Yesterday’s post about the Niger 2004-05 Famine Scam debate going in Norway has been updated with the following link:

Norwegian People’s Aid goes self-critical, published in Bergens Tidende on May 3rd, 2008

It is an interview with Petter Eide, the secretary general of the Norwegian People’s Aid whom after the Tabloid debate that followed the day after The Famine Scam had aired, went out on national television, saying that it was OK to exaggerate crises in order to raise funds.

In my chronicle Egeland, you owe an apology published in Bergens Tidende on April 28th, I write:

I am chocked by the lack of interest towards the intended receivers of this aid, and the appalling lack of interest in the needs of the country in question. Instead, representatives such as Petter Eide of the Norwegian People’s Aid, claim that it is morally acceptable to exaggerate crises in order to get the Western world to donate more. But it is really OK to comprise with the truth? Problems are simplified and over-dramatized, so that the larger aid organizations can offer a very simple solution, a real “quick fix” to global poverty and misery.

Esther Garvi, Eden Foundation

In the article Norwegian People’s Aid goes self-critical, Eide responds:

I am sorry for using words and expressions that may have caused misunderstandings. Of course, I do not condone lying.

Petter Eide, Norwegian People’s Aid

Here is what I initially made of the whole aid debate, after our meeting in Tabloid (posted on March 5th):

There is a whole debate going on about the aid organizations’ handling of “emergencies”, and the thing is, we can never forget that we are dealing with real human beings here. They may be poor, and they may be illiterate (hence they have no access to our studios and no means of putting their foot down when other people belittle them), but that does not make it OK to claim that they are dying of hunger and distribute food, when in fact they are not at all dying of hunger, but suffering from difficult diseases and other things related to their harsh situation.

Having read up on what Norway is left wondering about, I can only say that this from my side is not an issue about whether or not to engage in the poor, because I really commend anyone who wants to do something for the poor. But in order to help someone, you need to know what that person needs and wants; and you can absolutely never go into a situation and start meddling with the marginal coping mechanisms that that society has, only to retreat when your object no longer wins the sympathies of the masses. And believe me, the Western World tires easily of things that lack action.

Esther Garvi, Eden Foundation

In the article Norwegian People’s Aid goes self-critical, Eide continues:

…It is better, cheaper and more effective to prevent crises, rather than reacted to them. But all journalists think that it is better to write about an [ongoing] aid campaign rather than what is being done to prevent the crisis. It’s a dilemma, for we depend on attention to get money.

…what the researchers must understand, is that we need to finance our work. We use a lot of resources to raise money.

Petter Eide, Norwegian People’s Aid

I see the point that Tarje Iversen Wanvik, former campaign leader of Kirkens Nødhjelp, makes in the chronicle Aid in crisis:

The aid industry depends on financial donations in order to run its business. But in the way that they raise money, as well as how they deal with issues of poverty, they are in danger of tearing down the credibility of the entire industry.

Tarje Iversen Wanvik