The media has a lot of obstacles to overcome in its attempt to report the news as indicated
here. I would think that these obstacles would have a direct bearing as to what and how something is reported or presented.
At the same time you have those individuals that purposely write things that are false for whatever
reason.
Recently the AP, a major reporting source for many media establishments, was shown to have reported false information concerning an attack Nov. 24 on a mosque in the Hurriyah district in northwest Baghdad. This suggested false attack was carried by many distinguished reporting centers around the world. Needless to say that false information, when read around the world, will have a direct bearing as to how people interpret things.
We have a number of threads here on DR1 presently that point to these difficulties in reporting. One that comes to mind is the thread on
Trujillo. In it you will find many links to many sources each reporting as to the author’s take on the situation at the time of their writing. At the same time you will notice that movies have been made of these moments in history and that they too differ from that reported by people that had the direct exposure to that era. Added to that are the opinions posted by board members here on this board. Even when you read the autobiographies of people there is the possibility of bias being presented in those writing thereby giving way to a sort of ‘shifting of the truth’.
So who is to say what is truth and what is fiction? All history prior to the invention of the camera and the tape recorder in reality is all speculation as to the facts in what ever matter is being presented. The possibility that there is bias on the part of the person compiling the information for future reporting may have a tendency to sway the thinking of those that will read the information presented.
Now as to if there is manipulation in reference to Dominican history I would say yes and it is for the influencing the subjective reality of the Dominican people. As the real truth of history is debatable as to its authenticity if not backed up by film or recorded sound then I would infer that all history, unrecorded by sound or video, is ‘subjective reality’.
The reasoning for why this is being done can be straight forward and quite simple and honest in nature.
Here in the DR, due to its failure to obtain strong cohesiveness (my opinion), a strong rallying point needed to be created. The people seem to have chosen Duarte, Mella and Sánchez as that rally point behind the ‘Sociedad La Trinitaria’. Upon investigation of the ‘history’ behind these individuals and organization their true purpose and reason comes into question. This questioning isn’t important if the education system meets the desired effect of instilling patriotism and pride in the country thereby establishing a bit of cohesiveness.
This same system was used in the US. Look at the number of national heroes there are there. They are and have been used as a rally point for the US. At times there will be the individual that will try to bring discredit to those heroes like pointing out that Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. It is the subjective reality that comes into play as to whether you believe this man was great.
I’ve rambled on enough.
Rick