2001, and since then the camp has grown exponentially. Through the development of bigger work farms, gold mines, and guards' quarters Amnesty has inferred that Yodŏk is housing larger amounts of prisoners. Meanwhile, the North Korean government - Kim Jong-il - continue to deny that the camp exists.
The press video was about the work that Amnesty has been able to do in assessing the state of human rights violations in the camp with the help of the geospatial capabilities of The Center for Ethics in Science and Technology. The human rights violations are very disturbing, and have been expounded upon partially by the few prisoners who have been able to escape from the camp. It was really interesting watching a scientist explain the maps and their significance to an Amnesty representative, and it was exciting to be able to watch progressive research in the field.
This week I also had a conversation about the fact that there is nothing on the street level to indicate the Amnesty office and nothing on our office doors. I never thought much of that, aside from the fact that since we aren't a store or trying to solicit business that there is no need for a noticeable presence. However, while listening to the representative explain Amnesty's work with mapping the concentration camp, I wondered if the lack of signage was also a deliberate attempt to keep the Amnesty office unnoticeable. I asked my supervisor about this, and she said that was a large part of it. In addition to the lack of distinction for the office, there are fire-proof/bullet-proof doors and panic buttons. These safety precautions do not surprise me, and are becoming more and more utilized by all types of businesses. However, some of Amnesty's goals are particularly controversial and have engendered threatening behavior in the past. This reminded me of the CLP trip to the Anti-Defamation League last spring where the staffer explained to us that any organization that defends rights and criticizes the actions of governments or individuals often receives threats. This idea is present in a lot of Amnesty's work, but seemed particularly relevant while watching the scientist and the Amnesty representative explain the geospatial research of the area that North Korea has tried to keep completely secret.
Another interesting conversation that I had this week was with a fellow U of I alum who is working as a lawyer in Arlington. I was put in contact with him from another U of I alum who I actually met at the Cline Symposium! He asked me how my time was going in DC, if I felt that I had had a successful professional experience, and if there was anything that he could do to assist me with my goals before the end of my internship. I explained to him my desire to do international writing, and he said that he thought it was an attainable goal and gave me tips of concrete steps to work toward it. I especially appreciate when people provide specific, succinct advice. It was really encouraging to hear advice from someone who is fairly versed in the journalism industry and knows a lot about the market in DC. I was happy that the Cline Symposium had provided me with the opportunity to meet these alumni.
Amnesty has gotten much busier in the past few weeks (as I mentioned in the last post) and this has resulted in me taking signficantly more requests from journalists for interviews with different sources. I really like being able to set up an interview between a journalist and the appropriate Amnesty contact. I know that the interviews get Amnesty's message out to the public, and I am glad that I can have a role in facilitating that. The most remote call I have received to date was a British journalist calling from her post in Qatar.
I will end this post with how Easter went! I had originally planned on going home for Easter, but since I went home a few weeks ago I decided it would be better to stay in DC. I ended up going to Mass with a few of my friends here, and then we spent the perfect, sunny day outside. I have a history of interesting Easters, especially the Easter of 2009 while studying abroad that I spent in Stockholm. Have a great week everyone!
Monday, April 18, 2011
Carolyn April 11-15
Hey everyone! To say the last few weeks have been hectic would be an understatement. I have been really busy with almost no down-time for the past two weeks. Spring is typically the busiest season for Amnesty International because it is when it issues its most integral reports. There was also a large event that needed to be planned- Get on the Bus: DC. Get on the Bus DC was a large demonstration in front of several different embassies about different issues. I had to write the media advisory for it; here are the locations and descriptions that were sent to the media.
Locations and Times: Foundry Methodist Church, 1500 16th St. NW, 10:30 AM: Speakers forum of afore mentioned guests
Consulate of Iraq, 11:30 AM: calling for the release of Walid Yunis Ahmad, Kurdish man accused of being "a threat to security" and one of an estimated 30,000 cases of detention in Iraq Embassy of Zimbabwe, 11:30 AM: supporting the leaders of Women of Zimbabwe Arise and all human rights defenders by demanding the police in Zimbabwe quit harassing, intimidating, jailing and torturing people fighting for their rights
Indonesian Embassy, 1:30 PM: urging the government to release prisoner of conscience Filep Karma
Chad Embassy, 2:15 PM: calling for better treatment of displaced persons
Myanmar/Burma Embassy, 2:45 PM: calling for the release of Burmese political prisoners who were jailed for non-violent protests
Sri Lankan Embassy, 2:50 PM: reminding the government of the need for an international war crimes investigation and journalists at risk
Embassy of China, 4:10 PM: bringing focus and attention to the Chinese government’s detention of Tibetan Dhondup Wangchen, filmmaker of the documentary "Leaving Fear Behind," and to call on China for his immediate and unconditional release
This was an all-day event that garnered over a hundred participants and some media attention. I was happy because I convinced a radio show to arrive early in the morning and provide coverage of the event- this allows more people to hear about it to work toward our goal of promoting awareness. Anyway, aside from this event my time in DC has become really hectic too! A lot of the interns are starting to leave to go back to their hometowns or school, so most days have been filled with goodbye dinners and lunches and in general a lot of preparation for all of us to leave.
The other day my boss invited another intern and I to dinner at her house in Annapolis. It was really nice to be recognized, and my boss made a point to say how much she has appreciated the work that the other intern and I have been doing. I have also been putting in significant time researching career possibilities, because after the months that I have spent at Amnesty, I have decided that I definitely want to do international work but I probably do not want to work in the non-profit/ NGO realm.
I had a friend visit from home over the weekend who is planning on being an accountant and just finished up a full-time internship. At one point I was talking to her about the time that I have spent at Amnesty, and the things that I like and don't like about the work. The main thing that I like about the work is that I feel that it is an admirable cause that helps to alleviate injustice and cruelty in the world through its human rights work. The main thing that I don't like is that it is very hard to measure results. It is really fantastic to hear that a person that we were campaigning for has been treated more fairly, or even better, has been freed from an unjust incarceration. However, these successes take large amounts of time and results can not be attributed to any one factor. Maybe Amnesty had a large role in a person's freedom, or maybe it didn't.
I realize that it is unrealistic and naive to think that a large multinational organization will be able to engender immediate results on an international scale. This is simply not reality for any large multinational or NGO. However, I feel more motivation through having noticeable results and can work toward a goal in a systematic way with benchmarks that display progress. For example, if you are in sales, and you make a sale, that is a measure of progress that you can attain and evaluate that you are doing your job correctly. With Amnesty's type of work, you have to use much broader and more esoteric ways to measure success. I'm not saying that's bad; it's not, and it's the only way that a large scale organization can run. Working here, I have decided to determine my own standards of progress and make sure that I recognize when I do and do not meet them.
For example, the fact that I made sure that a radio station came to our Get on the Bus event was a success. If I talk to a journalist and am able to help them reach a contact to interview, that is a success. Basically, those are the aspects of my internship that have a measurable positive or negative reaction. I do other work, but there is generally no way to gauge if I have done it in an effective way aside from checking over my work. Sorry about the long rant on that, but I have been thinking about it lately as I consider the kind of work that I want to do post-graduation. I have come up with the fact that I want something where I will be able to derive satisfaction from broad, overarching goals (like Amnesty's vision of a world free of human rights violations) while still feeling like I am making day-to-day progress that is not simply based on ideas and rhetoric. Thank you for listening, have a good week!
Locations and Times: Foundry Methodist Church, 1500 16th St. NW, 10:30 AM: Speakers forum of afore mentioned guests
Consulate of Iraq, 11:30 AM: calling for the release of Walid Yunis Ahmad, Kurdish man accused of being "a threat to security" and one of an estimated 30,000 cases of detention in Iraq Embassy of Zimbabwe, 11:30 AM: supporting the leaders of Women of Zimbabwe Arise and all human rights defenders by demanding the police in Zimbabwe quit harassing, intimidating, jailing and torturing people fighting for their rights
Indonesian Embassy, 1:30 PM: urging the government to release prisoner of conscience Filep Karma
Chad Embassy, 2:15 PM: calling for better treatment of displaced persons
Myanmar/Burma Embassy, 2:45 PM: calling for the release of Burmese political prisoners who were jailed for non-violent protests
Sri Lankan Embassy, 2:50 PM: reminding the government of the need for an international war crimes investigation and journalists at risk
Embassy of China, 4:10 PM: bringing focus and attention to the Chinese government’s detention of Tibetan Dhondup Wangchen, filmmaker of the documentary "Leaving Fear Behind," and to call on China for his immediate and unconditional release
This was an all-day event that garnered over a hundred participants and some media attention. I was happy because I convinced a radio show to arrive early in the morning and provide coverage of the event- this allows more people to hear about it to work toward our goal of promoting awareness. Anyway, aside from this event my time in DC has become really hectic too! A lot of the interns are starting to leave to go back to their hometowns or school, so most days have been filled with goodbye dinners and lunches and in general a lot of preparation for all of us to leave.
The other day my boss invited another intern and I to dinner at her house in Annapolis. It was really nice to be recognized, and my boss made a point to say how much she has appreciated the work that the other intern and I have been doing. I have also been putting in significant time researching career possibilities, because after the months that I have spent at Amnesty, I have decided that I definitely want to do international work but I probably do not want to work in the non-profit/ NGO realm.
I had a friend visit from home over the weekend who is planning on being an accountant and just finished up a full-time internship. At one point I was talking to her about the time that I have spent at Amnesty, and the things that I like and don't like about the work. The main thing that I like about the work is that I feel that it is an admirable cause that helps to alleviate injustice and cruelty in the world through its human rights work. The main thing that I don't like is that it is very hard to measure results. It is really fantastic to hear that a person that we were campaigning for has been treated more fairly, or even better, has been freed from an unjust incarceration. However, these successes take large amounts of time and results can not be attributed to any one factor. Maybe Amnesty had a large role in a person's freedom, or maybe it didn't.
I realize that it is unrealistic and naive to think that a large multinational organization will be able to engender immediate results on an international scale. This is simply not reality for any large multinational or NGO. However, I feel more motivation through having noticeable results and can work toward a goal in a systematic way with benchmarks that display progress. For example, if you are in sales, and you make a sale, that is a measure of progress that you can attain and evaluate that you are doing your job correctly. With Amnesty's type of work, you have to use much broader and more esoteric ways to measure success. I'm not saying that's bad; it's not, and it's the only way that a large scale organization can run. Working here, I have decided to determine my own standards of progress and make sure that I recognize when I do and do not meet them.
For example, the fact that I made sure that a radio station came to our Get on the Bus event was a success. If I talk to a journalist and am able to help them reach a contact to interview, that is a success. Basically, those are the aspects of my internship that have a measurable positive or negative reaction. I do other work, but there is generally no way to gauge if I have done it in an effective way aside from checking over my work. Sorry about the long rant on that, but I have been thinking about it lately as I consider the kind of work that I want to do post-graduation. I have come up with the fact that I want something where I will be able to derive satisfaction from broad, overarching goals (like Amnesty's vision of a world free of human rights violations) while still feeling like I am making day-to-day progress that is not simply based on ideas and rhetoric. Thank you for listening, have a good week!
Friday, April 15, 2011
April 15th
Tuesday was the culmination of months of planning and hours of work...The 2011 Greek Congressional Visits. Every year the national presidents and student leaders of fraternities and sororities around the United States come to DC and lobby on behalf of the Collegiate Housing and Infrastructure Act. The bill was introduced in 2003 by Paul Ryan and passed the House but failed in the Senate. Each year it has been reintroduced and has gained sponsors since then but has never passed into law. I will give you a quick background on what the bill actually does and then explain sort of the series of event that go along with the visitis.
Bill Text Information
Under the tax code, charitiable contributions to colleges and universities for student housing improvements is tax-deductible. So if you make a donation for Scott Hall at University of Illinois you may write that off 100%. However, that same donation made to not for profit student housing like fraternities, sororities, Newman Centers, Hillels, and Evan Scholar housing is not. The bill eliminates this arbritary distinction between colleges and universities and allow charitiable donations made to not for profit student housing to be tax deductible.
So what does this do?
Affordability
Since 2000, the average cost of tutiton and room and board has increased tremendously. The average student loan debt is $24,000 and the cost of education is rising every year. Collegiate Housing and Infrastructure Act makes college more affordable by encourageing charitibale contributions that will drive down housing expenses.
Safety
Increasing age and wear of not-for-profit student housing requires significant improvements needed for safety. 1200 facilites nation wide need infrastructure upgrades and only 39% of fraternal housing has sprinklers. Charitibale contributions made to student housing would allow money to be spent on necessary safety equiptment such as fire sprinklers, smoke alarms, and extinguishers.
Job Creation
CHIA will provide capital and safety upgrades that will create jobs for America. Private funds will create jobs for plummers, contractors, roofers, carpenters, and electricans. It is estimated that $1 Billion in capital imporvement projects are ready for construction.
So National Presidents of all the fraternities and sororities come to DC and help visit offices to persuade members of congress to sponsor the bill. If the bill has enough sponsors in the house and senate then it will be voted on the floor. I was in a group with Alan Brackett President of Delta Tau Delta, Sarah Lindsay President of Delta Delta Delta, and a girl named Emily Rankin from UCLA that was a Tri Delt. We visited 11 congressional offices and the visits went very well.
I switched over back and forth from teams to visit Illinois Senate Offices, Delta Tau Delta connections, and my district in Illinois. That night was the Fraternity and Sorority PAC Dinner and 25 members spoke during the night. I have pictures with Sam Graves, Trent Lott, John Breaux, Robert Hurt, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Tom Carper.
The morning after we had a Fraternity and Sorority PAC meeting for four hours and then I went back to work. Overall, long but successful process.
peace'
Bill Text Information
Under the tax code, charitiable contributions to colleges and universities for student housing improvements is tax-deductible. So if you make a donation for Scott Hall at University of Illinois you may write that off 100%. However, that same donation made to not for profit student housing like fraternities, sororities, Newman Centers, Hillels, and Evan Scholar housing is not. The bill eliminates this arbritary distinction between colleges and universities and allow charitiable donations made to not for profit student housing to be tax deductible.
So what does this do?
Affordability
Since 2000, the average cost of tutiton and room and board has increased tremendously. The average student loan debt is $24,000 and the cost of education is rising every year. Collegiate Housing and Infrastructure Act makes college more affordable by encourageing charitibale contributions that will drive down housing expenses.
Safety
Increasing age and wear of not-for-profit student housing requires significant improvements needed for safety. 1200 facilites nation wide need infrastructure upgrades and only 39% of fraternal housing has sprinklers. Charitibale contributions made to student housing would allow money to be spent on necessary safety equiptment such as fire sprinklers, smoke alarms, and extinguishers.
Job Creation
CHIA will provide capital and safety upgrades that will create jobs for America. Private funds will create jobs for plummers, contractors, roofers, carpenters, and electricans. It is estimated that $1 Billion in capital imporvement projects are ready for construction.
So National Presidents of all the fraternities and sororities come to DC and help visit offices to persuade members of congress to sponsor the bill. If the bill has enough sponsors in the house and senate then it will be voted on the floor. I was in a group with Alan Brackett President of Delta Tau Delta, Sarah Lindsay President of Delta Delta Delta, and a girl named Emily Rankin from UCLA that was a Tri Delt. We visited 11 congressional offices and the visits went very well.
I switched over back and forth from teams to visit Illinois Senate Offices, Delta Tau Delta connections, and my district in Illinois. That night was the Fraternity and Sorority PAC Dinner and 25 members spoke during the night. I have pictures with Sam Graves, Trent Lott, John Breaux, Robert Hurt, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Tom Carper.
The morning after we had a Fraternity and Sorority PAC meeting for four hours and then I went back to work. Overall, long but successful process.
peace'
Friday, April 8, 2011
Shutdown and Internet Updates
I went to a very interesting hearing about the interent, piracy and counterfeiting. I want to explain some of the statements that people said while at the hearing. If you are interested at all in internet piracy, counterfeiting or google then read on, if not, stop and watch the news about the government shut down.
Ok so here are the people and here is what they said at the hearing. It is sort of long but kind of cool.
Speakers:
This hearing was another step in Congress’ review of IP infringement and counterfeiting problems, especially in online commerce. Such heightened review follows the priorities set by the IP Czar in her February 2011 report.
The primary solutions discussed at the hearing were to go after the money used to finance counterfeiting websites (via the banner advertisements) and how they ship goods (fed ex, UPS , etc). Google asked the entertainment industry to play a more active role in telling Google what websites are legitimate and what are not. They also noted that companies other than Google should increase their oversight of the Internet. They also discussed increasing the consequences for counterfeiting, to create a deterrent effect. Legislation that addresses these concerns should be drawn up, but needs to have a narrow scope because it is impossible to predict changes in the future.
Overview:
Online commerce has levels of theft that impacts movies, software, music, goods and services, and medicine. Counterfeit goods, fake products, and fake medicines are being sold illegally online and the goods are being shipped to American homes. Foreign websites that are out of the United States
American businesses are under assault from copy right thieves and counterfeiters. Crime is taking place online and the government has begun investigating crimes online because thieves have led them there. The government is not trying to infringe on 1st amendment rights, but when crimes are taking place, investigations need to occur. There are currently over 1,000 Intellectual Property investigations and 119 domain names have been seized. There has been enforcement of illegal streaming and downloading and no targeting of blogs or targeting of commercial interactions have occurred. Addressing online crime is not easy and should definitely not be off limits for enforcement.
The internet should not be lawless. The law is the same to libel on the internet as it is in the newspaper. It is the same to invasion of privacy on the internet as it is on television. When addressing 1st amendment concerns for the internet it must be drafted narrowly. It should only target websites that are totally infringing on privacy rights or pirating because it is important not to wipe out or block freedom of speech. Legislation should be based on laws that already exist. There have been copyright laws since 1790 and civil procedure with laws on the internet should make reference to old ones. It is important to protect copy right law so that will still encourage freedom of expression.
Google leads the industry in helping to combat counterfeit goods. Google has been willing to improve enforcement and operate in a meaningful way. Google is dedicated to fighting the bad guys that break the law, and at the same time, do not want to harm legitimate businesses. Google has spent millions of dollars and lots of time installing copyright tools into YouTube.com to block certain content ID and protecting the money to rights holders. Google has engineers that sole job is to work on protecting privacy rights.
When a copyright owner shows infringement to Google, they shut it down. When a Google user is duped into a website and counterfeit goods are sold, it reflects poorly on them. They have shut down 50,000 accounts that were selling counterfeit goods.
Enforcement problems are the main issue for Google. Removing sites and fighting the bad guys takes time, and is a constant battle. Google wants to remove content and movies that are counterfeited but the entertainment industry is a very complicated place.They have no way of knowing what is legitimate and what is not. When the entertainment industry tells Google a site is illegitimate then it removes it. Google is ready to work with the content industry to identify and eliminate websites that sell counterfeit goods. It needs feedback to know what is legitimate and what is not.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Carolyn March 28-31st
Hello! I am just getting caught up on work from my weekend in Chicago and Champaign. I had some logistical things to figure out in Champaign and I also received an award for an article I wrote last semester. I was really excited! I hope everyone is having a good week. Last week seems like a long time ago, and I also left on Thursday so the week was short for me.
The most notable development in Amnesty-related news was the disappointing rejection by the Supreme Court to Troy Davis' appeal; a man that Amnesty has been advocating for as having a strong case of innocence. Amnesty issued this statement on the development:
"Amnesty International is extremely disappointed that the Supreme Court rejected Troy Davis’ appeal. It appears that the justice system is comfortable allowing someone to be executed when there are lingering doubts about guilt in the case. No objective person could confidently determine that Davis is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence available now in his case. That leaves an ominous cloud hanging over an irreversible sentence such as the death penalty. Because there was no physical evidence linking Davis to the murder, nor was there physical evidence exonerating him, the case rested on a group of witnesses whose credibility was readily accepted for conviction, but so easily rejected in the appeals process. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, as the final fail-safe, has the opportunity to commute his sentence to life and prevent the possibility of executing an innocent person."
As you can see by the content of this statement, Amnesty has been working tirelessly to garner support for Troy Davis' appeal. It is very disappointing when Amnesty works toward a goal that does not come to fruition, because people here feel very strongly about the ideas behind what they are doing. However, there is still a chance of commuting to a life sentence through the State Board of Pardons and Paroles.
While cases about the death penalty are not necessarily the issue that I am interested in, I read about all of Amnesty's causes because they all necessitate interaction with the media.
Also in the news were further developments about Syria and the Tunisian migrants to Italy. The issue of mistreatment of Tunisian immigrants in Italy is interesting to me because I studied abroad in Italy, and I witnessed the very obvious sentiment against immigrants and foreigners. While I was there I didn't realize the gravitas of the situation.
Another task I completed last week was drafting a letter to the editor template about Amnesty's stance on the crackdown of collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin. Amnesty often tries to mobilize support by providing activists with materials like letter templates, so I did research on the statements that Amnesty has issued and put together a cohesive but brief statement about what Amnesty's position. I enjoy getting writing experience because that is what I want to do when I finish my degree. I can't believe it's already April- time is going so fast! Have a great day and weekend everyone!
The most notable development in Amnesty-related news was the disappointing rejection by the Supreme Court to Troy Davis' appeal; a man that Amnesty has been advocating for as having a strong case of innocence. Amnesty issued this statement on the development:
"Amnesty International is extremely disappointed that the Supreme Court rejected Troy Davis’ appeal. It appears that the justice system is comfortable allowing someone to be executed when there are lingering doubts about guilt in the case. No objective person could confidently determine that Davis is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence available now in his case. That leaves an ominous cloud hanging over an irreversible sentence such as the death penalty. Because there was no physical evidence linking Davis to the murder, nor was there physical evidence exonerating him, the case rested on a group of witnesses whose credibility was readily accepted for conviction, but so easily rejected in the appeals process. The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, as the final fail-safe, has the opportunity to commute his sentence to life and prevent the possibility of executing an innocent person."
As you can see by the content of this statement, Amnesty has been working tirelessly to garner support for Troy Davis' appeal. It is very disappointing when Amnesty works toward a goal that does not come to fruition, because people here feel very strongly about the ideas behind what they are doing. However, there is still a chance of commuting to a life sentence through the State Board of Pardons and Paroles.
While cases about the death penalty are not necessarily the issue that I am interested in, I read about all of Amnesty's causes because they all necessitate interaction with the media.
Also in the news were further developments about Syria and the Tunisian migrants to Italy. The issue of mistreatment of Tunisian immigrants in Italy is interesting to me because I studied abroad in Italy, and I witnessed the very obvious sentiment against immigrants and foreigners. While I was there I didn't realize the gravitas of the situation.
Another task I completed last week was drafting a letter to the editor template about Amnesty's stance on the crackdown of collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin. Amnesty often tries to mobilize support by providing activists with materials like letter templates, so I did research on the statements that Amnesty has issued and put together a cohesive but brief statement about what Amnesty's position. I enjoy getting writing experience because that is what I want to do when I finish my degree. I can't believe it's already April- time is going so fast! Have a great day and weekend everyone!
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Government SHUTDOWN
One of the jobs of being a lobbyist is reporting on the potential effects of proposed legislation. Often times, (more often than not) members of Congress will sign onto a bill, rule change or procedure and have no idea how it will actually play out. The change could have unintended results and could be potentially devastating for different parts of the economy. One of
- 1099 Reporting Requirements
Cadillac Plan Tax- Individual Mandate
- Restrictions for marketing
Along the same lines, one key current event in Washington
As you might know, typically Democrats want to expand government and the Republicans want to limit it. This is precisely what the two are arguing over in the budget financing proposal. The Republicans are proposing a $6.2 trillion cut in government spending over the next decade, eliminating hundreds of duplicative programs, curbing corporate welfare, and banning earmarks. This would help reduce the deficit and reach a sustainable government. In regards to taxes, Republicans want to keep the taxes low to allow the economy to grow and eliminate $800 billion in tax increases proposed by the health care law. For growth and jobs, they estimate nearly 1 million new private sector jobs and unemployment rate down to 4 percent by 2015.
For the Democrats, these cuts will hurt the economy and halt job creation. Since Obama took office in 2008, the number of jobs in the United States
It will be interesting to watch and see what will happen with the budget this week. A government shutdown will be devastating to much of the work that I have been doing for the past couple of weeks. Maybe the Reps and the Dems can come to some common ground and no matter what actually happens both sides will claim victory.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Carolyn March 21-25
Hey everybody! I hope you had a good weekend. Last week was interesting because it was the first week with my new supervisor (who I am training!) but aside from that it was fairly administrative and quiet because several people from the DC and NY office went on vacation following the Annual General Meeting.
I heard that the AGM was really fun, with guests ranging from Christy Turlington to former political prisoners to musical artist Jahi. These meetings typically appeal to a broad spectrum of different ages and types of people, so it is important to make the appearances diverse.
My new supervisor previously worked at the Feminist Majority Foundation, so obviously she is very interested in women's rights. She decided to work for Amnesty because she is wanted a job in communication for a non-profit. She started on Monday, and I was asked to explain how to issue press releases, compile media reports, take calls from the press, and the day-to-day workings of the media office at Amnesty. Amnesty is very welcoming toward new employees, so I think she felt at home.
The biggest issue with Amnesty in the news this week was our release of the yearly death penalty report. The report surveys the status of the death penalty around the world, and contains detailed comparisons and updates about different countries. Amnesty is a very reliable source on many international human rights issues (for information as well as advocacy), and the death penalty is one that Amnesty has worked with diligently for years.
According to the report, a total of 31 countries abolished the death penalty in law or in practice during the last 10 years, but China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Yemen carried out the most executions—in direct contradiction of international human rights law. Many of countries that are currently undergoing political upheavals carried out executions in 2010, Iran (252), Libya (18), Saudi Arabia (27), Syria (17), Yemen (53) [numbers in parenthesis are minimal numbers of execution AI verified]. In these countries, the death penalty was frequently imposed after unfair trials and for offenses, such as drug-trafficking or adultery, that are not recognized as the "most serious crimes" and therefore in violation of international law.
In my opinion, the factual (and practical) argument against the death penalty is strong: "The facts are making an impact in a very emotional debate: the death penalty does not deter murder, it costs millions and the system is riddled with bias and error. More and more Americans are wondering if we can afford the financial and moral costs of the death penalty," Amnesty's death penalty abolition campaign director said.
Here is some specific information about the death penalty in the US:
"In the United States at least 110 death sentences were imposed during 2010. This represents only one-third of the number of death sentences imposed in the mid-1990s and is lower than in any year since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. In March 2011, Illinois became the 16th state to abolish the death penalty."
This report was important in the media office because it was distributed widely throughout the American press, so I received several calls with questions and interview requests. The phone number distributed on the press releases is my office phone, so I am the first person to field these calls. It is interesting to talk to journalists and help deliver information, but since they are often on deadlines, it is at times frenetic to get them the interview that they need.
Also prominent in the news were some of the human rights violations that are now becoming widespread in post-revolution Egypt. Amnesty is concerned that female protestors have been treated especially harshly. Amnesty also issued a statement about the brutal treatment of protesters in Syria. Unfortunately, it seems that the human rights violations rampant in countries in North Africa and the Middle East have not ended with the onset of revolution.
I hope everyone has a good week. I am going back to Chicago for the weekend and I will be back next week! Have a great day.
I heard that the AGM was really fun, with guests ranging from Christy Turlington to former political prisoners to musical artist Jahi. These meetings typically appeal to a broad spectrum of different ages and types of people, so it is important to make the appearances diverse.
My new supervisor previously worked at the Feminist Majority Foundation, so obviously she is very interested in women's rights. She decided to work for Amnesty because she is wanted a job in communication for a non-profit. She started on Monday, and I was asked to explain how to issue press releases, compile media reports, take calls from the press, and the day-to-day workings of the media office at Amnesty. Amnesty is very welcoming toward new employees, so I think she felt at home.
The biggest issue with Amnesty in the news this week was our release of the yearly death penalty report. The report surveys the status of the death penalty around the world, and contains detailed comparisons and updates about different countries. Amnesty is a very reliable source on many international human rights issues (for information as well as advocacy), and the death penalty is one that Amnesty has worked with diligently for years.
According to the report, a total of 31 countries abolished the death penalty in law or in practice during the last 10 years, but China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Yemen carried out the most executions—in direct contradiction of international human rights law. Many of countries that are currently undergoing political upheavals carried out executions in 2010, Iran (252), Libya (18), Saudi Arabia (27), Syria (17), Yemen (53) [numbers in parenthesis are minimal numbers of execution AI verified]. In these countries, the death penalty was frequently imposed after unfair trials and for offenses, such as drug-trafficking or adultery, that are not recognized as the "most serious crimes" and therefore in violation of international law.
In my opinion, the factual (and practical) argument against the death penalty is strong: "The facts are making an impact in a very emotional debate: the death penalty does not deter murder, it costs millions and the system is riddled with bias and error. More and more Americans are wondering if we can afford the financial and moral costs of the death penalty," Amnesty's death penalty abolition campaign director said.
Here is some specific information about the death penalty in the US:
"In the United States at least 110 death sentences were imposed during 2010. This represents only one-third of the number of death sentences imposed in the mid-1990s and is lower than in any year since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. In March 2011, Illinois became the 16th state to abolish the death penalty."
This report was important in the media office because it was distributed widely throughout the American press, so I received several calls with questions and interview requests. The phone number distributed on the press releases is my office phone, so I am the first person to field these calls. It is interesting to talk to journalists and help deliver information, but since they are often on deadlines, it is at times frenetic to get them the interview that they need.
Also prominent in the news were some of the human rights violations that are now becoming widespread in post-revolution Egypt. Amnesty is concerned that female protestors have been treated especially harshly. Amnesty also issued a statement about the brutal treatment of protesters in Syria. Unfortunately, it seems that the human rights violations rampant in countries in North Africa and the Middle East have not ended with the onset of revolution.
I hope everyone has a good week. I am going back to Chicago for the weekend and I will be back next week! Have a great day.
Patrick: Week 7 (February 28-March 4)
If I did not have an obligation to blog about each week at my internship site, I likely would have omitted this week from my collection of postings. This week wasn't a bad one by any means, but it was devoted primarily to me updating our expense records via labelling and scanning receipts. Once all of the receipts were "digitized" as PDFs, I created spreadsheets of expenditures that serve as our monthly expense reports. Beyond this, I could continue by providing you with more details about the mundane processes that make up the broader process of "record keeping" in our office. However, I am going to kind of mix things up a bit this week--to avoid putting you to sleep--and talk about an event I attended on Tuesday (the 1st) that was political but non work-related. This event was a speech by Meghan McCain, daughter of U.S. Senator John McCain.
- The speech wasn't intended to be academic per se, nor was it intended to be all that politically charged. Instead, it was simply a collection of Meghan's own views on how the Republican Party must "widen its tent" by moving away from some of its more restrictive stances on social issues (i.e. abortion and gay marriage) and focus its efforts on preserving free markets, individual rights and freedoms, as well as the ideals of a small, limited government.
- I know the speech resonated with me. And, judging by the number of identifiably "left-leaning" audience members present, Meghan certainly attracted a crowd that was indicative of her distaste for polarizing partisanship. This year especially, I have begun to consider myself more of a libertarian than a "cookie cutter" Republican. To be clear, I'm not a staunch libertarian in the sense of being opposed to all forms of government infrastructure and intervention. However, I do think that our current government is crippling our economy via its excessive spending demands and the ridiculous tax burdens it places on its tax-paying citizens. In addition, I believe the private sector is able to handle even our society's more "altruistic" dilemmas more efficiently and effectively than government is able to do so. Not surprisingly then, I hope to actively work toward limiting the scope government in this country throughout my lifetime. Not to be forgotten, however, is the idea that part of this work will involve embracing the broad-based tenets of individuality and individual choice surrounding a woman's right to an abortion and an individual's right to enter into a same-sex relationship.
- But enough about my beliefs and hopes for society's future. The point is that Meghan McCain delivered an inspiring "call to action" that successfully apologized for Republican missteps on social issues in one breath while reaffirming all of the things that make me proud to be a "Republican" in the next breath. In short, many thanks to Meghan for inspiring me and others like me who are tired of the Republican Party actively stifling diversity in its ranks. The Republican Party can indeed be great again. Let's steer it away from its current path of polarized obscurity and toward a more inclusive future!
Michael: Week 5 (Feb 28th to March 4th)
In addition to the Early Alert, this week I finally had a chance to visit NATO, saw the Ambassador again at an intern brown bag lunch meeting, and met Alec Ross, Secretary Clinton’s Senior Adviser for Innovation.
Monday’s Early Alert focused solely on Libya. Topics covered were: reaction to the UN’s decision to impose sanctions Qaddafi (El Mundo headlines “Qaddafi becomes a pariah”), commentary on Qaddafi’s future as ruler of Libya (Polska: “Qaddafi’s days are numbered”), the calls by some for the West to “do everything to protect the people in Libya” (Blid), and the general perception that “the United States, after some initial hesitation, seems determined to take the lead” (El Pais). In the afternoon, I sat in on a series of interviews of current or past participants in the Fulbright scholarship.
Tuesday’s Early Alert also centered on Libya, and coverage concentrated on the debate over whether the West should intervene militarily in Libya. For instance, a commentary in the Daily Telegraph argues that “The Libyans cannot be left to a terrible fate,” and adds “An array of voices are arguing that if Gaddafi begins to exterminate Libyan citizens… then the world will have a duty to intervene.”Others, however, urge caution. For instance, Süddeutsche editorializes: “Europe and the US are only calming their conscience by discussing imposing a no-fly zone over Libya. This will not decide the power struggle between Qaddafi and his opponents… If the international community wanted to interfere militarily, it would have to send ground troops, which it will not do. First, the interim government in Bengasi does not want foreign troops in the country.... Secondly, the West could not justify the mission to its people.” We also wrote a section on speculation about “What comes after Qaddafi?” (El Mundo).
We also wrote on Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan’s highly controversial speech in Düsseldorf, Germany. There are several million people of Turkish background in Germany, many of whom are guestworkers who started to Germany in the 1960s or their children or grandchildren, and questions over integration, culture, etc have long simmered. On Monday, during a visit to Germany, PM Erdogan gave a speech to an assembly of over 10,000 Turks in Germany, mentioning his “growing unease” about the way immigrants are treated in Germany. Tuesday’s edition of The Guardian headlined “Erodgan tells Turks to resist assimilation into German society,” and La Croix noted that Erdogan was “fuel[ing] the German debate over immigration.” The popular German tabloid Bild Zeitung judged “Erdogan's sermon to be a provocation…With these remarks he is torpedoing… the difficult attempt to integrate the more than three million people with Turkish roots into Germany's society… This is shabby and irresponsible." Others, like Süddeutsche Zeitung, weren’t as outraged at Erdogan’s speech, though the paper pointed out that “If someone really should feel provoked by Erdogan's criticism of assimilation, then this should be the Kurds in Turkey. It would have been nice if all the critics grabbed Erdogan by the scuff of his neck and used his words at home in Diyarbakir or Ankara.” This is in reference to the long-standing dispute in Turkey over the status of the country’s large indigenous Kurdish minority - from 1984 to 1999 there was open warfare within Turkey between the military and the separatist, Kurdish PKK insurgents that devastated much of the predominantly Kurdish south-eastern provinces, killing many Turks and Kurds. Only in 2002 (under Erdogan's government) did Turkey pass laws allowing Kurdish-language radio and television broadcasts, though many points of contention remain (hence Süddeutsche Zeitung’s reference to Erdogan’s apparent hypocrisy in decrying assimilationist policies in Germany).
Tuesday afternoon Alec Ross, Secretary Clinton’s Senior Adviser for Innovation, visited the Media Hub for a video interview and then conference with staff from the Tri-mission embassies. In light of the Arab revolutions, in both the interview and conference Ross primarily talked about social media. In particular, I liked that Ross pointed out that while they played a role, social media tools like Facebook and Twitter did not cause the revolutions. I completely agree: while social media played a role, it’s definitely not the point of making these “Twitter Revolutions,” as some have sensationally called them. He also compared these tools to metal: just as metal can be fashioned into a hospital or a machete, the internet can be used for both peaceful and violent pursuits, as seen in how the internet both brings many people together around the world but also facilities global terrorist networks.
Wednesday’s Early Alert focused on Libya and also saw the return of the regional domino effect section. Libya angles included: reactions to Qaddafi’s bloody counterattack amidst what the UN warned was a refugee crisis as thousands attempted to flee to neighboring Tunisia, the question of whether a no-fly zone would be instituted, and speculation on how events in Libya would evolve. On the domino effect, we focused on revolts and sometimes violent reactions in Iran, Yemen, and, interestingly, Iraq.
In the middle of working on the Early Alert, I left to attend a ‘brown bag’ lunch with Ambassador Kennard and interns from the three embassies. The Ambassador talked on a number of issues. He mentioned that in his view there are three components to success: that you should always have a vision of where you are going, that you have to execute (or else it’s just a dream), and that you have to have some passion about what you want to do. The Ambassador also commented on attempts to fashion a common EU foreign policy, most notably the recently-created European External Action Service (EAS), which in some sense serves (or might one day serve) as the foreign ministry of the EU.
Wednesday afternoon I attended an interview strategies presentation by one of the other interns at the Media Hub. I’m of course not a journalism student, but several things stood out to me. One is that it often helps to ask an interviewee to repeat their answer to a question, as the second time through their answers are usually more concise with less “ums” or pauses, as they are no longer making up their answer as they go. Another tip is to keep natural sounds in videos. That’s hard to explain without an example… in the presentation that intern showed a clip from a story about a woman in America who creates paintings that memorialize fallen US soldiers. She (the intern) pointed out all the sounds in the segment that I normally would not pay much attention to, and as we paid close attention it was clear that the clip would have been a lot less effective had the only sound been people talking.
Thursday’s Early Alert covered three topics: Libya, Pakistan, and attacks on US soldiers in Germany. On Libya, we focused on the debate in the European press between those who warned against military intervention and those who say “A foreign intervention may become inevitable” (Slate.fr). For instance, Poland’s Gazeta Wyborcza writes, “The military in Washington are dampening the enthusiasm of some experts and politicians who want to carry out a military action against the Qaddafi regime…. It seems, then, that strong statements from Hillary Clinton are rather psychological warfare aimed at encouraging the Libyan military to quit the dictator and join the revolution.” By contrast, the German Tagesspiegel comments: “The situation would change if Qaddafi was attempting to re-conquer the east, threatening bloodshed of revenge. Requests for help would follow and the world could no longer stand by and watch. It should be prepared for this.”
Our angle on Pakistan was the assassination of the country’s only Christian minister by Islamists. Something we also look for is whether right- and left-wing papers disagree or agree on an issue; the former isn’t exactly surprising, but the latter is notable. So I thought it significant that, for instance, Britain’s center-right Daily Telegraph and center-left Guardian both strongly condemned what they called the Pakistani government’s “appeasement” of extremists.
Our third topic was the killing of two US soldiers at Frankfurt Airport in Germany. Tagesspiegel reported that this was a “targeted attack on Americans” by a “suspect who has links to Islamists,” and Rzeczpospolita wonders whether it was a “terrorist attack” or an “act by a madman.” Our counterparts in Berlin reported that that morning the German N-TV mentioned that “Federal Prosecutors take over investigations” as “the German-Kosovo suspect has been unmasked as an Islamist,” who was fighting a “Holy War against infidels.”
Friday morning I did not do much on the Early Alert since I had the opportunity that day to go to NATO Headquarters for a tour by the Information Officer (IO) at the U.S. Mission to NATO. Since NATO is located far from the center of Brussels (not even reachable by metro), I took a taxi there and back. Coming from the Media Hub and it’s less-than-10 employees, NATO was huge – there are over 20 meeting rooms for Ambassadors, government officials, and journalists, and the last NATO Summit, held in Lisbon last November, featured heads of state and delegations from more than 50 countries and over 1,800 journalists! Since official business was taking place I unfortunately did not get the see NATO’s main summit room, though I did get to see parts of US Mission and had coffee and juice with the IO at NATO’s cafeteria.
Once I got back to the Media Hub the Early Alert had already been mostly completed, but in the afternoon I discussed with my supervisor the new style we will use from here on at the request of Washington. The main difference is that we will now include one sentence summaries either in the headline of each section or as their first sentence that give an overview of the press. For instance, for our section on the reaction to continued violence in Libya we wrote “Events in Libya remain on front pages, but below the fold, of most European newspapers.” Also, on my suggestion, we might get rid of the usual section headers listing the country or topic (i.e. we no longer have a separate line just saying “LIBYA” before all the sections on Libya).
Monday’s Early Alert focused solely on Libya. Topics covered were: reaction to the UN’s decision to impose sanctions Qaddafi (El Mundo headlines “Qaddafi becomes a pariah”), commentary on Qaddafi’s future as ruler of Libya (Polska: “Qaddafi’s days are numbered”), the calls by some for the West to “do everything to protect the people in Libya” (Blid), and the general perception that “the United States, after some initial hesitation, seems determined to take the lead” (El Pais). In the afternoon, I sat in on a series of interviews of current or past participants in the Fulbright scholarship.
Tuesday’s Early Alert also centered on Libya, and coverage concentrated on the debate over whether the West should intervene militarily in Libya. For instance, a commentary in the Daily Telegraph argues that “The Libyans cannot be left to a terrible fate,” and adds “An array of voices are arguing that if Gaddafi begins to exterminate Libyan citizens… then the world will have a duty to intervene.”Others, however, urge caution. For instance, Süddeutsche editorializes: “Europe and the US are only calming their conscience by discussing imposing a no-fly zone over Libya. This will not decide the power struggle between Qaddafi and his opponents… If the international community wanted to interfere militarily, it would have to send ground troops, which it will not do. First, the interim government in Bengasi does not want foreign troops in the country.... Secondly, the West could not justify the mission to its people.” We also wrote a section on speculation about “What comes after Qaddafi?” (El Mundo).
We also wrote on Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan’s highly controversial speech in Düsseldorf, Germany. There are several million people of Turkish background in Germany, many of whom are guestworkers who started to Germany in the 1960s or their children or grandchildren, and questions over integration, culture, etc have long simmered. On Monday, during a visit to Germany, PM Erdogan gave a speech to an assembly of over 10,000 Turks in Germany, mentioning his “growing unease” about the way immigrants are treated in Germany. Tuesday’s edition of The Guardian headlined “Erodgan tells Turks to resist assimilation into German society,” and La Croix noted that Erdogan was “fuel[ing] the German debate over immigration.” The popular German tabloid Bild Zeitung judged “Erdogan's sermon to be a provocation…With these remarks he is torpedoing… the difficult attempt to integrate the more than three million people with Turkish roots into Germany's society… This is shabby and irresponsible." Others, like Süddeutsche Zeitung, weren’t as outraged at Erdogan’s speech, though the paper pointed out that “If someone really should feel provoked by Erdogan's criticism of assimilation, then this should be the Kurds in Turkey. It would have been nice if all the critics grabbed Erdogan by the scuff of his neck and used his words at home in Diyarbakir or Ankara.” This is in reference to the long-standing dispute in Turkey over the status of the country’s large indigenous Kurdish minority - from 1984 to 1999 there was open warfare within Turkey between the military and the separatist, Kurdish PKK insurgents that devastated much of the predominantly Kurdish south-eastern provinces, killing many Turks and Kurds. Only in 2002 (under Erdogan's government) did Turkey pass laws allowing Kurdish-language radio and television broadcasts, though many points of contention remain (hence Süddeutsche Zeitung’s reference to Erdogan’s apparent hypocrisy in decrying assimilationist policies in Germany).
Tuesday afternoon Alec Ross, Secretary Clinton’s Senior Adviser for Innovation, visited the Media Hub for a video interview and then conference with staff from the Tri-mission embassies. In light of the Arab revolutions, in both the interview and conference Ross primarily talked about social media. In particular, I liked that Ross pointed out that while they played a role, social media tools like Facebook and Twitter did not cause the revolutions. I completely agree: while social media played a role, it’s definitely not the point of making these “Twitter Revolutions,” as some have sensationally called them. He also compared these tools to metal: just as metal can be fashioned into a hospital or a machete, the internet can be used for both peaceful and violent pursuits, as seen in how the internet both brings many people together around the world but also facilities global terrorist networks.
Wednesday’s Early Alert focused on Libya and also saw the return of the regional domino effect section. Libya angles included: reactions to Qaddafi’s bloody counterattack amidst what the UN warned was a refugee crisis as thousands attempted to flee to neighboring Tunisia, the question of whether a no-fly zone would be instituted, and speculation on how events in Libya would evolve. On the domino effect, we focused on revolts and sometimes violent reactions in Iran, Yemen, and, interestingly, Iraq.
In the middle of working on the Early Alert, I left to attend a ‘brown bag’ lunch with Ambassador Kennard and interns from the three embassies. The Ambassador talked on a number of issues. He mentioned that in his view there are three components to success: that you should always have a vision of where you are going, that you have to execute (or else it’s just a dream), and that you have to have some passion about what you want to do. The Ambassador also commented on attempts to fashion a common EU foreign policy, most notably the recently-created European External Action Service (EAS), which in some sense serves (or might one day serve) as the foreign ministry of the EU.
Wednesday afternoon I attended an interview strategies presentation by one of the other interns at the Media Hub. I’m of course not a journalism student, but several things stood out to me. One is that it often helps to ask an interviewee to repeat their answer to a question, as the second time through their answers are usually more concise with less “ums” or pauses, as they are no longer making up their answer as they go. Another tip is to keep natural sounds in videos. That’s hard to explain without an example… in the presentation that intern showed a clip from a story about a woman in America who creates paintings that memorialize fallen US soldiers. She (the intern) pointed out all the sounds in the segment that I normally would not pay much attention to, and as we paid close attention it was clear that the clip would have been a lot less effective had the only sound been people talking.
Thursday’s Early Alert covered three topics: Libya, Pakistan, and attacks on US soldiers in Germany. On Libya, we focused on the debate in the European press between those who warned against military intervention and those who say “A foreign intervention may become inevitable” (Slate.fr). For instance, Poland’s Gazeta Wyborcza writes, “The military in Washington are dampening the enthusiasm of some experts and politicians who want to carry out a military action against the Qaddafi regime…. It seems, then, that strong statements from Hillary Clinton are rather psychological warfare aimed at encouraging the Libyan military to quit the dictator and join the revolution.” By contrast, the German Tagesspiegel comments: “The situation would change if Qaddafi was attempting to re-conquer the east, threatening bloodshed of revenge. Requests for help would follow and the world could no longer stand by and watch. It should be prepared for this.”
Our angle on Pakistan was the assassination of the country’s only Christian minister by Islamists. Something we also look for is whether right- and left-wing papers disagree or agree on an issue; the former isn’t exactly surprising, but the latter is notable. So I thought it significant that, for instance, Britain’s center-right Daily Telegraph and center-left Guardian both strongly condemned what they called the Pakistani government’s “appeasement” of extremists.
Our third topic was the killing of two US soldiers at Frankfurt Airport in Germany. Tagesspiegel reported that this was a “targeted attack on Americans” by a “suspect who has links to Islamists,” and Rzeczpospolita wonders whether it was a “terrorist attack” or an “act by a madman.” Our counterparts in Berlin reported that that morning the German N-TV mentioned that “Federal Prosecutors take over investigations” as “the German-Kosovo suspect has been unmasked as an Islamist,” who was fighting a “Holy War against infidels.”
Friday morning I did not do much on the Early Alert since I had the opportunity that day to go to NATO Headquarters for a tour by the Information Officer (IO) at the U.S. Mission to NATO. Since NATO is located far from the center of Brussels (not even reachable by metro), I took a taxi there and back. Coming from the Media Hub and it’s less-than-10 employees, NATO was huge – there are over 20 meeting rooms for Ambassadors, government officials, and journalists, and the last NATO Summit, held in Lisbon last November, featured heads of state and delegations from more than 50 countries and over 1,800 journalists! Since official business was taking place I unfortunately did not get the see NATO’s main summit room, though I did get to see parts of US Mission and had coffee and juice with the IO at NATO’s cafeteria.
A few of the topics we discussed…
- Something I was not aware of is that the Public Affairs Office at the U.S. Mission helps organize and coordinate week-long tours for journalists from NATO-member states and other countries to travel to Afghanistan. The office also brings international journalists to NATO so they can gain a better understanding of it operates, as well as learn about key U.S. foreign policy goals. Meanwhile, the Press Office within the U.S. Mission Public Affairs Office sets up meetings for journalists to interview the U.S. Ambassador and other officials at the Mission.
- At the last NATO Summit, the 28 NATO members agreed on a new Strategic Concept that will guide NATO operations over the next 10 years and which includes a crisis management role. Obviously that’s now a major issue with regard to Libya because if it isn’t a crisis, then what is?
- Another topic we discussed is a concern the IO deals with regularly: the question of what the U.S. Ambassador to NATO can and should say to the press. The Ambassador, of course, doesn’t want to get ahead of what the President, Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense are saying. Thus, one of the functions of the Mission’s Press Office is to produce regular summaries of speeches by and articles about top U.S. officials, which are shared with the Ambassador and other officials at the Mission. Perhaps in lieu of the Early Alerts I would have been analyzing official statements if I had interned at the Mission to NATO…
Once I got back to the Media Hub the Early Alert had already been mostly completed, but in the afternoon I discussed with my supervisor the new style we will use from here on at the request of Washington. The main difference is that we will now include one sentence summaries either in the headline of each section or as their first sentence that give an overview of the press. For instance, for our section on the reaction to continued violence in Libya we wrote “Events in Libya remain on front pages, but below the fold, of most European newspapers.” Also, on my suggestion, we might get rid of the usual section headers listing the country or topic (i.e. we no longer have a separate line just saying “LIBYA” before all the sections on Libya).
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Patrick: Week 6 (February 21-25)
This week, my boss approached me about putting together a newsletter for the Academy that will appear once each semester. The newsletter will provide those interested in our work with a summation of everything in which we have been involved throughout the semester. It will also keep these individuals informed of any future endeavors for which we may be looking to drum up donor interest and/or support. Finally, a steady newsletter will go a long way in convincing both current and potential donors that the Academy is an "up and coming" organization with an important mission worthy of their continued financial support.
Apart from learning the fundamental importance of producing a viable organizational news bulletin, I learned the importance of building an appropriate brand and image for our organization. For example, as an organization situated in the realm of higher education philanthropy, we exist to provide free-market minded opportunities and programs to university students and faculty. So, in order to illustrate our progress in the form of a donor newsletter, we must be mindful of what our newsletter audience will perceive as acceptable progress. I say this because we may make a considerable amount of internal organizational progress from one given year to the next; however, unless we can provide tangible evidence of students and faculty benefiting from our work, the year will likely be considered a "so-so" one at best. With this in mind, it is easy to see why collecting interviews, testimonials, and pictures from each event or activity we sponsor is a vitally important endeavor. As part of a newsletter, these items will illustrate to donors that their contributions to our organization are going toward productive ends!
Unfortunately for us, the academy's previous director--who oversaw things before my boss arrived--did not quite recognize the true importance of documenting student and faculty involvement with the academy for future use. As a result, one of my main tasks for the week has involved sifting through pictures taken at previous events to see if any of them could be used in our newsletter. This task was frustrating because all of the photos through which I looked proved to be unusable. Humorously enough, the photos were not unusable because they were of bad quality; they were unusable because they were not of students and faculty. As my boss put it, "Donors want to see students and faculty looking engaged; they don't want to see pictures of older men and women like themselves."
Putting my search for suitable newsletter graphics on hold, I transitioned later in the week to drafting and sending out questions for students and faculty to answer about recent Academy programming. I would use information and direct quotes from the responses I received to prepare "write-ups" for the newsletter. Finally, I ended the week by traveling to Kinkos to get an estimate on printing 1,000 to 2,000 copies of the newsletter on high-quality gloss paper. I was excited to get the "green light" on taking an active step toward production.
I hope everyone had a good week!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)