http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Logo_250X250.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Background_1024X576.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Banner_686X60.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Half-Banner_234X60.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Logo_250X250 http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Logo-Watermark_250X250.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Background_1024X576.jpg http://www.bigthink.com/adobe/Half-Banner-ALT_234X60.jpg Bigthink http://www.bigthink.com/feed/rss/comment/idea/9666 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 03:24:53 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.bigthink.com/policy-politics/iraq/9666 I fully agree with the comment made by %u2018swedish chef%u2019 above. It is a misrepresentation to have Ms. Jolie pictured as an expert on such an immensely complex issue. As someone who works in international development (academic and overseas fieldwork) and who is currently involved with child rights/conflict issues, and having read the transcript (and others on the CfFR website), to present her as an expert with something new and important to say on the subject is fundamentally misguided. It brings to mind Easterly%u2019s comment whereby media representations/grandstanding by celebrity%u2019s (on their day off one assumes) vastly simplify complex issues. Such outcomes are never beneficial in the long run (although they may certainly raise both Ms. Jolies and CfFR%u2019s image in the public domain). Ms. Jolie;s involvement is due to funding of an education partnership headed by Gene B. Sperling, also of the CfFR. (I am not discounting her monetary contributions, I think it is good that she contributes so generously - although equally one may argue that the amount she is paid to simply act is out of all proportion!). I also think her overseas trips to refugee camps are good - but again, not overly impressive. She is not working in them day in and day out, she is merely visiting and offering her views (which could as easily be done by the aid workers themselves, with likely, a deeper understanding of the ongoing complexities that exist in such camps). One may argue that her (and other celebrity activists) help highlight such issues, but again, I would argue that people are not given a choice. Who is to say that the general public wouldn%u2019t respond just as well to a real expert offering their views? Indeed, simplifications of these issues don%u2019t get us anywhere. There is also a case of %u2018preaching to the converted%u2019 whereby those who read CfFR and the transcripts don%u2019t need to be fed a Hollywood version of the reality. In any case, her comments are not as an expert - she has not spent years in education, or working in various development (economist/policy/think tank/research) positions understanding the subtleties/complexities of foreign policy/poverty/development (etc.). All of which have deep implications for foreign involvement/poverty schemes and policy mandates, and which may not be evident from a fly in visit (regardless of how many briefs she is given to read). She does not work as a researcher or aid worker or academic or policy maker (or any other of the myriad positions that would have more experience on the subject) working daily on issues to do with children/conflict and education. Ultimately - like her piece in the Economist, and the daily news tags which feature her and other celebrities representing world affairs - we are made to watch as someone who is being fed information by experts stands in for the real thing. Not unlike Baudrillard%u2019s vision of the future (simulacrum). Perhaps for her next Hollywood movie we could have Easterly portray her part, and she could merely whisper the words to him offstage? Bigthink Wed, 28 May 2008 10:48:43 +0100 http://www.bigthink.com/policy-politics/iraq/9666/#18849 http://www.bigthink.com/policy-politics/iraq/9666 I haven't even watched the clip and I've got an eyebrow raised... Bigthink Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:25:26 +0100 http://www.bigthink.com/policy-politics/iraq/9666/#14134