Doug:
Obviously I do not agree that the country reports are useless.
An individual country may have political pressures to bend the truth, it
is true. However, if multiple countries say the same thing, then I
think it is hard to imagine that various countries in various parts of
the globe all are lying in the same way for political reasons. Sounds a
lot like a global conspiracy theory at that point.
The other way to look at these advisories is to look at the details
rather than the big picture. If the advisory says specifically that a
particular region of country X is unsafe, or that you should avoid doing
A, B, or C, then that is specific advice, something you can act on. A
general statement saying that country X has a high crime rate might be
more influenced by political pressures than the detailed advice, which
presumably is based on crimes reported to the embassy, in the local
newspapers, or from other sources.
The other old rule is that if there is smoke, there is fire.
If you think that countries are subject to bias, then I argue that
individuals are even more subject to bias. What about someone in the
tourism business who has a financial interest in tourism in country X?
What about someone who has an emotional attachment to country X, could
that person look at the faults of country X in an objective manner,
especially if it involved admitting to outsiders that his own country or
his favorite country was no longer a safe place for tourists? What
about someone who has strong political views, which cause him to favor
or disfavor a particular country for political reasons? (IE. Cuba).
What about someone whose views of the country are based primarily on the
nice locals they met on their last couple of trips there? People have
biases, sometimes very strong biases.
It is true, as you said, if you know personally a resident of country X,
and know that person is reasonable, unbiased, inteligent, and informed,
then that individual is a very good source of information. But opinions
expressed by unknown individuals on the internet are far from that that ideal.
There is plenty of bias out there, which is why I urge people to get
input from as many sources as possible, not just individuals on the
internet who may have hidden or obvious biases.
I will make one other comment, which is that Latin America as a region
is a relatively violent area, with serious crime problems. (I have
plenty of sources to back up that claim, if anyone is interested,
starting with the UN.) I would not push these government advisories if
I was talking about Japan or Canada, which are relatively safe.
Richard
Doug McDonald wrote:
>
> Richard Ferguson wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately,
>
> Unfortunately you always answer posts with the same
> stuff. You list government web sites for travel information.
>
> These are, basically amd uniformly, worthless.
>
> This is because they are influenced, 100%, by politics and/
> or political correctness.
>
> They cannot be trusted as to whether a place is safe
> or unsafe, healthy or unhealthy. That goes either way:
> if they say it is safe, it may not be. If they say it is
> dangerous, it may not be.
>
> The only good information can be obtained from private
> sources who you personally trust.
>
> Doug McDonald |
