Amanda Taub over at the excellent, but infrequent Wronging Wrights Blog, has uncovered what appears to be a fictitious source being cited by the media as being a 'representative of the Darfur refugee community'. There are three parts - in the first she chronicles her discovery that Mr. Sharati might not be real:
Google seemed to back up the theory that Sharati was a creation of Abdel Wahid's PR machine. A little more searching turned up a number of statements and press releases from the mysterious Mr. S, quite a few of which contained express support for Abdel Wahid. I think my favorite was his Open Letter to President Obama last April, which closes with the claim that the "only legitimate representative" for the IDPs and refugees in camps is "the Founder and Chairperson of Sudan Liberation Movement/ Army Mr. Abdel Wahid Mohamed Ahmed El nur [sic] the defender of our rights." Not exactly a neutral humanitarian perspective, Captain Subtlety.The second she confronts the unrepentant Associated Press and NY Times:
In other words, she'd published a quote from "Abu Sharati," stating that he was a refugee representative, when in fact he was neither (a) Abu Sharati, or (b) a refugee representative. Another journalist I spoke to, who has traveled to Darfur, confirmed that the name was a pseudonym. And according to Alex de Waal, the word "Sharati" is the plural of "Shartai," which refers to a Fur administrative chief under the Sultanic system. So "Abu Sharati" would mean "chief of chiefs" within the Fur tradition, which I suppose could be translated as "representative."In the third, she discussed why it matters that the media are using fake sources:
First of all, it matters because if "Abu Sharati" -whoever he really is- does not have any legitimate authority to speak on behalf of Darfur's displaced people, then presenting his views as if he does is basically just stealing. Being able to tell your own story matters, all the time, for everyone. Losing the power to do that matters too. That's the reason why, if I were to start calling journalists and claiming that I speak on behalf of all attorneys in the United States, the ABA would have a legitimate beef with me. I have no right to claim that I speak for other people without their permission.It's a great read, and the sort of stuff that blogging would ideally be about.