Thread by @TimothyDSnyder

0/10 The Nova Kakhovka Dam in Ukraine, controlled by Russia, has been destroyed. This brings humanitarian, ecological, and economic disaster to Ukrainians. Here are some guidelines for writing about this catastrophe.

1. Avoid the temptation to bothsides a calamity.  That's not journalism.

2. When a Russian spokesperson claims that Ukraine did something (e.g. blow a dam), this is not part of a story of an event in the real world.  It is part of a different story: about all the outrageous claims Russia has made about Ukraine since invading in 2014.

3. Citing Russian claims next to Ukrainian claims is unfair to the Ukrainians.  What Russian spokespersons have said has almost always been untrue, whereas what Ukrainian spokespersons have said has largely been reliable. The juxtaposition suggests a false equality.

4. If a Russian spokesman (e.g. Dmitri Peskov) must be cited, it must be mentioned that this specific figure has lied about every aspect of this war. This is not insult but context.  Readers picking up the story in the middle need to know the background.

5. If Russian propaganda for external consumption is cited, so must that for internal consumption. Propagandists long argued that Ukrainian dams should be blown. A Russian parliamentarian takes for granted Russia blew the dam and rejoices. See @JuliaDavisNews

6.  When a story begins with bothsidesing, readers are instructed that an object in the physical world (like a dam) is just an element of narrative. They are guided into the wrong genre (literature) right at the moment when analysis is needed. This does their minds a disservice.

7. Dams are objects. How they can be destroyed is a subject for experts. This NYT story has the merit of treating dams as physical rather than narrative objects. It becomes clear that the dam was likely destroyed by an explosion from the inside.
nytimes.com/2023/06/06/wor…

8. Russia was in control of the relevant part of the dam when it exploded. This is an elemental part of the context. It comes before what anyone says. When a murder is investigated, detectives think about means. Russia had the means. Ukraine did not.

9. The story doesn't start at the moment the dam explodes. For the last fifteen months Russia has been killing Ukrainian civilians and destroying Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, whereas Ukraine has been trying to protect its people and the structures that keep them alive.

10. The setting includes military history. Armies that are attacking do not blow dams to block their own path of advance.  Armies that are retreating do blow dams to slow the advance of the other side.  Ukraine was advancing, and Russia was retreating.

11/10 Objectivity does not mean treating an event as a coin flip between two public statements. It demands thinking about the objects and the settings that readers require for understanding amidst uncertainty.