16 December, 2005

Okay, more WTO in HK shit....

Right right, I know I just posted (literally) on the WTO but I was reading more on Caracas Chronicles and Francisco has this hilarious bit where the he decides to attend the press conference hosted by the International Manufacturers' Association and he

walk[s] into the room and realize I am the only "journalist" who's turned up. So I sit down and there they all are, the heads of every major employers' federation in Europe and North America, lined up in front of me. Undeterred, the chairman launches straight into the "press conference" except, well, there are about 20 of them and only one of me. So I get to ask all the questions, these guys just take turns answering.

Anyway, read it cause there's not only that but some interesting tidbits on how this round of trade talks has been dominated by developing nations (a good thing in my opinion) and agriculture (perhaps not so good). Interestingly enough, the US's position is closely aligned with the Brazil-Indian bloc's on agriculture subsidies and liberlization of those markets while the EU, it seems, is coming out the bad guy on this (Yippee! oh, is it wrong to take delight in that?)


vergueishon said...

It's not "wrong" to take delight in it, but it is maybe a bit glib. Anyway, the EU will definately come out as the "bad guy" in this round of talks. Speaking of which, in a recent piece, NPR was billing the obstacles to this event as mostly posed by "rich countries," never once discerning between the US and Europe. I hate to say it, seeing as I listen to NPR a couple of times a week, but they're definately turning down the heat on Europe.

Eve said...

Really, are you that surprised? NPR has been soft on Europe for a long time now. Still, that they dont distinguish between US and Europe's positions on agriculture, which differ radically, should remind you to take their reports with a grain of salt. NPR, like any news organization, has a certain agenda to present the truth in specific ways, like FoxNews or CNN; just cause they're on the radio, are publicly funded and have soothing announcers doesnt mean they arent prone to the same problems.

vergueishon said...

Woa! I think I got more than I asked for. NPR is a great source of news for topics that are generally ignored by the cable networks, local media and even print media. Their known more for their emphasis on influential and sometimes less-know issues, and not so much headlines. At the same time, on certain topics their slant does come out. On the other hand, this is the case with any news source, particularly blogs, here more, here less.

And yes, I *was* surprised.

Eve said...

Sorry, didnt mean to come on like that. I guess I was thinking of another conversation I had with someone who said they got a lot of their news from NPR cause, in their mind, NPR was unbiased--which we know not to be true (listen to their stories on Israel, you'll soon get the picture).
Still, NPR is great for getting those non-headline stories.