Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:


(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245

advertisements

Print|Email

Cole Play

| December 14, 2004

There is a lot of virtual mud flying this way and that following this post by Juan Cole, who based his opinions on this post at Martini Republic, prompting this observation from Jeff Jarvis, who calls Cole "pond scum."

The topic? Whether the Iraq the Model blog is the real thing or part of a vast right-wing conspiracy. Cole doesn't actually come out and say that he thinks the blog is a sham; he merely hides behind what Martini Republic says. But he does add, revealingly, in a clear endorsement of the accusation:

The phenomenon of blog trolling, and frankly of blog agents provocateurs secretly working for a particular group or goal and deliberately attempting to spread disinformation, is likely to grow in importance. It is a technique made for the well-funded Neoconservatives, for instance, and I have my suspicions about one or two sites out there already.

Cole has been repeatedly accused, to my mind quite justly, of assuming conspiracies based on scant evidence. In a recent post, for example, he reported access problems to his site, then wrote: "For mysterious reasons, some readers in the past week have been experiencing difficulty in accessing Informed Comment. For others, the problem has cleared up. I checked with my server provider and with Blogger, but haven't had any report of a denial of service attack or any other obvious explanation."

I have no desire to open a new front in the war against Juan Cole (Martin Kramer and Tony Badran are miles ahead in that regard). He is someone I've published quite often, and hope to again. However, there is a cautionary tale here: Cole did well to turn his Informed Comment blog into a "must read" platform during the Iraq war, but somehow one gets a sense that somewhere in there it all went to his head, and that he feels, like many of us hacks, that a sharp and shallow opinion can substitute for a deep and considered one. That's not always the case, but Cole's blog appears to have manufactured a public edition of Cole, that of the harassed but defiant activist, that Cole the academic often feels he has to live up to.

It would be shame to see Cole shrivel up entirely into self-parody. But worse, here was someone who made the Iraqi situation more understandable to many Americans at one time. He preferred to become shrill, though, losing an opportunity to bridge the knowledge gap. Such is the power, and curse, of being transposed from the classroom to the studio.

← Saying "No" to Syria | Main | Was That Part of His Advance? →

|12.14.04 @ 12:39PM|

Yet another great example of the self-diagnosis and self correction of internet based news/opinion.

Actually this was a correction of Cole's attempt to correct Iraq the Model. Fascinating, Captain.

|12.14.04 @ 1:10PM|

"Such is the power, and curse, of being transposed from the classroom to the studio."

Paging Paul Krugman ...

Jesse Walker|12.14.04 @ 1:12PM|

Looks to me like Cole is way off base here. His comments remind me of the conspiracy theories David Warren, Roger Simon, et al were spinning about Salam Pax last year -- that he must be a Baathist agent because he didn't fit their idea of what an Iraqi ought to be saying.

Naturally, few if any of the people attacking Cole -- for this and for far more defensible statements -- gave Warren and Simon the same treatment. Their theories were "interesting speculation."

Tim Cavanaugh|12.14.04 @ 1:25PM|

Obviously, Iraq The Model is a fake. I've checked the Ford, Elite and Wilhemina Agencies, and they don't represent anybody named "Iraq."

|12.14.04 @ 1:36PM|

Jesse,
Shhhh, you're supposed to be outraged, not calling out someone's hypocrisy. Besides, Salam is a Baathist, how else would a homosexual architect get internet access?

Ken Layne|12.14.04 @ 1:47PM|

Thank you, Jesse, for noting that the Bush Worshipper blogs have been very quick to claim conspiracy when it came to any Iraqi blogger not shedding public tears of gratitude for our blessed & holy invasion.

Nobody remembers anything. Especially bloggers.

As for Cole's mild suggestion regarding Paul Wolfowitz's most-favorite No. 1 Iraqi blogger, it seems reasonable to suspect that wildly pro-American political writing from a deeply anti-American wrecked country under a deadly U.S. occupation might just be propaganda.

Reason staffer Matt Welch recently wrote about a fascinating U.S. Dept. of Defense document on this very subject.

Take a look:

Arab and Muslim Internet users worldwide include change agents, young and old, critical to the region?s future. The U.S. needs trusted, reliable web sites conducive to dialogue on political, intellectual, and cultural levels. [...]

Underwrite International Products: There is a world-wide community of expert story tellers who produce message products for television, radio, film and games. Some of their products are exquisitely sensitive to nuances of the culture of the target audience. Such products should be developed -- or better -- identified so that their broader distribution to the target audience can be underwritten.

Use Interactive and Mediated Channels: Pervasive telecommunications technology permits the cost effective engagement of target audiences in sustained two-way interactions using electronic mail, interactive dialogue, virtual communication, interactive video games, and interactive Internet games. Similarly, this technology supports ad hoc group interactions using blogs and chat rooms. Mediated interactions involve an individual who orchestrated the posting of material on a web site focused on a specific issue. These new forms of engagement should be harnessed for appropriate audiences.



It doesn't matter in the least (to me) if this latest Iraqi Blogger is a DoD or CIA plant or the real Bush-lovin' deal. The fact is that the U.S. Government has made clear its interest in planting such pro-American blogs in the Muslim world, and anyone who doesn't consider this when feting an alleged independent blogger is deliberately ignoring the stated goals of the Dept. of Defense.

|12.14.04 @ 2:26PM|

In a related note, on Drum's blog there's a story of a couple of South Dakota bloggers that were paid by the Thune campaign and never disclosed it and kept mentioning imagined intimidation by the Daschle campaign and other stuff.

I'm not saying this is any reflection of the Iraq the Model bloggers, I don't read them enough to form an opinion, but these accusations are bound to happen in all media, mainstream and non. That's why the Jesse Walker media mandate (tell us who you voted for) is great. Lay the biases out in the open and let people decide for themselves. Would my opinion of the Corner or CalPundit (I know, old name) change if I found out they were taking money from Bush or Kerry, respectively. No, because I already know they're biased for their candidate of choice. Heck, I'd respect them more for it, at least they're getting paid to do what they want to do. Of course, the more disclosure the better.

Seeing as how the internet is the new way of the old newspapers, I'm guessing that back in the day, there were these sorts of allegations against newspapers. Not that there aren't already. Tons of people swear that the LA Times was in Davis' pocket.

|12.14.04 @ 2:58PM|

Jesse's point is a good one, however Salam Pax was anonymous while the speculation was going on, while the Iraq the Model guys are live and in person. I think speculating about the true identity of Salam Pax was less egregious.

I agree that no matter who backs them, they each represent some portion of Iraqi opinion, and evading their points due to conspiracy theories is dishonest.

Jesse Walker|12.14.04 @ 4:19PM|

Mo: That's actually the Matt Welch Media Mandate, though I'm happy to endorse it.

|12.14.04 @ 8:38PM|

Well, anyone remember "Encounter", the magazine which turned out to have been funded is some fashion by the CIA ? That revelation didn't cause anyone to doubt Stephen Spender's anti-communist chops. Seems to me that these Iraqi Bloggers could be perfectly sincere, even if they are on the take.
But Jesse is correct about how the war-blogger sycophants were all over Salam-pax when he didn't hew smartly to the program.

Matt Frost|12.14.04 @ 9:18PM|

Naturally, few if any of the people attacking Cole -- for this and for far more defensible statements -- gave Warren and Simon the same treatment. Their theories were "interesting speculation."

But Jesse is correct about how the war-blogger sycophants were all over Salam-pax when he didn't hew smartly to the program.

So what? Obviously, we agree that Roger Simon and the rest of those war bloggers are vacuous cranks. But are they on NPR every week?

|12.14.04 @ 10:56PM|

Naturally, few if any of the people attacking Cole -- for this and for far more defensible statements -- gave Warren and Simon the same treatment. Their theories were "interesting speculation."

Warren and Simon speculated that an anonymous blogger, about whom nothing was known beyond the fact that he was posting from within a totalitarian state, might be working for that state. Could you explain why you think their behavior parallels that of Cole, who had all the facts at his disposal and simply chose to ignore them?

Even if, like most of us, you assumed that Pax was merely a privledged Iraqi rather than an actual Ba'athist, Simon's speculation was impossible to dismiss out of hand. We simply didn't have the information we needed to conclusively determine that he was wrong. Cole had everything he needed to know that he was wrong; he just apparently didn't care.

|12.14.04 @ 11:01PM|

My question is -- if neo-cons and other groups aren't setting up fake blogs or blogs on the take under the table, then why aren't they doing it? Its cheap, easy to set up, can have some limited influence on elite opinion -- seems like a good bang for the buck -- a good strategy for neo-cons and others...

Matt Frost|12.15.04 @ 5:29AM|

Naturally, few if any of the people attacking Cole -- for this and for far more defensible statements -- gave Warren and Simon the same treatment. Their theories were "interesting speculation."

And those guys weren't spinning theories that involved Jews (excuse me - Neocons) pulling the strings, either. Maybe my sensibilities are just a tad delicate, but I think that any accusations are made a degree or two worse when they involve a Jewish conspiracy.

Jesse Walker|12.15.04 @ 11:34AM|

Dan: Because in both cases, the argument boiled down to "This isn't what a real Iraqi would be thinking."

Matt: "Neocon" is not a synonym for "Jew."

|12.15.04 @ 1:35PM|

Neocon has (not in every instance, but in many) become a "safe" way for many to spin conspiracy theories aimed at Jews. The pattern of attributed behavior and consipracy is just too similar not to notice, i.e. replace the word neocon with Jew in many of the theories involving neocons these days (who, when those who put forth the theories name names, are almost exclusively Jewish names) and you would have something straight out of the Protocals of Zion or Mein Kamf.

gaius marius|12.15.04 @ 3:48PM|

Neocon has (not in every instance, but in many) become a "safe" way for many to spin conspiracy theories aimed at Jews.

this is an assertion so bizarre that i don't even know how to respond.

i'm sure some antisemites actually (and stupidly) do this, as they coopt any convenient political terminology as best they can.

but that is light-years from elevating the bloodthirsty trotskyites that populate aei and pnac above criticism.

Leave a Comment

advertisements

Home|About|Advertise|Privacy Policy|Contact
Copyright 2008, Reason Magazine