news/n(y)o͞oz/
| Noun: |
|
Today the Washington Post publishes the following report by its reporters Kevin Sieff and Richard Leiby as news on its homepage and on the front page of its print edition: Afghan troops get a lesson in American cultural ignorance.
The core of the piece is this:
[T]he Afghan army is trying something new: a guide to the strange ways of the American soldier. The goal is to convince Afghan troops that when their Western counterparts do something deeply insulting, it’s likely a product of cultural ignorance and not worthy of revenge.
The pamphlet is intended to “strengthen our understanding of our [NATO] counterpart,” according to an English translation of the pamphlet that was provided to The Washington Post. But in doing so, it also reveals seemingly minor — and rarely acknowledged — cultural faux pas that have created palpable tension between the two forces.
“Please do not get offended if you see a NATO member blowing his/her nose in front of you,” the guide instructs.
So the Afghan government is teaching its soldiers that they should ignore the acculturate behavior of the foreign barbarians. That is obviously necessary as, even after 11 years, the invading savages are still cultural ignorant and unable to learn how to behave themselves. It is interesting to know that. But how come I remember reading that story already and quite a while ago?
Searching the web for "Afghanistan culture pamphlet" shows that the Washington Post is not delivering news here but is more or less plagiarizing a report by Reuters that was put on the wire three weeks ago, on September 6: Afghans use culture guides to cut "insider" attacks
A pamphlet with guidance on handling cultural differences between Afghans and their foreign partners has been produced amid great concern among Afghan and NATO leaders about attacks by Afghan soldiers and policemen on the foreign troops training them. The attacks have killed 45 NATO-led troops this year.
…
Defense Ministry spokesman Zahir Azimi showed it to reporters on Thursday, saying it was intended for the 190,000-strong Afghan national army.
…
"Coalition troops may ask about the women in your family. Do not take offence, they just want friendly relations with you. In return, teach them that Afghans do not discuss their families' women with others," the pamphlet instructs, referring to Afghanistan's ultra-conservative society.
…
Putting one's boots on a desk, blowing one's nose, winking, taking photos, swearing and raising the middle finger are also given as examples of Western culture which might offend Afghans.
It is obvious that the Post report is about the same pamphlet Reuters was first to report on. That pamphlet was not "provided to The Washington Post", which makes the report look exclusive, but multiple copies were distributed at an official press conference of the Afghan defense ministry. Russia TV had its own version on the story on September 8. The French agency AFP also had a writeup published, for example, by The Australian on September 10.
The only thing new in today's Post version of this three week old story is a small quote from the officials that released the report. The meat of the story was copy-pasted from the old agency reports.
The quality of Washington Post has been going down for a while. But meshing up three weeks old wire reports and publishing them as own reporting on the front page is not news but for the once valuable Washington Post a new low.