I have never met Mr. S .... I have also never met anybody who has met
Mr. S .... All I know about Mr. S ..., I have read on the Internet.
I write about Mr. S ... because he has disciples who want him to
receive the Nobel Peace Prize. I am against that.
I think it would be hypocritical to award him, even if it's not a Nobel
Prize but a lesser recognition. I write about him to avoid that he gets
awards because having worked in the media my whole life, I probably
have a better awareness of the hypocritical aspects of his stardom than
some of those who decide on awards.
Mr. S ... has, for a long time, projected himself onto the media, as a
source of sexy topics and as a celebrity contributor. The theme on
which he rode to fame, of course, was the immorality of child prostitution
in the Philippines.
But having worked for the press, including the tabloid media, I know
how moral topics are sorted there.
The greatest ethical scandal of the modern world, the dying of millions
of children every year in Third World countries, primarily Africa,
because of malnutrition or easily preventable diseases, is not a good topic
for the media, especially not the tabloids. It is unappetizing.
Everybody knows that it is ongoing, and that it is preventable.
Everybody with a moral sense knows deep inside that he should donate half his
salary for children dying of malnutrition or malaria in Africa. But of
course, people want to use themselves the money they earn, and they
want to eat delicious food and have entertainment.
It is well-known in the tabloid media that if you repeatedly run
stories about world hunger, or the ongoing suffering of children in Africa,
your readers will buy other newspapers. People don't want to be reminded
that as upright citizens, they should donate much of their money. And
they want to enjoy their meals without having pictures of starving
children flashing before their inner eyes.
If as a junior editor, you push topics such as the moral scandal of
children in Africa dying from malnutrition or easily preventable diseases,
you will never become editor-in-chief, and if you are editor-in-chief
and don't keep such topics off the front page, you will sooner or later
be fired by your publisher because the circulation of your tabloid or
newspaper will drop, and that is contrary to the duties of the
editor-in-chief.
Now compare this with some juicy stories about tourists in Asia who get
caught with child prostitutes. In principle, for tabloid buyers who are
not satisfied with their own sex lives, nothing is a better read than
stories about other people who are in real trouble for having sex. It's
the ultimate vindication for those who don't have sex.
Which is why rather recently, a British tabloid spent a lot of money on
the tracking down of Gary Glitter in Vietnam.
It's not that the newspaper acted out of genuine moral concern. It's
the story. If they would be concerned with genuine moral issues, they
would send their reporters to Africa to produce stories about children who
slowly suffer to death on a teaspoon of nutrition a day, which feeds
intestinal worms more than it feeds the children.
I do want to point out the important function people like Mr. S ...
have for the media, especially the tabloid media, and, by extension, their
instrumental role in creating severe distortions in the moral
perception of the media-consuming public. These moral distortions would be
further cemented if somebody like Mr. S ... were to receive a major award.
If we agree that not a collection of commandments of a perceived
supranational being is the foundation of modern ethics but the recognition of
the needless suffering of other beings, than there are millions of
worse fates in this world, here and today, than the fates of some child
prostitutes who roam the streets of a Third World city and enjoy a high
degree of personal freedom and a good amount of money which they
typically perceive as easily earned.
Among the many cases that are worse fates but do not get as much
attention from moral crusaders:
1. As mentioned previously, the plight of children dying of hunger and
easily preventable diseases in Africa.
2. Those in captivity and tortured in prisons anywhere around the
world. In most countries of the world, prison guards have a free hand in
mistreating inmates.
3. People experiencing slow and painful deaths from diseases even in
Europe and North America.
4. The suffering of people who are paralyzed for decades and more or
less forgotten in some closed institutions.
Of course, if these people are not children, they are less appealing to
our sense of sympathy. But yes, adults can suffer more than children.
This should be kept morally in perspective.
From the perspective of modern ethics, the fact that there are child
prostitutes in Third World countries is a minor dilemma.
My criticism of Mr. S ... (and organizations like Ecpat) does not focus
on what they are doing but on what they are not doing. Their posture
(including their claim for the widest media coverage possible) is of
those who are occupying the highest moral ground, dedicating their lives to
the noblest of all causes, saving children from "sexual predators".
They also adopt a posture of moral unassailability.
But to claim the highest moral merit, one has to address the worst
ethical problems (the worst suffering of other beings), and the further
down one goes on this scale, the more an ethical problem becomes a pet
project.
It doesn't fit the moral high ground if those addressing ethical
problems are overly seeking public attention for their good deeds. No other
ethical issue is as suited for a "doing good" ego trip as is social work
with child prostitutes, as no other topic receives such easy and
prominent media coverage.
Compared to other ethical problems, doing social work with child
prostitutes also requires little personal sacrifice.
If you work with dying children in Africa, you feel compelled to donate
a lot of your personal wealth to saving children. A single dollar you
spend can mean a child will be saved.
But if your morality consists of tracking down Western customers of
child prostitutes, than you can be personally rich and still claim moral
fame.
And this is not a setting that should be supported by international
moral awards.
