In his Sept. 11, 2000, column the late Bob Bartley argued that the press tends to deal in stereotypes, which arise "out of a tension between the ideal of objectivity and the reality of a liberal background and environment." We were reminded of this observation when we saw a piece posted on the BBC Web site yesterday, which exemplifies just how blind journalists can be to their own prejudices--even when the stories they are reporting run counter to those prejudices.
The headline: "US Detainee 'Mentally Tortured.'" The lead paragraph:
A Pakistani-born US resident detained at Guantanamo Bay has said he was "mentally tortured" there, according to a transcript released by the Pentagon.
It is true that the detainee, Majid Khan, claims to have been "mentally tortured." It is also true that the press stereotypes Guantanamo as a place where wicked Americans commit unspeakable atrocities against innocent terrorists. But if you read the BBC story to the end, you discover that Khan's claims actually refute the press's stereotype:
Mr Khan complained about how US guards had taken away pictures of his daughter, given him new glasses with the wrong prescription, shaved his beard off, forcibly fed him when he went on hunger strike, and denied him the opportunity for recreation. . . .
Later, Mr Khan produced a list of further examples of psychological torture, which included the provision of "cheap, branded, unscented soap," the prison newsletter, noisy fans and half-inflated balls in the recreation room that "hardly bounce."
The poor dear has half-inflated balls!
Must . . . resist . . . urge to . . . giggle!
Oh, the humanity! None of the inconveniences Khan describes even remotely qualify as torture, yet the Beeb accepts his characterization at face value. The stereotype prevails even though the facts make clear that it is false. This is journalism?