We have yet more reader activism: JBillie didn’t like what he heard on NPR (National Public Radio) on a show about the Armenian genocide (yes, President Obama, it was a genocide, even though you cowardly refuse to use that word), and so he sent a testy letter to the station (published with permission). Their response was not satisfactory.
This is a message for Steve Innskeep: This morning, when interviewing the scholar on the Armenian genocide by the Turks during WWI, you used the adjective “scientific” to describe the plan for murdering the Armenians.
This is the wrong adjective.
There were no scientists involved in this decision. There were no experiments, data, or results. These decisions were made by generals and politicians. This plan was managed, not scientific. It was calculated, not scientific.
Why is it that managed genocides somehow get marked up to the ledger of science, when science has nothing to do with them, even as a tool. The Armenian genocide was carried out by foot soldiers with small arms and death marches. Science isn’t needed and wasn’t used for it. These tools have been around since long before the word science was ever coined or the techniques ever used.
No, the adjective you were groping for was: Cold-blooded. Not scientific: Cold-blooded.
Can you please correct this in the repeats of this segment? Thanks,
Response to Message #957487:
Thank you for contacting NPR.
We appreciate you sharing your concerns with us. We strive to offer the highest quality of news and information available. Listener feedback helps us to accomplish this goal.
We welcome both criticism and praise, and your thoughts will be taken into consideration.
Thank you for listening, and for your continued support of public broadcasting. For the latest news and information, visit NPR.org.
NPR Audience and Community Relations
That letter went right in the circular file. If they correct it in a rebroadcast, I’ll send a free copy of my new book to the reader that hears it and proves it.
And you know, I wouldn’t have thought twice about the use of the word “scientific,” even though, as the reader notes, it really is pejorative here.