Your back's against the wall.
Dec. 22nd, 2006 03:06 pmIsn't this weather splendid? I donned my mask a few streets before reaching The Beautiful & Damned last night, just to match the mood of the night even more to a horror silent. Although - they never mention in the comics how much a mask feels odd, restricts your vision, heats up your face. As against cloaks which, for all the jibes against them in The Incredibles and Watchmen, I've always found remarkably easy to wear.
Anyway, I hadn't been planning to go online today, but as it turned out I needed to send this:
To whom it may concern,
I wish to leave the National Union of Journalists. I am unfamiliar with the procedures for this, and understand there may be a notice period involved; if so, please start it immediately.
For some time I have felt uneasy at the Union's stance on a number of issues. Each time I read The Journalist, or see coverage of the NUJ elsewhere, I see laudable work within the NUJ's remit of protecting the nation's journalists, encouraging unbiased reporting and fighting for decent pay and conditions. But I also see far too much international politics. Even if I agreed with the stances being taken, I would consider this mission creep to be deeply dubious. But I do not agree. I see the NUJ supporting Venzuelan demagogue Hugo Chavez and his government's smears against NUJ member Phil Gunson. I read endless pieces attacking Israel and any restrictions it places on reporters, while overlooking the far greater censorship practiced by Israel's regional enemies. I see a tendency to take the side of Islamists against our democratically-elected government, all in the supposed name of 'liberal' ideas. In summary, I see another symptom of the deep confusion of the British Left, which apparently still believes that 'my enemy's enemy is my friend', and that 'my enemy' is by definition the United States of America.
Having felt this way for some time, I had told myself I would give The Journalist one more chance to allay my fears. Yesterday, the January/February issue arrived, and what did it contain? Objections from Phil Gunson and The Economist over the NUJ's stance on Venezuela, but no response to these. A double page spread on the wonders of the niqab. Utterly spurious arguments as to why CND affiliation has anything to do with the business of the NUJ (yes, you printed counter-arguments too - and coherent ones, but the preference of the article and the NUJ still seemed clear). A large article on US funding of Reporters Sans Frontieres, alongside a much smaller sidebar about the censorship practiced in Castro's Cuba. And finally, a piece convoluted even by the increasingly ludicrous standards of 9/11 conspiracy theorists, arguing that suicide bombers do not exist but that if we continue to report that they do, this will bring them into being and we'll only have ourselves to blame!
If there were any real chance of the NUJ winning recognition at [my employer], then there would at least be some conflict between honour and self-interest. As is, I no longer wish to be a member of an organisation which is losing sight of its core mission and gaining some disgusting bedfellows in the process.
Yours,
Alex Sarll
(Ex-)Member number XXXXXXX
Anyway, I hadn't been planning to go online today, but as it turned out I needed to send this:
To whom it may concern,
I wish to leave the National Union of Journalists. I am unfamiliar with the procedures for this, and understand there may be a notice period involved; if so, please start it immediately.
For some time I have felt uneasy at the Union's stance on a number of issues. Each time I read The Journalist, or see coverage of the NUJ elsewhere, I see laudable work within the NUJ's remit of protecting the nation's journalists, encouraging unbiased reporting and fighting for decent pay and conditions. But I also see far too much international politics. Even if I agreed with the stances being taken, I would consider this mission creep to be deeply dubious. But I do not agree. I see the NUJ supporting Venzuelan demagogue Hugo Chavez and his government's smears against NUJ member Phil Gunson. I read endless pieces attacking Israel and any restrictions it places on reporters, while overlooking the far greater censorship practiced by Israel's regional enemies. I see a tendency to take the side of Islamists against our democratically-elected government, all in the supposed name of 'liberal' ideas. In summary, I see another symptom of the deep confusion of the British Left, which apparently still believes that 'my enemy's enemy is my friend', and that 'my enemy' is by definition the United States of America.
Having felt this way for some time, I had told myself I would give The Journalist one more chance to allay my fears. Yesterday, the January/February issue arrived, and what did it contain? Objections from Phil Gunson and The Economist over the NUJ's stance on Venezuela, but no response to these. A double page spread on the wonders of the niqab. Utterly spurious arguments as to why CND affiliation has anything to do with the business of the NUJ (yes, you printed counter-arguments too - and coherent ones, but the preference of the article and the NUJ still seemed clear). A large article on US funding of Reporters Sans Frontieres, alongside a much smaller sidebar about the censorship practiced in Castro's Cuba. And finally, a piece convoluted even by the increasingly ludicrous standards of 9/11 conspiracy theorists, arguing that suicide bombers do not exist but that if we continue to report that they do, this will bring them into being and we'll only have ourselves to blame!
If there were any real chance of the NUJ winning recognition at [my employer], then there would at least be some conflict between honour and self-interest. As is, I no longer wish to be a member of an organisation which is losing sight of its core mission and gaining some disgusting bedfellows in the process.
Yours,
Alex Sarll
(Ex-)Member number XXXXXXX
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:18 pm (UTC)As an NUJ member and activist (Secretary of the Yellow Advertiser's Chapel), it baffles me that the Union spends far too much of its time trying to be important, rather than fighting for better pay for us Hacks. Were it not for my pay being so utterly pisspoor, and the fact that we'll be getting sold off next year, I'd have left myself.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:24 pm (UTC)Well done on your letter, I do fail to see how journalism and politics should mix. Being a scummy working class kid (by which I actually mean that too many drinks preclude making a coherent argument, coherently) surely journalism means the simple act of recording the news, not necessarily judging it?
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:28 pm (UTC)And thank you. And yes, to an extent; while I think an individual journalist can certainly have an agenda, the umbrella union should be neutral.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 09:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:41 pm (UTC)It's very difficult, to me, being raised as a socialist and being taught that the unions are ALL POWER to find that you disagree with them sometimes. Obviously you'll never agree with any party or union 100%, but you have to balance it, somehow. Actually my love for Ken is from him doing some protest walk near us when I was a kid, and my dad praising Ken to the heavens (this must have been 75/76) and it's very difficult sometimes to separate person from politics.
See you on your birthday!
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 09:56 am (UTC)The not-agreeing-100% thing is very hard for me; it's why I could probably never be a member of any political party. Or, as it now turns out, union.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 03:44 pm (UTC)This was pretty much the reason the Executive Committee of my Students Union that I was on took the decision to disaffiliate from the NUS.
Unions are their to represent the interests of their members, not force political stances upon them - even if that stance is in itself an honourable one.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 09:58 am (UTC)Given the discounts, there was at least some benefit there, so I mainly just voted for absolutely anyone who stood against Labour students.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 04:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 09:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-22 06:03 pm (UTC)Says I, I've vowed to never talk politics with anyone I don't know ever again,
no subject
Date: 2006-12-24 10:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-26 10:04 pm (UTC)