The New Yorker sued by New Guinea tribesmen
Thanks, Rhonda – for a link to the parties in the suit
The profiles of the two legally warring parties could not be further apart.
On the one side are two poor tribesmen living in a remote part of New Guinea; on the other a Pulitzer Prize-winning bestselling author and arguably the world’s most urbane magazine, The New Yorker.
The tribesmen this week filed a $10m lawsuit for defamation in a Manhattan court claiming that Jared Diamond had portrayed them wrongly as vengeful, bloodthirsty killers. The two-page complaint said they were falsely accused of “serious criminal activity and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, including murder”…
The contentious New Guinea article is no longer available from the New Yorker’s magazine, presumably for legal reasons, but an abstract still carried by the magazine’s website bills it as a work of anthropology. It explores the story of a New Guinean highlander whose uncle was killed in a battle against a neighbouring clan and who thus felt duty-bound to seek revenge.
The tribesman named in the article is Daniel Wemp, a member of the Handa clan, who is one of the two individuals that have brought the lawsuit. In the New Yorker he is said to have prosecuted his public fight over three years, at the cost of 29 lives in the course of six battles and the theft of 300 pigs.
The other man listed in the legal action is Henep Isum Mandingo, who Wemp is said in the article to have held responsible for his uncle’s murder…
But key elements in the story have been challenged by a self-appointed media monitoring website called stinkyjournalism.org. It claims to have looked into the article, to the lengths of sending three fact-checkers to the highlands of New Guinea to interview the central characters.
Diamond has yet to respond to the allegations.
You mean the readership of The New Yorker in New Guinea is sufficient that neighbors are standing round hollering at these two guys – because of an article by an anthropologist?
Follow-on interviews since the story hit the Web indicate the plaintiffs claim they told the stories to Diamond – but, they weren’t the principals in the tales.
Yes, the Papua New Guinea lawyers, economists, students and university professors and political leaders are talking about the article. The Bishop of Mendi received it in the mail. University library data bases and Internet cafes provide access to The New Yorker. But is it really more “fun” to believe they are all ignorant headhunters?
It’s funny too, how in US celebrations, when people put on traditional dress –pilgrims or civil war duds–these images are not trotted out as representative of everyday people in our society today. Yet every time that you have a New Guinea tribes person –the special-occasion-only costume is rolled out…just like here above.
Our web site has photos of Isum and Daniel, the two plaintiffs wearing just regular street clothes–but that’s not something to laugh at I guess.
If you or your friend or family member was simply a working guy, a trained mechanic, who drove Mr Daisy (Dr. Diamond) as your job, and suddenly you are accused in a magazine of being a murderer and a rapist–things you never did. Ask yourself, what would you do? Or is it that you believe they are of so little value as human beings, that they should just sit back and take the abuse?
I believe any fair minded person would see how serious a situation this is. If the media can do this to them–better believe that you and people you know are next. If you are interested in the facts go to StinkyJournalism dot org http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/latest-journalism-news-updates-149.php
Rhonda R Shearer
April 24, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Rhonda might also mention she is a principal in starting this lawsuit. And the website referenced is hers.
Other than that, I think pilgrims look about as absurd as any other fancy-dress christian. Including the pope.
And Eideard looks pretty silly in a kilt.
keaneo
April 24, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I provided my full name and a link to an article I co-authored so I was hardly hiding my identity or role.
How could I be a principal (meaning party) in this lawsuit? The libels have nothing to do with me. However, you could correctly say I am helping these victims of an injustice. I have made full disclosures about this in my article:
http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/latest-journalism-news-updates-149.php
If New Yorker and Diamond would have taken care of business, I could and would be doing something else.
You are begging my point about the fancy dress. What I said, I thought clearly, was that when people write about New Guinea the fancy dress costumes roll out and there is rarely a captions that admits that people are depicted on a special occasion or dressed for tourists. I say that is unfair.
When you see the photo at the top of your blog, with its fierce looking traditional paint and costumes, it is not illustrating emotional distress–and you know it. You could have selected a photo that did illustrate these peoples emotional distress. If, for example, you chose a photo of a mother holding a dead infant (PNG has a very high infant mortality rate).
If your goal is to mock less powerful people at their expense, well done. Fish in a barrel.
I really think you should re-consider helping make the world a better place instead.
Rhonda R Shearer
April 24, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Only the man on the right is the party in the suit. It was taken after a day of hard physical work. He is with family members.
If you have a better idea of what they should do about lies published about them–namely that they are murderers, rapists and thieves–please let me know. New Yorker or Diamond, has not corrected or apologized so they have no alternative but to sue. This involves not just them but the tribes reputation.
I mentioned in my that one Handa scholar (a PhD student in law)was criticized in a peer review, suggesting that he was not honest because he did not mention all the violence in his Handa area …and then the reviewer cites Diamond’s bogus New Yorker article as his authoritative source.
These people–or anyone–deserves better.
Rhonda R Shearer
April 24, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Just for the record, Rhonda – since it’s likely you only dropped by here because of your interest in one Post -
I’ll celebrate the anniversary of my first arrest in a civil rights sit-in 50 miles from the White House next month. It will be 50 years.
The time since has been spent variously in union organizing, activities challenging the status quo in North America on civil rights, civil liberties – including GLBT equal rights.
Outside the United States those activities have included actions on behalf of national liberation movements from the Atlantic to the Red Sea – which included arrest and expulsion from the UK.
Within and without the United States, my activities on behalf of peace and opposition to U.S. imperialism make an ornate file which sits in copies on desks of several acronyms, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.. I don’t believe in sorting out injustice just inside law courts – though I appreciate their value – going back to folks like Bill Kunstler and Ted Koskoff who saved my butt a few times.
Next time you visit a blog to straighten everyone out about whatever your single-issue campaign may be – take a minute or two to look around before you scuttle back to your ivory tower.
—————-
Though you nudged me from my usual silence in the Comments section. The regulars here mostly have a clear picture of how I feel – because they are in fact regulars. I’m surprised they haven’t given you a “cripes!” or two.
This is, after all, only my personal blog and there’s a lot more hollering going on over at what we refer to as the “big blog” with lots of editors – who everyone thinks agree with each other – and we don’t. But, at least we try to be polite and not lapse back into anything like the flaming days of Usenet.
eideard
April 24, 2009 at 5:06 pm
I am very glad to have that information, and very much appreciate any and all of your advocacy efforts –but your history makes it all the more surprising how you referred to these PNG people.
I don’t get it. Why wouldn’t you offer help and encouragement for these men’s efforts to speak truth to power?
I am a grandmother and am too old to believe I can straighten people out. Nor do I live in an ivory tower. But I can speak to unfairness and trying to make the world a better place.
Rhonda R Shearer
April 24, 2009 at 5:18 pm
You’re in a dialogue with Eideard – someone who’s an optimist – and a cynic.
Cripes. Sometimes the cynic half takes precedence. For any of us. Especially when a $10 million lawsuit is “required”.
Eid was in one multi-million$ class-action suit that I know of. They won vs. the local Police Dept., the regional phone company and the FBI.
He took $1,000 for his trouble. The lead attorney – also a plaintiff – was awarded 1 million$ and gave away all but $1,000. As I recall, Eid was out of work at the time.
Experiences like that temper one’s attitude towards lawsuits.
moss
April 24, 2009 at 6:01 pm
The 10 million number is a standard having to do with the money limits of a certain court. (In this case it was 10 million–it is a convention that is rubber stamped in I am told)
Look at all the attention this law suit has brought to their and the general cause of indigenous peoples everywhere who are often exploited and the brunt of truth sacrificed for a good (and profitable)story.
My experience is class actions suck. The lawyers do get all the money. You are completely right. This is different. It is a last resort as The New Yorker and Diamond won’t take their lies back. If you have a better idea of what these men can do instead of a lawsuit–other than nothing–please let me know.
Rhonda R Shearer
April 24, 2009 at 6:31 pm
No better ideas. Maybe if I had a “wayback” machine I’d have advised differently. I wouldn’t have chosen to confront The New Yorker in court.
They have the bucks and suits on retainer to confront whole fracking governments.
I haven’t knowledge of where the best wedge might be; but, I would have focused on Diamond, where his persona acts on a day-to-day basis, his profession takes him, his reputation counts for more than a single incident – something like that. Peers count for so much in academia.
I know if you spend enough time snooping – often you can find something easier than a lawyer. Even though I’ve known some terrific, competent Movement lawyers.
Best of luck and time!
eideard
April 24, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Why not use the media methods that have become affordable and practical? Contact LINK-TV and Current-TV?
Find some City College film majors to make a documentary. Even a Ken Burns-style workup that’s 5 or 10 minutes long to present the view of the offended folks in PNG is not especially difficult to produce.
A task that some student would jump at, I’d think. Nowadays there are plenty of venues for distribution and publication – especially the Web.
Then, let it leak to the press and to the guy who wrote the article. Might jog some activity even before the documentary is made?
newrepublican
April 25, 2009 at 6:48 am
I will do it! Thanks!
Rhonda R Shearer
April 25, 2009 at 7:08 am