Two bios:
Marla Ruzicka (December 31, 1976 – April 16, 2005) was an American Green activist and aid worker who was killed by a car bomb blast in Baghdad.
Cori Dauber is an Associate Professor of Communication Studies (and of Peace, War, and Defense) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is also a Research Fellow at the Triangle Institute for Security Studies.
Cori Dauber, in addition to being a professor of communications (with peace, war and defense thrown in for good measure) is also a right-wing blogger. In a post titled "Let Us Not Speak Ill of the Dead", Dauber ignored her own admonition and noted the death on Saturday of Marla Ruzicka by putting scare quotes around "humanitarian" and "aid worker", and writing:
What, precisely, she did of a practical nature in either Afghanistan or Iraq is left somewhat vague, besides caring an enormous amount, and organizing. Were food, or medical supplies, or school supplies, ever actually found, dispursed [sic], distributed? If so, it isn't mentioned. But, boy, did she care, with tireless energy, and she made sure the civilian victims of war knew she was there caring -- and that "we" were sorry.
But, boy, did she care. The sarcasm drips and burns like acid. What, precisely, of a practical nature, has Cori Dauber done in regard to civilian victims of war? Encouraged the creation of a few, perhaps. Worse than someone who went to Afghanistan and Iraq without the desire to kill people. But she thinks the MSM hid the late Ms. Ruzicka's light:
Why the reluctance to say she was a leftist in the pieces tonight? She clearly didn't shy away from that in life -- in fact she took pride in her beliefs. Why deny them to her in death?
But, boy, did she care. It's very important to get Ruzicka's political affiliation down, you see. Why? To attack Ruzicka with, silly blog reader. Not directly, of course; Dauber denies any such intention. But if political affiliation were such an important thing to know, I would expect Prof. Dauber to call for the revelation of the political affiliation of every American killed in the Magnificent War Against Terror and Its Liberal Sympathizers. Strangely, a cursory review of Dauber's archives reveals no such call. Except in Ruzicka's case.
But, boy, did she care. Then Dauber used Ruzicka's death to accuse the media of making inflammatory accusations that the U.S. military is lying through its teeth about not keeping records on civilian casualties in Iraq. Not that the U.S. military has ever lied about such things before. And then she accused journalists in Iraq of hiding the fact that they knew and liked Ruzicka and her work on behalf of her NGO, which calls into question how unbiased the coverage of her death is.
But, boy, did she care. The net effect, as usual, is that Dauber conjures up a liberal, America-hating media-NGO conspiracy from the death of a woman who lost her life trying to help people.
And that, in short, is the mentality of the right today.
To be clear, I would note that the sarcasm was not directed towards Ms. Ruzicka, since I also noted a few paragraphs below the one you quote that the Washington Post's article on her death made clear she actually got several million dollars appropriated for the people she was concerned with. My sarcasm was directed towards the way the broadcast networks reported on her work -- which is to say with no substantive information about the actual contribution she made. About the importance of her political views, I guess we just disagree, but I didn't want to leave the impression that I had been slinging around snark towards someone who had just died in a combat zone, which is the clear impression you leave about my writing.
Posted by: dauber | April 19, 2005 at 11:13 PM
Actually, that's the impression I got from reading your article as well. You do appear to be slinging snark at someone who's just died in a combat zone.
Posted by: Peter Ross | April 20, 2005 at 11:13 AM
Damn, what a lowlife.
Posted by: Linnet | April 20, 2005 at 11:55 AM
Dauber, there were plenty of ways for you to make sure it was clear you were criticizing the coverage, rather than the woman. You didn't take any of them.
Second, your criticism of the media is pretty weak. It amounts to saying Ruzicka's politics should have been an issue - when the politics of others who die in Iraq are not - and that reporters in a war zone shouldn't write about other people there if they like them.
Bottom line: uncouth behavior and poor analysis.
Posted by: Mithras | April 20, 2005 at 12:16 PM