8/8 Sydney A 2nd Opp. 2nd Speaker CO Final Koc Worlds WUDC 2010

Summary

The transcript discusses the complex nature of war and the impact of empathy versus visceral reactions on decision-making. It highlights the Somalia conflict in 1993, where the graphic display of an American pilot's death influenced public opinion, leading to a withdrawal from intervention and subsequent humanitarian crisis. The speaker argues against euphemisms and the media's role in shaping perceptions, advocating for a more informed and rational approach to war, rather than one driven by emotional responses to visual stimuli. The summary also touches on the use of drones and the ethical considerations of military actions, emphasizing the importance of accountability and the consequences of avoiding conflict.

Takeaways

• 📚 Empathy vs. Visceral Reaction: The speaker discusses the difference between understanding conflict through empathy versus the immediate, emotional response to graphic imagery, which can lead to skewed decision-making.
• 🌐 Media Influence: The role of media in shaping public perception of war is highlighted, with the speaker suggesting that the portrayal of war can lead to a visceral reaction that may not always align with rational, utilitarian considerations.
• 🔍 The Somalia Incident: The script references the 1993 Mogadishu incident, where the public display of a dead American pilot influenced U.S. policy decisions and led to a withdrawal from Somalia.
• 🗣️ Euphemisms and Language: The speaker criticizes the use of euphemisms in reporting and argues for clear, direct language to convey the realities of war.
• 📉 Public Perception and Decision-Making: The script suggests that public perception, influenced by media, can pressure policymakers into making decisions that may not be in the best interest of many, but rather cater to the emotional response to a single incident.
• 🛡️ The Just War Theory: The concept of a 'Just War' is mentioned, implying that visceral reactions can hinder the ability to engage in wars that may be justifiable on utilitarian grounds.
• 👀 The Power of Visuals: The transcript emphasizes the impact of visual imagery on public opinion and policy, suggesting that graphic content can override rational thought processes.
• 🚫 Censorship and Reporting: The speaker argues against censorship, stating that the public has a right to see the true nature of war, even if it leads to negative reactions.
• 🤔 The Complexity of War: The script acknowledges the complexity of entering wars and the need for proper information to make informed decisions, suggesting that euphemisms and lack of transparency can lead to misguided actions.
• 🌍 Global Impact: The speaker touches on the global implications of war, noting that decisions made in one country can have far-reaching effects on others, including the potential for increased conflict.
• 🛑 The Consequences of Inaction: The transcript suggests that not engaging in conflict does not necessarily prevent it, and may lead to less accountable actors and more brutal outcomes.

Q & A

What is the historical event referred to by the speaker when mentioning Mogadishu in 1993?

The historical event referred to is the Battle of Mogadishu, also known as the Black Hawk Down incident, where an American military operation in Somalia resulted in the downing of two UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters and the death of several American soldiers.

What does the speaker mean by 'the gap between learning with empathy about conflict and seeing the visual reaction of brutality'?

The speaker is highlighting the difference between understanding conflicts intellectually and emotionally through empathy, and the visceral reactions people have when they witness the graphic and brutal realities of war.

What is the 'utilitarian calculus' mentioned in the script?

Utilitarian calculus refers to the ethical decision-making process that weighs the overall good or consequences of an action, often associated with maximizing happiness for the greatest number of people.

Why does the speaker argue that the media's portrayal of war can lead to biased decisions?

The speaker suggests that media portrayals, especially those that emphasize the suffering of one group over another, can lead to an emotional response that skews decision-making away from a more rational, utilitarian approach.

What is the speaker's view on the use of euphemisms in war reporting?

The speaker criticizes the use of euphemisms in war reporting, arguing that they can obscure the true nature of conflicts and lead to a lack of proper understanding and informed decision-making.

What is the speaker's stance on the role of the media in war?

The speaker believes that the media has a responsibility to report accurately and without euphemisms, and that their portrayal can significantly influence public opinion and policy decisions regarding war.

What does the speaker suggest about the impact of visual media on war decisions?

The speaker suggests that visual media can have a powerful impact on war decisions by eliciting strong emotional reactions that may override rational considerations.

How does the speaker view the use of drones in warfare?

The speaker sees the use of drones as a way to avoid the risks associated with ground troops, but also raises concerns about the lack of accountability and the potential for committing atrocities.

What is the speaker's opinion on the censorship of graphic content in war reporting?

The speaker is critical of censorship, arguing that it prevents the public from understanding the true nature of war and can lead to misguided decisions.

What does the speaker imply about the consequences of not intervening in conflicts?

The speaker implies that not intervening in conflicts does not necessarily prevent them from occurring and may lead to more brutal and less accountable actions by other actors.

What is the speaker's perspective on the balance between empathy and visceral reaction in understanding war?

The speaker believes that while empathy is important, the visceral reaction to the horrors of war can be a double-edged sword, potentially leading to more harm than good.

Outlines

00:00

😢 The Impact of Visual Empathy on War Decisions

This paragraph discusses the emotional and rational gap that arises from witnessing the brutality of war through visuals versus empathizing through stories. It emphasizes the public's visceral reaction to graphic images, which can lead to skewed decision-making, prioritizing one life over many. The speaker argues against the use of euphemisms in journalism and highlights the importance of full and proper information for making decisions about war. The paragraph also touches on the media's role in shaping public opinion and the potential consequences of censoring or not censoring graphic content.

05:01

🛡️ Changing Warfare Tactics and the Ethics of Visual Exposure

The second paragraph explores the shift in military tactics, such as the use of drones instead of ground troops to minimize risk. It delves into the ethical dilemmas of broadcasting graphic content, the impact of such images on public perception, and the potential backlash against governments that decide to censor or release such material. The speaker also discusses the psychological effects of war on families and the importance of not taking away their choices by making decisions for them. The paragraph concludes with a reflection on the necessity of war and the accountability of those involved in conflicts, regardless of the methods used.

Keywords

💡Empathy

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. In the video, it is contrasted with a visceral reaction, suggesting that empathy involves a deeper cognitive understanding of others' experiences, as opposed to an instinctive, emotional response. The script mentions that people may lose the ability to make fair decisions when empathy is overshadowed by a more immediate, gut reaction to the horrors of war.

💡Visceral Reaction

A visceral reaction refers to an instinctive, involuntary response to a stimulus, often driven by emotion rather than reason. The video discusses how such reactions can lead to biased decision-making, particularly in the context of war, where the emotional impact of one American pilot's death can overshadow the broader humanitarian crisis affecting thousands in Somalia.

💡Utilitarian Calculus

Utilitarian calculus is an ethical approach that focuses on maximizing overall well-being or happiness, often by weighing the benefits and harms of an action. The script implies that in situations of conflict, the ability to perform this calculus can be compromised by strong emotional reactions, leading to decisions that may not be in the best interest of the greatest number of people.

💡Media Reporting

Media reporting is the act of conveying news or information to the public through various channels. The video criticizes the use of euphemisms in media reporting about war and suggests that the media has a responsibility to provide full and proper information to enable informed public opinion. It also touches on the issue of censorship and the impact of graphic content on public perception.

💡Euphemisms

Euphemisms are mild or indirect expressions used to avoid harsh or blunt language. The script argues that euphemisms can obscure the true nature of events, such as the realities of war, and can contribute to a misunderstanding or underestimation of the severity of situations.

💡Propaganda

Propaganda refers to information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view. The video discusses how certain media outlets, including CNN, can inadvertently or deliberately contribute to the spread of propaganda, particularly in the context of war and conflict.

💡Censorship

Censorship is the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security. The script raises the question of whether certain images or reports of war should be censored to prevent a visceral reaction from the public, which could influence decision-making in ways that are not rational or beneficial.

💡Drones

Drones, in the context of the video, refer to unmanned aerial vehicles used for military purposes, such as surveillance and targeted attacks. The script mentions the shift from traditional troop deployment to the use of drones as a way to minimize direct exposure to the horrors of war and to reduce the risk of casualties, which can trigger strong public reactions.

💡Accountability

Accountability is the obligation to report on or be responsible for one's actions. The video suggests that when the realities of war are hidden from the public, there is less accountability for the actions taken during conflict, which can lead to a lack of transparency and potentially unethical behavior.

💡Torture

Torture is the act of inflicting severe physical or psychological pain on someone to obtain information or a confession, or for intimidation. The script discusses the controversy surrounding the release of information about torture, particularly in the context of Guantanamo, and the ethical implications of censoring such information from the public.

💡Conflict

Conflict refers to a serious disagreement or argument, often related to a struggle for power or control. The video emphasizes that conflicts do not cease to exist simply because they are not reported on or because military intervention is not undertaken. It suggests that understanding and addressing the root causes of conflict is crucial for ethical decision-making.

Highlights

The gap between learning with empathy about conflict and the visual reaction of brutality can impact decision-making in war.

Visceral reactions can lead to privileging one life over thousands, impacting utilitarian calculus in war situations.

Euphemisms and the media's role in reporting war are discussed as potential issues in conveying the reality of conflict.

The speaker argues against using euphemisms and for more transparent language in war reporting.

Visual reactions to war can override rationality, leading to decisions that may result in condemning others to death.

The speaker suggests that visual reactions may lead to more just wars by influencing public opinion.

The impact of visualizing the horrors of war on public perception and government decisions is discussed.

The speaker questions the use of graphic images in influencing war decisions and public empathy.

The importance of understanding the distinction between empathy and visceral reaction in war scenarios is emphasized.

The speaker argues for a more modern and proportional approach to war, citing Israel's 2009 actions as an example.

The role of the media in shaping public perception of war and the government's responsibility in controlling information is discussed.

The speaker criticizes the use of drones and the lack of accountability in modern warfare.

The impact of graphic content on the decision-making process of government representatives is questioned.

The speaker discusses the ethical implications of censoring graphic content from the public in war reporting.

The importance of transparency and accountability in war reporting to prevent atrocities is highlighted.

The speaker argues that conflicts do not cease to exist if not reported or fought in a certain way.

The potential consequences of not fighting wars when necessary and the utilitarian impact on more people dying are discussed.

Transcripts

hold on the opposition where is the CEO

Johnstone head who I'm using as a

lectern in Mogadishu in 1993 one dead

American pilot we strive through the

streets for everyone to see on TV and

moved her to was forced to leave Somalia

and let the country burn he was forced

to not go into a wonder and let people

die in there hundreds of thousands

that's the gap between learning with

empathy about about conflict and seeing

the visual reaction of the brutality

leaves your situation where people lose

the ability to make fair utilitarian

calculus that's where you lean to a

situation where instead of people

empathizing with the horrors that I hear

and they see that the people instead of

owning by a visceral reaction they were

led into a trap of privileging one

American life over the lives of the

thousands and millions of surveillance

mr. speaker I'll ask two questions first

how do we enter war

secondly how we flattened to the first

no thank you we were very close in

Dartmouth is necessary to full and

proper information to make a proper

decision they said that euphemisms are a

problem we say firstly you don't like

euphemisms that's example to create an

argument for food journalism that

doesn't use them but secondly that is an

argument for the media to not report

documents Pedro Beijing no not going to

show cracker deliberately I assure you

we say in language when he said you can

never understand when you prove it

spreadsheet I don't know where the last

time he read a report of the Iraq Wars

and it's in freedom spreadsheet and

password but I saw you using English

language to convey what occurs in wars

wars

but a visual reaction that overrides

their rationality that makes them for

Salinas to do things that condemned

other people to death because of their

natural reaction to prove each their

brother or their or their poison

opposition we open the blue visual

reaction will lead to more Just War we

say first and that is sakes what a

visceral reaction does and it was not

simply an assertion to say that he would

sing ritually the true horror over one

word of God in but at the same time if

we saw visually the true horror of

fighting three Iraqi people we were too

gaudy the relevant comparison is whether

if you saw the visual the visual result

of fighting to free the running because

by their very much when you saw you were

in central Africa it was killing white

people we would have pulled out turns

out and never gone

response to our pairwise info will try

twice to get the idea out them out there

I feel them super ugly with a challenge

on epub okay

you can't assert the right pieces in the

confiscated you know governments are on

this unit

why constitutes leads make this decision

and why should any other site upon

seeing Bruce images but it's simply not

worth it to fight for in their name with

these costs because we told you that

there is a distinction between empathy

and a visceral reaction returns with a

three hundred thousand people dying

before that you improvise on what it

must be like to see the Janjaweed right

into the place on the battler camel

armed with an ak-47 I've never seen the

photograph of doing it but I've read

about that I know but by the same token

see someone who lived down the street

from me in Connecticut disemboweled and

hanging from a bridge in Fallujah will

make you think all of a sudden that my

government should be dirty

that's right leads to bad walks to first

question second question how to fight

the war we hope that we need to not

worry about families they more to kids

firstly that's just taking choice away

from them and giving them to the

government and secondly of the families

I even our cultural realm so we never

argue people see the destruction of

their country

hugely effective and the projections

images of their dead fellers is hugely

shamed more defensive and the government

deciding to impede Western taste by

broadcasting of is hugely offensive to

the CNN is now the producer or the main

producer of al Qaeda propaganda we set

that carpets with hearts of mind within

micro students know that we are

attempting to come more modern and

proportional and the example is Israel

2009 yeah we also we also said one of

the things I'm told is extension for

governments to and is necessarily

realized that people will have a big

visceral reaction to say one of their

own trips day when they say the

opposition so the moment the news antics

they kill the opposition and more in

distributed without telling your

position mr. speaker that is why the

United States move from putting troops

in the ground

for running the risk of a blackboard

being down and instead whose Predator

drones to attack things as my own

were committing atrocities again or but

the example - you heard like my life

like a torture Fontana were like

extruder and mission bull and America

sees an ability processes because the

finger positions of God is in a rubber

ball and they the US House of

Representatives elegent Committee don't

get their reporting from Syrian they

access to the graphic content they can

see it letting way up and land my own

decision though eventually they make the

decision and making all the people

accountants women saying the we should

censor the recording to a torture that

occurred over and above what should

happen but I'm saying this into the

report provided to military intelligence

at a potential massacre

we're saying we don't release the report

to the public and that's why Bravo bar

has been able to so extraordinary

rendition and stop torturing people at

Guantanamo without releasing videos or

finding who's like grandstanding by any

means of little bit some help to us

something was silly he was not doing

this after the title of your city after

Barack Obama had turned back the policy

and only already knew what waterboarding

did I want water putting her people but

we also told you this the attention the

way there are going to be wars and

conflicts if we are at fight the

conflict doesn't cease to exist if we

didn't go into a wonder it didn't make a

conflict didn't occur if we can't fight

the war in Iraq the way that we want

it doesn't in the conflict will occur it

means a conflict we passed the actors

that are less likely to be accountable

you lose more nurseries American troops

are brutal wars Afghanistan instead of

fighting for there itself to support the

war and support necessary factors to mr.

speaker there is a distinction between

empathizing by reading without what

happens in a war and knowing about what

happens in a war and having the visceral

reaction that people have their loved

ones brutalized broadcast across the

world and in doing so sopping up

survival as well stopping us from

fighting wars when we need to and

ultimately utilitarian lead to more

people dying in worse