台灣媒體多數報導中東新聞幾乎都是來自西方新聞來源，而且多半未經思索，全盤接受這些報導內容。新聞對於衝突事件的評論，多半是用「穆斯林的憤怒」或是形容穆斯林本質上仍是反美，不願意接受美國的「善意」的協助。下面是ㄧ位人類學博士針對近期西方媒體採用「穆斯林世界」這個辭彙所做的批判。
摘要：
新聞媒體如紐約時報(The New York TImes)將埃及與利比亞的示威反美運動，描述成「美國與穆斯林世界的苦惱」。紐約時報表示「穆斯林世界傾向於暴力的釋放。」記者Robert Worh則說：「又再ㄧ次，穆斯林陷入憤怒情緒。」「許多在西方的人士詢問者，為何伊斯蘭似乎又例行式的用暴力回覆這些污衊？」
現在差不多是時候將所謂「穆斯林世界」(the Muslim World)，從西方媒體中移除。使用這個詞不僅是忽略當地歷史與政治，而且缺乏精確的報導。事實上，「穆斯林世界」的絕大多數人沒有參與這些施威活動，也不是所有反對這些影片的穆斯林，支持在利比亞的暴力行為。西方媒體強化ㄧ種刻板印象，將「穆斯林世界」描述成單一與暴力現象。當前的示威運動被描述為「阿拉伯之冬」，這是ㄧ種極為簡化的描述。
伊斯蘭信仰中的確是有伊斯蘭社群(Ummah)概念，但是若檢驗「穆斯林世界」的概念，事實上不同地區的穆斯林社群展現不同的樣貌，並非單一性。在西方媒體中，很少聽到「基督教世界」，例如在google搜尋「基督教世界」，產生五百八十萬筆資料，但是「穆斯林世界」則出現八千七百萬比資料，兩者相當不對等。
媒體採用「穆斯林憤怒」說明開羅與班加西(Benghazi)的衝突根源。這種簡化報導，將「穆斯林世界」視為問題根源，但對於這些穆斯林國家的真正具體問題，卻毫無知悉。事實上，當利比亞駐美國大使遇害之後，利比亞許多居民拿者英文標誌，標題上寫者「班加西反對恐怖主義」及「很抱歉美國人，這不是我們伊斯蘭的行為。」
回應這些謾罵的方式，不是透過媒體將「穆斯林」視為集體概念，媒體應該注意個別國家的情況，因為獨裁者與派系之爭塑造了當地政治形態。當前的危機是顯示當地腐敗政治團體利用宗教來煽動暴力，以獲得政治資本。西方媒體不要陷入他們的圈套。
Western media reinforces stereotypes by reducing a complex set of
causes to the rage into an amorphous mass.
Last Modified: 16 Sep 2012 15:05
On September 12, the day after the
attacks on the US diplomatic missions in Egypt and Libya, the New
York Times set out to explain what it called the "anguished relationship
between the United States and the Muslim world". According to the Times,
the "Muslim world" was prone to outbursts of violence, and the reaction to the
14-minute anti-Islam movie trailer The Innocence of Muslims was both
baffling and predictable. "Once again, Muslims were furious," wrote
reporter Robert F Worth, "and many in the West found themselves asking why Islam seems to
routinely answer such desecrations with violence."
It is estimated that less than 0.001 per cent of the so-called 'Muslim world' is protesting the film [REUTERS]
Other media outlets echoed the claim that
"the Muslim world" was consumed by anger, and had long been so. The Associated
Press offered a look back at "Five other incidents that
inspired rage in the Muslim world", crediting over a billion people for
the actions of a few thousand in their search for historical continuity. Others
took a psychoanalytic approach. "Why is the Muslim world so easily offended?" asked Washington
Post columnist Fouad
Ajami. "Madness in the Muslim World: Help Me Understand," pleaded a blogger for the Houston
Chronicle.
It is time to retire the phrase "the
Muslim world" from the Western media. Using the phrase in the manner above
disregards not only history and politics, but accurate reporting of
contemporary events. The protests that took place around the world ranged in scale and
intensity, in the participants' willingness to use violence, and in their
rationales. The
majority of the "Muslim world" did not participate in these protests,
nor did all of the Muslims who protested the video advocate the bloodshed that
took place in Libya.
By reducing a complex set of causes and
conflicts to the rage of an amorphous mass, the Western media reinforce the very stereotype
of a united, violent "Muslim world" that both the makers of the
anti-Islam video and the Islamist instigators of the violence perpetuate.
Misleading generalisations
Essentialist views of Islam and Muslims
are nothing new. In
Western media, Islam is often presented as a contagion, with Muslims as the
afflicted, helpless to their own hostile impulses. What is different about the current
crisis is that it comes in the aftermath of the "Arab Spring" -
another series of intricate events depicted as interconnected and inevitable.
Democracy would "spread" from one Muslim country to another, analysts
argued, regardless of the unique historical trajectories of individual states.
Some analysts went so far as to suggest it would spread to Central Asia, a region
of largely isolationist dictatorships uninfluenced by Middle Eastern politics. The current protests are being
portrayed as an "Arab Winter" - a simplistic reversal of a
simplistic perception of success, with Muslims, undifferentiated, receiving the blame.
There is, of course, cohesion among
Muslims, in the sense that there is cohesion among followers of any faith. The notion of the ummah is an essential part of Islamic
doctrine. But the way the idea of "the Muslim world" is expressed
within Islamic communities is different from the way it is expressed outside
them. It is rare to hear the phrase "the Christian world" used in the
English-language media, because doing so would generalise about the motives of over 2
billion people. No such respect applies to the world's 1.5 billion Muslims. Googling the phrase "the
Christian world" yields 5.8 million results, while the phrase "the
Muslim world" gives over 87 million results, many of them wondering what is
"wrong" with the queried target. When the phrase "the Muslim
world" is invoked, it is usually to reduce, denigrate or impugn.
The
Western media's broad-stroke regionalism means that conflicts within individual
Muslim-majority states become marginalised. Syrians posting on Twitter wondered
how the world could give so much attention to a conflict that killed seven
people while dozens of Syrians are killed by state security forces every day -
documenting, as one commenter noted, their own demise in videos that receive far less
attention than the bigoted pseudo-cinema of one American. Similarly, the violence at the
diplomatic missions in Cairo and Benghazi was initially conflated, with
"Muslim rage" being presented as a root cause for two distinct
conflicts. The
tendency to see "the Muslim world" as a problem in general means that
specific problems within Muslim countries go unseen.
Dispelling stereotypes
Soon after the destruction of the US
embassy in Benghazi and the deaths of four Americans, a protest was held
against the men who murdered them. Libyan citizens held English-language signs declaring
"Benghazi is against terrorism" and "Sorry Americans this is not
the behavior of our Islam and Profit [sic]". Photos of the protest, distributed by Libya Alhurra Livestream, went
viral on Facebook and Twitter.
The Libyans protesting were aware that
not only Libyans, but Muslims in general, would be blamed for the violence that
took place, because the small group of Muslims who stormed the embassy would be
seen as representative of all. They gave the rare apology that Western commentators often encourage
Muslims to make on behalf of others who commit violence in the name of Islam. But while the sentiment of the protestors
is appreciated by many Americans - and the photos likely assuaged some prejudices - such
explanations should not be necessary. Ordinary people should not be assumed to share the beliefs of
violent criminals who share their faith.
The Innocence of Muslims was made by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an
Egyptian-American who hates Muslims. It was found on YouTube and put on
Egyptian television by Sheikh Khaled Abdullah, a man
trying to convince the world that Americans hate Muslims. This was a perfect
storm of gross and deceitful parties depicting each other in the most vile
terms, and then living up to each others' worst expectations.
The answer to such invective is not to
reinforce it through media portrayals of "Muslims" as a collective.
The media should instead pay more attention to individual states, conflicts and
leaders, since dictatorship and factionalism have been as essential in shaping
politics in Muslim-majority
regions as has religion. The current crisis demonstrates how corrupt parties
use religion as an incitement to violence and a means to political gain. The Western media should not
play party to their prejudices.
Sarah Kendzior is an anthropologist who
recently received her PhD from Washington University in St Louis.
The views expressed in this article are
the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
留言
張貼留言