Soenke Zehle on Sun, 16 Mar 2003 07:55:12 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Wartime Journalism (Final) |
I know that nettime is not really a 'media' list in the traditional sense but rather concerned with the materiality of media infrastructures, the logic of networks etc. Anyway, war is upon us, and since at least some nettimers are also journalists/radio hosts etc., I thougt that this debate on 'journalism in times of war' (archived at OpenDemocracy <http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/issue-8-92.jsp>) might be of interest. For background on these exchanges, see the set of guidelines on ethical conflict reporting published by the 'journalism think-tank' Reporting the World (Lynch, Jake. Reporting the World: The Findings. A practical checklist for the ethical reporting of conflicts in the 21st Century, produced by journalists, for journalists. <http://www.reportingtheworld.org/>), also materials at German papers have only occasionally referred to the cut-throat economic competition between CNN and Fox to account for the (to me, anyway) stunningly patriotic emphasis in their coverage, rarely discussed the influence of PNAC strategists (about ten of which are now members of the Bush administration), or tried to shed some light on the creative manoevering of Hill & Knowlton, once again in charge of media strategy. Without these, though, the apparent bumpiness of pre-war diplomacy makes even less sense, and neither does a controversy over the ethics of wartime journalism and the charge of a 'peace bias' that distorts the good old rule of impartiality. BTW, on the US-Spies-On-UN-Security-Council-Memorandum: as y'all have noticed, there has been virtually no debate whatsoever on what Dan Ellsberg thought of as (suprise, surprise) yet another case of the 'Pentagon Papers.' Alternative media coverage (US: Media Beat, Democracy Now, Mother Jones, Counterpunch, Utne Reader did pick it up) doesn't really count, I guess, as long as the gray lady doesn't pull her weight. The memo version I had forwarded still had the anglicized spelling (modified by the Observer) that caused the Washington Times to question its authenticity, but its authenticity is no longer the issue. Both Norman Solomon and Amy Goodman tried to slip in the issue when they were being interviewed on CNN, to no avail. For a summary of what turned out to be yet another media non-event, see Tomasky, Michael. "Spooky Story: Why the American media shrugged off a story about spying at the United Nations ". The American Prospect (March 12 2003). <http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/03/tomasky-m-03-12.html>. Soenke # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net