<Previous - The Constitutionality of the Individual Mandate - Why Trayvon Martin's Death is Different - Next>
Thoughts on Mike Daisey
Mike Daisey could have been this generation's Upton Sinclair if he had just been honest about what he was producing. The Jungle was not a true story, but fictionalized events that did happen, centered around the character of Jurgis (poor, poor Jurgis). Unfortunately Daisey wasn't honest. It's unfortunate, not because it taints his work or lessens our enjoyment of it, but because it will set back the real work of improving labor conditions in China. Everything Mike Daisey described as happening did actually happen. Some events happened as he described them. Others, based on actual reports from times when he was or was not in China in factories he was or was not at, were personalized for dramatic effect. As fiction that is powerful. Portrayed as truth it is even more so. But, of course, it was “truthy”, not truth, which is in no way good enough for journalism. None of this changes the fact that these events happened and that conditions can be very terrible in China. Now the facts about these conditions will come under a cloud of suspicion. That’s terrible because, while America has almost completely eradicated these conditions, we’ve simply outsourced them to other countries. China is the setting for this generation’s The Jungle.

Daisey also screwed This American Life. Ira Glass owned up to his mistakes, saying that once the show couldn’t get in touch with Daisey’s translator they should have killed the piece even if the big stuff checked out. I’m sure it won’t matter to detractors of This American Life and public media in general, but that’s how you own up to a mistake. Glass puts out at most one show a week - and in practice much less than that. To devote an entire episode to a retraction, given the percentage of annual content that represents, is unheard of. Fans and detractors alike should take note. I found the original episode to be deeply compelling. Interestingly enough, the ”Retraction” episode was just as riveting. They just know how to tell a story.

Some other points:

The reference to Upton Sinclair was made on some blog I read but can't remember, but I'm making the claim that Daisey could be compared to him had he been more honest.

At the end of the original This American Life, Ira Glass points out that economists (including the likes of Paul Krugman) generally agree that sweatshops, broadly defined, are a good thing for countries in the long run. That still doesn’t mean workers shouldn’t attempt to improve their conditions. They don’t live “in the long run”. They experience those conditions now.

One thing that was kind of annoying about the original, even before it blew up in Daisey’s face, was that he focused so much of it on Apple. I have a few Apple products because they are just damn good, but I’m Windows and Android user and have no reason to go to the mattresses for the company. That said, Foxconn and any of the manufacturers in China, do this for every company that sells electronic goods all over the world. It was unfair to pin the working conditions on Apple, even if it was the best place to generate action. From what I’ve read Apple is actually one of the better companies at policing working conditions.
 
[Click for Comment Policy]
New addition to comment policy: first time comments (denoted by your email address) go into moderation so I can get a grip on my yummy spam problem.
* indicates a required field.
I would never ever display your email address.
promise.
xoxo
* Name:    
* Email:    
URL