The fact is sacred, the interpretation is free. This is the general principle not only in journalism, but also to any activity. This principle extends even over the interpersonal relations. For example, when a wife says to her husband, “Oh, you made me unhappy,” it is certainly an interpretation that can or also cannot be based on the facts. If the spouses try to go deep into the facts, then, it is very likely that both will have, as it is now common to say, a package of facts. The detailed discussion of this “package”, as a rule, will not lead to reconciliation, but purely theoretically it should lead from the field of interpretation to the field of facts.
The expressions like “Putin is an evil” and “The United States is an evil”, indeed, are interpretations. There are facts that prove the atrocities on both sides. But including them in the pretentious term of “embodiment of an evil” seems exaggeration and extreme for me. However, as I said, everyone here is free to interpret. Simply, those who make interpretations on this level are reluctant to go deep into the facts proving the atrocities of their sympathized side.
Approximately since 1992, in the streets and the opposition newspapers (at that time there was no Facebook), and since 1998, the official propaganda was saying, “ANM ruined the country.” Again, it is an interpretation, whose “base of facts” is too unsteady. If by saying a “country” we mean the USSR, then it’s just ridiculous. If we are referring to the fact that the majority of Armenians were more abundant during the communist times than during ANM and the rest of the political powers, it is true.
As to what extent it is associated with the process of “ruining”, again no one is reluctant to go deep into the facts. Because today those speaking of “ruining” do not so much interpret the historical facts, as much they want through recalling the past to weaken the arguments of today’s opposition political figures originated from the given party. And the mentioned figures do not accept any fact of the past that will negatively characterize their former party. Here, it turns out again that those who interpret are not interested in going deep into the facts equitably.
Read also
… “Gazprom” is reducing the gas price for Armenia so that the “Gazprom Armenia” would not raise this price for Armenians,” this is not even an interpretation. It is already a “dribbling” of the mind.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
