Making sense of the spin
Politicians seldom make entirely unambiguous statements, but when newspaper editors take what they say and try to squash it into their own agenda, the results can be wildly differing conclusions drawn from the same starting point.
Last week, Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller made the following quote, which was carried by numerous newspapers worldwide: "We [Poland] cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that the Spanish and others are leaving Iraq. The final decision about the withdrawal will be agreed and thought over, but the problem does exist."
Now, you might infer, particularly from the idiom 'not to turn a blind eye,' that Poland is becoming skeptical about the presence of its troops in Iraq. The second sentence would seem to confirm that Polish withdrawal is now definitely on the cards.
However, when the quote was beamed around the world, copywriters took their readers' considerations into account. The headline in a British paper read, 'Anxious Poland may follow Spain's lead and withdraw troops,' with the subsequent story playing on the uncertainty aspect and highlighting ordinary Poles' fears of a terrorist attack. The article made the latter point quite successfully by including a quote from Poland's intelligence chief, saying, "We have untested structures and zero experience in reacting to such events. The shock society could experience in the aftermath of a terrorist attack could have incalculable political and social consequences." Indeed.
Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, a national U.S. paper came up with, 'Official: Polish troops to stay in Iraq.' This story contained exactly the same quote from Miller, but instead poured cold water on the most obvious inference by immediately following that with another quote from his spokesman, who said, "Poland will be in Iraq as long as necessary, until the situation there is stabilized" (this second quote being absent from the UK paper). In the article, Polish fears of a terrorist attack were not mentioned; instead, the tone was much more moderate.
This would seem to be a typical case of perspective: For UK readers, the glass is half-empty, but for Americans, the glass must surely be half-full. The contrast is starker when you consider the absence in the U.S. article of the raised threat of an attack on Polish soil.
Polish newspapers have been carrying more and more stories about this prospect recently, a fact seemingly not lost on all of the English-language media.
However, in unscientific research, when questioning individuals about a possible attack, this writer has met with reactions ranging from the stoic to outright hilarity. Poles will say that their country simply isn't significant enough to warrant it; not important at all. Nevertheless, with Spain's withdrawal, followed by other countries, with popular opposition to the occupation increasing all the time, and, of course, with American military conduct proving to be the best recruiting sergeant al-Qaida could ever have hoped for, Poland's continued presence in Iraq surely won't help to lessen its chances of drawing unwanted attention.
While Leszek Miller et al may not say as much, at the moment Poland appears to be doing an extremely good impression of a sitting duck.
Last week, Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller made the following quote, which was carried by numerous newspapers worldwide: "We [Poland] cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that the Spanish and others are leaving Iraq. The final decision about the withdrawal will be agreed and thought over, but the problem does exist."
Now, you might infer, particularly from the idiom 'not to turn a blind eye,' that Poland is becoming skeptical about the presence of its troops in Iraq. The second sentence would seem to confirm that Polish withdrawal is now definitely on the cards.
However, when the quote was beamed around the world, copywriters took their readers' considerations into account. The headline in a British paper read, 'Anxious Poland may follow Spain's lead and withdraw troops,' with the subsequent story playing on the uncertainty aspect and highlighting ordinary Poles' fears of a terrorist attack. The article made the latter point quite successfully by including a quote from Poland's intelligence chief, saying, "We have untested structures and zero experience in reacting to such events. The shock society could experience in the aftermath of a terrorist attack could have incalculable political and social consequences." Indeed.
Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, a national U.S. paper came up with, 'Official: Polish troops to stay in Iraq.' This story contained exactly the same quote from Miller, but instead poured cold water on the most obvious inference by immediately following that with another quote from his spokesman, who said, "Poland will be in Iraq as long as necessary, until the situation there is stabilized" (this second quote being absent from the UK paper). In the article, Polish fears of a terrorist attack were not mentioned; instead, the tone was much more moderate.
This would seem to be a typical case of perspective: For UK readers, the glass is half-empty, but for Americans, the glass must surely be half-full. The contrast is starker when you consider the absence in the U.S. article of the raised threat of an attack on Polish soil.
Polish newspapers have been carrying more and more stories about this prospect recently, a fact seemingly not lost on all of the English-language media.
However, in unscientific research, when questioning individuals about a possible attack, this writer has met with reactions ranging from the stoic to outright hilarity. Poles will say that their country simply isn't significant enough to warrant it; not important at all. Nevertheless, with Spain's withdrawal, followed by other countries, with popular opposition to the occupation increasing all the time, and, of course, with American military conduct proving to be the best recruiting sergeant al-Qaida could ever have hoped for, Poland's continued presence in Iraq surely won't help to lessen its chances of drawing unwanted attention.
While Leszek Miller et al may not say as much, at the moment Poland appears to be doing an extremely good impression of a sitting duck.
