It’s interesting to learn the intended goal of the government in Laos in regards to contracting out the hydropower-projects, but I don’t know if it is really necessary for the writer to start off the story by stigmatizing Laos as one of the poorest nations in Asia. It might sound better if the writer indeed, prefaces Laos with insufficient capacity to develop a country in a timely manner and therefore, hydropower is the only hope for the country. I have heard about Laos being the poorest country in Southeast Asia hundreds of times. Every journalist is obsessed with using the word “Poorest” when writing or compiling reports about Laos whether is coherent or incoherent to the story. I honestly hope they stop regurgitating the same sh1t over and over and prefacing it with something like “Laos is trying to catch up with her neighbors or Laos is one of the most peaceful places ever since the end of the civil war.”
I am not attempting to repudiate the fact that Laos is poor, but I am sure by now, the world has adequate knowledge about our destitution.They seem to rub the word “poorest” on our face countless times before they would even talk about the intended subject. Maybe I am just a little bit too sensitive here.Sometime I want to have those reporters retake the class “Ethical Code of Conduct” so that they can maintain standards of professionalism. I understand if they were to write about the country’s economy or poverty in Laos then it is not uncommon to focus on these issues.I guess they soon will write about Laotian’s defecation in the bush.
- because it's partly true, on a strictly economic point of view - because most of them never went to Laos and in fact don't realy know the country (they can just read figures in economic studies) - because they still live in the 20th century (when GDP was the good concept to measure the level of richness of a country) and not ine the 21st century (where we discovered a new most efficent wayt to measure a coutnry richness: the HDI : human development index)
