RE: Tehran Condemns Washington’s “Maximum Pressure Campaign” as Economic Terrorism
Hello @hulabugger
Believe me, I am a Bitcoin fan for its ability to help nations be free of the US government having unfair control over them by weaponizing the US dollar. And I share the opinion that the US government should respect other nations right to self-manage themselves and not be trying to enforce their own rules on other nations.
However, journalism is a precious form of communication. It needs to remain pure so that people can trust that it is factual. In order for that, reporters have a tradition of not being allowed an opinion while doing the task of reporting. Any "newsy" information that permits the author to express opinion needs to stipulate at the head of the document that it is an "opinion piece".
For example, do we call two nations having conflicts an act of "terrorism"? No, no we would not do that. Nations may enter into combat, but terrorism is a different topic. Humans do sometimes use words incorrectly, such as when Madoff became referred to as a "financial terrorist" which is a ridiculous use of the word. It is not appropriate to label any action a form of terrorism.
True journalism does not take sides. It explains what event is happening. Now, the author does have in her blog the word "commentator" which is helpful, but each article wherein she plans to take sides she should label it "opinion". This is common practice in blogging and journalism work.
The author writes beautifully, and we would love to support her independent journalism. The important thing for us is either that bias not exist in the piece or that it be labeled opinion at the top.
This article contains direct quotes from Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif including, “If the United States decides to cause so much pain on the Iranian people by imposing economic warfare, by engaging in economic terrorism against Iran, then there will be consequences.” That's not the author's opinion - it's a fact.
@hulabugger Hello again,
I absolutely do not wish to argue with you, and I do care about the economic concerns of the citizens of Iran.
I'm sure he did say what you quoted there. However, economic "terrorism" is an inappropriate term for the actions that the US has taken. Although the Irianian leader might have used the term loosely, in her article she mentioned it in non-quoted areas. This is the issue.
Economic sanctions are not something I necessarily agree with but calling economic sanctions "terrorism" is quite a stretch from reality. That would be like calling someone that downvotes another person an economic terrorist...
I consider perpetual demonetization to be a form of financial censorship. However, not "economic terrorism" in any way. That is excessive terminology.
Economic sanctions are primarily embargoes and tariffs. They can be problematic for nations that are highly dependent on outsourced products/services. Personally, I dislike the idea, but I won't go around calling a nation's government a terrorist organization for such an act. It is very different from exploding a random shopping mall full of civilians.
Okay, the author should have used quotation marks. I agree that Zarif probably should not have called sanctions "terrorism." I think he actually had it right the first time when he called sanctions "economic warfare."
I fully agree with your statement.