Blowhard Braggadocio

Sent to the New York Times last week

To the Editor:  

Roger Cohen (“Imagined Snipers, Real Challenges“, column, March 27) says “a seven-year dose” of “braggadocio from the White House” is quite enough.

Had they not already been killed by its policies, I suspect hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would agree.

So what was Mr Cohen’s response to the “bungled” war strategy when it was being devised, and might yet have been stopped (to say nothing of the lies that sold it)? A whisper of sotto voce braggadocio.

“To judge by the President’s plans,” he wrote to Times foreign staff on September 11, 2002, “the first half of next year may be busy.”

Without fear or favour indeed.

Daniel Simpson
London, March 27, 2008

The writer was a reporter for the Times in the Balkans during 2002 and 2003

Question Time for Democracy

Funnily enough, it isn’t

Dear Ms Halbach,

When more people have taken anti-depressants than voted for the current government, it’s time to ask questions about democracy.

If barely one in five voters elect the ruling party, and almost twice as many abstain, how should Question Time represent its audience when picking panellists? If most daily news is framed by officialdom and big business, and the three main parties share broadly similar platforms, where should viewers turn for incisive debate and analysis?

While its format remains sound, Question Time is stuck in a conceptual rut. What’s needed is an injection of critical thinking, and the courage to set its own agenda, instead of following other people’s. More shows should tackle themes, as on World Have Your Say. At least one guest should be a specialist authority and they ought to be framing the debate. Balance comes from judicious moderation, not pro-forma panel selection, and the aim should be to scrutinise the powerful, requiring input from beyond the Westminster bubble.

As the $1 billion race for the U.S. presidency unfolds, the story needs to be issues, not polls or personalities. So far, the biggest have been barely discussed: what does it all mean for America’s imperial role, and what happens next as that Empire declines? When Britain prepares to vote, the spotlight should return to electoral reform, and the Power Inquiry’s conclusion that: “The main political parties are widely held in contempt. They are seen as offering no real choice to citizens.”

The greatest challenges we face need urgent joined-up thinking, not sops to lobbies and faits accomplis. What use are biofuels, for example, if they don’t solve the energy or climate crises, while making food and water crises worse? How sustainable is economic growth without destroying the means to sustain ourselves? These questions demand intelligent discussion and the public has a right to expect it on TV.

Having worked as a foreign correspondent, I have an international perspective on global affairs and an outsider’s insight into Britain. Producing a daily world news bulletin, I’ve learned to prioritise context and analysis over soundbites and stand-ups.

As editor of Question Time, I’d host the national conversations that Parliament and the press shy away from, spicing up journalistic rigour with the dissent that’s the basis of democracy. I look forward to discussing my plans for the coming year.

Yours sincerely,

Daniel Simpson