TRAVELOGUE

Nicolas Kristof's columns for the Times have all the charm -- and all the depth -- you get when you let a relatively smart tourist write a column. You may agree or disagree with Tom Friedman, you may find him so frustrating you want to scream and yell and throw things -- but you never doubt that he's writing from a place of great depth and knowledge. Kristof wanders through the world and writes up his impressions, and I swear, you wonder if he's even read the Times' own coverage of the places he's visiting.

Take today's column on Iran. He discovers that even though it's said to be a police state, it isn't a very "effective" police state since people have so much internet access they can even write blogs, and notes that even though they're illegal, satellite dishes are all over the place.

He forgets to mention that Iranian bloggers can't blog openly without taking great risks. He doesn't mention the Iranian blogger who had to blog his fears that he was about to be arrested so that when he disappeared a petition could be started, pressure put on the government to free him. He doesn't point out that one of the reasons blogs were important is that they were the only medium available to Iranian MPs protesting the fact that they were completely shut out of the electoral process this year.

He's impressed that fewer newspapers have been shut down. This is an odd position for a Times-man to take. Shouldn't he be screaming in rage at the number of publications that have been shut down? More journalists are imprisoned in Iran than in any other country in the Mideast.

And then of course there's the fact that the reformers were shut out of the elections this year.

Is he right that this government has left enough chinks that the people will eventually find some way to be free? Probably, although we need to help them. If we -- and the Europeans -- support the mullahs, it's hard to see how this happens. But Kristof's happy talk, his blithe assumption that since there are blogs and satellite TV, surely freedom is just around the corner is so simplistic as to be . . . an embarrassment. It's hard to know what else to call it. The arrests, the press shut downs, the electoral coup, those aren't things he's seen himself, so they don't factor into his assessment (one hesitates to call this tripe "analysis.")

It's tourist as reporter.

Comments

[IceCold]

Friedman's writings reflect depth and knowledge? Surely you jest. I guess it all depends on one's standards, but without trying to be invidious I'd say Friedman reflects a journalist-level understanding of issues and how to reason through them. You're characterization of Kristof is excellent, but applies largely to Friedman as well.

[dauber]

I think you have to read Friedman, Hoagland, and Zakaria, because all three are doing actual reporting, and while you may not like the answers the provide, all three are asking interesting questions -- with columnists, it isn't about whether you agree with them. It's about whether they give you something to think about.