Visualising Truths: The Politics of Omission, Manipulation, and Erasure

This roundtable revisits the perceived ‘truthfulness’ of imagery in the face of decisions–intentional or not–that omit, edit, and erase elements. These practices potentially matter for how people make sense of issues, yet are not always apparent in visual outputs’ final forms. By considering the notion of truth-telling via a range of images and settings–including artificial intelligence, urban development, and data journalism–this event aims to highlight how visuals and their creators relate to facts, misinformation, and yet-to-be-realized realities.

HYBRID EVENT - All Jihad Is Local: the Micro-Politics of Militant Islamism in 1980s Lebanon and Beyond

Biography:

Raphaël Lefèvre investigates Islamist armed groups in the Middle East. His latest book is Jihad in the City: Militant Islamism and Contentious Politics in Tripoli (Cambridge University Press, 2021). He is also the author of Ashes of Hama, the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria (Oxford University Press, 2013). His PhD thesis which he did at the University of Cambridge was awarded the Bill Gates Sr Prize by the Gates Cambridge Trust and the Syrian Studies Association Prize.

Abstract:

America and China: How did we get here, and where should diplomacy go next?

Relations between the US and China are at the tensest point for half a century. Can we look to history to understand why we have reached this point? In the next decade, global prosperity and peace will depend on this bilateral relationship being managed well. How likely are the prospects of that? In conversation with historian of China Rana Mitter, Robert B. Zoellick will draw on his long experience of public service relating to China and his new book on US diplomacy to discuss these urgent issues.

More than Self-Interest? Income, Equality of Opportunity and Intergenerational Mobility

Beliefs in equality of opportunity and intergenerational mobility are increasingly popular as an explanation for redistribution preferences. Some individuals (even if they are poor) may be more willing to accept inequality as a result of a fair meritocratic process. Others (even when they are rich) may support redistribution if they believe inequality to be the result of an unfair system. In this project, we start with the relationship between material self-interest and redistribution preferences as a baseline.
The Economist
Subscribe to