Recently, one tweet of mine was "deconstructed" by one blog written by a person who positions himself as "a journalist and photojournalist of Armenian and English descent who has been resident in the Republic of Armenia since 1998," based on multiple Azeri language sources and some speculations of what had happened in Baku.
The piece is called When Twitter Can Be Misleading, and aforementioned tweet of mine is cited as a possible case study. Anyway, I wouldn't ever bother myself of answering his post, if the method by which I am declared "misleading" is itself a blatant falsification of a primary source and dishonesty.
Let's start from the beginning.
Recently, Milli.az - an Azeri version of famous online news service Day.az published a news story that run:
A person defending Armenians is detained in Baku?I'll go into the contents of the article below, but first - here is my tweet that I sent then:
Person defending Armenians in various Internet forums and chatting with them was detained in Baku.
Coming to the content of the story, Milli.az, after reporting the time and place of the arrest, details the incident as such:
Our investigation revealed that the detainee is 25-year-old Anar Muhit oglu Heybatov. He was chatting with Armenians in various Internet forums. Last time during a discussion in an internet forum he protested at Azeris cursing Armenians and called one of them to a park near Narimanov metro station. Law-defense bodies [that is police] have detained that person [that is, Heybatov] and delivered him to National Security Ministry.As it is seen from the text, there is nothing contradictory to my tweet, indeed, it is reinforcing the fact that I tweeted. However, the aforementioned blogger has posted an English translation of the same media report where the above paragraph was slightly altered, but the meaning was blatantly falsified:
After some research it turned out that the arrestee is a 25 yr old Anar Muhit oglu Heybatov. He was communicating with Armenians in various internet forums. Last time he objected to Azeris who were cursing Armenians and called out one Azeri ( who was cursing too) to meet up in the park near Narimanov metro station. The person called out by Heybatov to meet up was detained by the police and delivered to NatSec.Based on this manipulation of the original source, the same blogger claims that:
it does not say that Anar Muhit oglu Heybatov was arrested and taken to National Security for defending Armenians online. In fact, as mentioned before, it even alleges that it was the one attacking Armenians who was, although there is nothing to indicate whether this is true either.And then the respected journalist and blogger brings other rationale:
[...] the whole angle the headline and introductory text of the story implies is also misleading. As one friend in Baku concluded, it was probably likely that the two men disagreed angrily on an Internet forum, met and could have exchanged blows. The police might have arrested them, but not because they communicated online about Armenians.Thus, next conclusion of him - I was misleading people [perhaps deliberately].
OK, I am not a journalist with gross expertise, but when I tweet, I try to remain maximum close to what the original source says - in this case, I summarized the text and tweeted it with the very words that run in the headline and the lead.
I can't (a) base my tweet on my speculation of what happened there - I wasn't at Narimanov park unlike some folks in Yerevan and I don't know what really happened there - I have only read a media report and that is why my tweet starts with "Media report." Neither I can (b) manipulate the text and then tweet the thing that the original news doesn't say.
Therefore, the conclusion is - in the original text there is nothing contradictory to what I wrote in my tweet, instead, my critic altered the original text to create that impression.
9 comments:
Ali, there are three things I want to communicate to you.
First: as I posted in a reply to you on twitter (after which you blocked me, and that was unreasonable thing to do given that we don't know each other and I didn't insult you by my reply) the original text was translated by me and only me. If there is a manipulation with the text translated, then you should address this to me, not to someone who does not know azerbaijani language and is not responsible for translation.
Second: the main idea of the response article to your tweet was to show the real facts rather than misinterpret them i.e. that someone was not detained for COMMUNICATING with armenians. However, in your tweet you pointed out that someone was detained for CHATTING with armenians. This in nature doesn't make sense as there is no legal provision which would incriminate the act of chatting with armenians as a criminal offence.
Third: it does not really matter WHO was arrested. What matters is FOR WHAT someone was arrested. In your well-structured post you wandered from the topic by emphasizing that the author of the article purposely mistranslated the text and positioned as if the guy who was cursing armenians was arrested, not Anar Heybatov. even if so, which the author didnt do ( given he is not a translator), this does not change the idea of your tweet - detention for communication with armenians. If you closely pay attention to the comments in http://onewmphoto.posterous.com/when-twitter-can-be-misleading [...The police arrested this person and delivered him to NatSec. Head of PR in NatSec Arif Babayev didnt confirm that such a person was delivered to them](the seond media report translated by me), you will see that there is no mentioning by me about Anar's arrest. I admit, however, that the media reports themselves are somewhat vague in terms of describing "the person" who was arrested. But this issue is not principal one. Thus, you distracted from the principal idea - the reason for arrest - and instead delved into - who was arrested.
I am sure you have common sense and understand that playing with words and distorting the main idea does not lead to positive things.
Dear VagusNervus, whatever the deep semantic analysis of this tweet might be, the attack on it was mean-spirited, petty, and uncalled for, and it clearly had other purposes, as we all know. And I think that it is far more severe that this same “journalist” breached his journalistic ethics by publicly disclosing confidential information about me that I gave to him on clear conditions of discretion.
From my correspondence of Feb. 2009:
Him: “Ani, I wish you'd reveal your true identity to me by now. Sure, we might not agree on some aspects of local politics, but on many other things we do and I do consider myself a trustworthy person.”
Me: “My keeping the identity a secret is nothing against you--the complication is actually more stupidly personal than anything, so if I do tell you, you'll have to promise discretion.”
Him: ...“Anyways, discretion is my middle name (well, actually, it's James, but you know what I mean...)”
Cheers, ___
Tell me VagusNervus, do you know anyone with the middle name of James? ;)
Meanwhile, if you want to criticize other people’s tweeting expertise, I suggest that you make your own account public so we can judge how well you can do accurately encapsulating context & meaning in 140 characters.
Dear vaguSnervuS, the text of the original article cited by that infamous blog post was deliberately altered to change its meaning, and the sole argument "deconstructing" my tweet and labeling me "misleading" was based on that part - I have CLEARLY written everything in the post above and don't find it necessary to labor the point again.
Anyway, thanks for coming out and admitting that you were an accomplice. Will know from now on who are my "benefactors."
Ani, I haven't disclosed any confidential information about you to anyone so please, stop making things up. Indeed, all you do is allege and accuse, but never give any concrete facts.
Instead, I have not revealed your identity to anyone, but I have, however, made it clear you are not Armenian, no matter what the name suggests.
So, get your facts right please. Oh, and a warning to you about publishing private emails. I have plenty from you, but again, I have not disclosed them. Nor your name.
Now, let's get back on topic. The text was not altered. And the tweet was incorrect and misleading to the point of doing more harm than good. And without checking or knowing Azeri, you re-tweeted it.
That is blatantly irresponsible.
Meanwhile, the original Azeri reports with translation are available on my blog post. Let others read and work out for themselves if an Azerbaijan was detained for communicating with Armenians or not.
And let them also decide on whether you are attempting to shift focus instead of simply saying, "sorry, the tweet was misleading and I'm going to clarify things now..."
Being detained for fighting and being detained for chatting with Armenians are two entirely different things. Not putting in the link to the original report also makes the situation worse.
Onnik, when you lie again next time, please destroy proofs beforehand. Which is a grave mistake of yours, every time.
Have only 1 blocked person on Twitter - @goldentent: an American pretending to be Armenian who harassed me constantly during 2008 election
@matthewbach and you didn't receive emails from @goldentent (an American who is NOT Armenian) trying to force me to support opposition here
@matthewbach -- besides, as @goldentent is now in contact with some of my friends, it's time they knew she is not "Ani Wandaryan."
Accused of dishonesty for revealing one American woman connecting with some of my friends is hiding behind an assumed Armenian name. Ironic.
Meh--wouldn't have had to publish any private correspondence if Onnik hadn't gone on and on with this weird "harassment" claim. My entire private 2008 correspondence with him was one email asking for clarification since after reading hundreds of his comments on blogs of his own and others I still couldn't understand his position on something. And when he wrote back saying he didn't respond privately to emails, I didn't write again until he contacted me in 2009. So, harassment? Bizarre! Stalking? I haven't a clue--I do follow people on Twitter and interact with them if they follow me back. Isn't that the whole purpose??
Anyway, I've always said that Ani is a What and a Why, not a Who. Trying to help, wishing for a better life and peace for all in the Caucasus, who deserve better. In Azerbaijan, "How" is up to people like Emin and Adnan, Arzu, Nigar, Ilkin, and Ali, among many.
As some"one" said in a blogpost, "What's in a Name?"
Indeed.
Again, no lies. Just you quoting things and telling people how to interpret them. I have not identified who "Ani" is. Therefore there is no evidence to destroy.
Your sense of logic and argument is one of the most distorted I've encountered, in fact. I told "Ani" I would not reveal her name and I haven't.
That she wasn't Armenian was known already by some, and openly so from a few bloggers in Armenia as well as yourself.
As for the emails I received, c'mon people. Quite trying to shift the focus of this issue. It's quite simple.
A Tweet was sent out saying that someone was detained for communicating with Armenians. There was no link to the original post. Already a "no-no" for Twitter.
Moreover, there was reference to someone being detained and sent to National Security for chatting wit Armenians.
Such a tweet was therefore misleading and unfortunate because this was not true, and people re-tweeted it, spreading misinformation.
Now, was this on purpose or not? Dunno, but I can't see anyone saying "sorry, my tweet gave the wrong impression."
That's the issue, and I don't see how doing such things is going to help anything in Azerbaijan. In fact, I think they can only do harm.
So, the tweet is there, the original text in Azerbaijani is there on my blog, the translations are there too.
Let people read it all and decide for themselves if an Azerbaijani was detained for communicating with Armenians or not. It's quite clear one was not.
Now, if only you'd stop avoiding the issue and focus on the real and most important point. You sent out a misleading tweet which can only do damage.
It has now been rectified, although you still fail to inform people that it was misleading, and I hope people insist on links in tweets before believing all they read.
Especially if even when it's there it's in a foreign language they don't understand. I at least sought out the sources and received translations.
Indeed, even your translation does not change the reality. You sent out an incorrect tweet which is dangerous in the present situation.
Same goes for you, "Ani."
You avoided the entire issue and instead focused on something which was said in another medium to shift focus away from Ali's misleading tweet.
Quit shifting that focus and simply admit you re-tweeted an incorrect tweet which can do more harm than good to Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict transformation.
And you didn't even check the story first.
Simply put, in the interest of spreading factual information, try not to do so again and correct your errors when you do. As it is you're avoiding the issue.
Make a mistake with information, correct it immediately. Anyone with journalistic experience would know that. And, even those who don't would.
Avoiding the issue and not being able to rectify what is a story that could frighten Azerbaijanis off from communicating is very concerning indeed.
Thanks a lot. Last word on the subject, although I suspect you will now again seek to shift the issue away again so all I can say is the following.
Read the tweet, read the story in its original Azeri as well as the three translations (two of which I posted), and see for yourself that nobody was detained for communicating with Armenians.
Sure, there are those who are frightened and panic, warning people not to be in contact, but this story does not make such fears real.
Indeed, we should all be incredibly relieved and pleasantly surprised that one Azerbaijani did try to stop anti-Armenian rhetoric openly. That is when things really change.
Thankfully, Arzu and some others are not afraid to meet and communicate Armenians openly. Others are scared, and such tweets only make more the same.
End of subject. Misleading and incorrect information clarified and rectified. Like I said, let people read both posts and then determine for themselves the situation.
The facts of the story are all there.
Sorry, still don't see anything wrong with Ali's tweet, which only said "media report". I do see something seriously wrong with your attack on me (from tweet above):
Have only 1 blocked person on Twitter - @goldentent: an American pretending to be Armenian who harassed me constantly during 2008 election
...because I didn't even START reading blogs from Armenia until AFTER the 2008 Armenian election and the subsequent deaths of 10 or more people on March 1. You can click on my Blogger profile to see when Ani Wandaryan was born. I had only followed the election through news sources like A1+ and Lragir, but the state of emergency blocked everything but a few blogs like Nazarian (US) and Unzipped (UK). When I saw there wasn't sufficient international coverage or debate, I decided to contribute to the discussion. Truthfully, I also felt sorry for a blogger named "Onnik Krikorian," who seemed harassed by both sides. Thought he could use some help, especially after someone threatened his son.
And that one private email I wrote you that I referenced earlier was written in June 2008, far after the election. So--"harassing"? "Forcing" you to support the opposition? C'mon, Onnik, we all know better, really...and you also blocked a Twitter account named @dolmastan. So, lots of inaccuracies on your part in those tweets of your own, and they were deliberate and mean-spirited ones. Please clear your head and move on. There are real issues and more important things to think about in the Caucasus.
As for your work--Godspeed. I won't retweet you anymore, though I did retweet you 70+ times before you unfollowed me in December. Still to this day one of your top retweeters out there in the Twitter standings.
To readers: I am not going to labor the point anymore - everything is clearly written down in my post above. ;)
To Ani: I am appalled how some people can come forth and defend their hoaxes and lies even after they are exposed. No need for 2012, doomsday is already here ;)
To liars and hoaxers: I am closing this post for comments as your attacks on me and especially Ani are no longer within limits of logic but explicitly ad hominem. Hmm, it always was such though...
Post a Comment