Genocide Porn

I suspect that like me, many of you are regular readers of the New York Times. There op-ed columnists are among the most popular in the country. But amid all the partisanship and narcissism, the one writer that is consistently tackling serious world issues in an even-handed and illuminating manner is the one most likely to be ignored.

The National Geographic Adventure blog just ran a very interesting interview with Nicholas Kristof. One especially compelling exchange had to do with why perhaps Kristof slips by less noticed compared to his more bombastic peers like Friedman, Dowd, and Krugman:

NGA: Do you ever worry that you might overwhelm your readers or turn them off somehow? You know, maybe someone’s drinking his morning coffee, reading the paper, and he finally throws up his hands and says, Enough! I can’t handle Kristof this morning.

NK: Sometimes I worry about writing what might be called, frankly, "genocide porn." Darfur is so painful a topic, and so brutal, and so graphic that it becomes almost titillating. I worry about that when I pile on horrifying examples. But I don’t know any other way to get people to actually act—and maybe write a letter to the White House.

I always find his stories quite courageous. He consistently writes about issues that lack commercial appeal in a serious and informative manner, hoping to have an impact. He does not get involved in the red vs. blue back and forth that characterizes most of our public discourse, and which quite frankly is more likely to drive up readership and ratings. And he has not been afraid to insert himself into dangerous areas and complicated issues without having a preconceived notion of what kinds of answers he will find.

Go back and read about the way he dealt with the illicit sex trade in Cambodia and the young girls that have been exploited to gain an idea of what I am talking about. Here is his archive page on the New York Times.