For most of history, genocide was just something governments did and nobody blinked.
China was probably the worst place in the world to grow up female 100 years ago. There was foot binding, female infanticide, concubinage, and child marriage, and now it's one of the better places. So I really do feel that we're on the right side of history here.
If you just try to make rational arguments about why people should care about Congo and how 5 million people have died, then people tend not to be receptive. But once you've created a connection of empathy, rational arguments can play a supportive role.
Our national leaders tend to try to protect the national interest as they see it. They may screw up in that, but they at least see that as their role. In contrast, where issues of our national values are involved, which covers pretty much any humanitarian issue, they pretty much drop the ball.
Guilt-tripping people does not work; they tend to be turned off.
I think when hundreds of thousands of lives are on the line, you might have to set aside some principles.
The news media's silence, particularly television news, is reprehensible.
Write letters to your editors, write to your members of Congress, and write to your news stations.
You could perhaps better tell the story of a place by writing of a tiny village as a sort of prism into the bigger issues the culture was facing. It struck me as a better way to learn about a place, or at least a different way, than just going to interview the president. So I have often tried to tell the story of a place through people there. But I'm just amazed.
I think it's dangerous to be optimistic.
Usually people are very much focused on keeping their kids alive.
One of the principles of journalism is you don't lie. You never lie.
I said that one can't stereotype [Donald] Trump voters anymore than they can anybody else.
I think that [Donald] Trump is frankly a bigot. He has a racist history.
It's important not to demonize [Donald's] Trump voters.
In much of the world, the most dangerous thing a woman can do is become pregnant.
In general, talking about human rights tends to be very persuasive for people who care about human rights.
If one is talking to a finance minister of a poor country, moral arguments tend not to get very far. But if you can argue that their country is going to grow 2 percent faster per year if they can just harness the power of the female half of the population more effectively, that is an argument they consider.
Once you've created a connection of empathy, rational arguments can play a supportive role.
The way you get leaders to care about issues of conscience is to apply political pressure. It's less a question of persuading leaders directly and more trying to build a social movement that holds their feet to the fire.
Individual storytelling is incredibly powerful. We as journalists know intuitively what scientists of the brain are discovering through brain scans, which is that emotional stories tend to open the portals, and that once there's a connection made, people are more open to rational arguments.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: