| nettimme's_roving_reporter on Sat, 17 Apr 1999 03:32:33 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> (fwd) Washington Times: CNN, State Department Alliance |
The Washington Times
Sunday, March 14, 1999
FORUM
Odd alliance at State, CNN?
by Stella Jatras
In my opinion, there is something
unhealthy when the recently married CNN's Christiane
Amanpour and the State Department's James Rubin cover
the same "breaking news" story.
Ms. Amanpour, who never ceased to present
a one-sided CNN perspective throughout the Bosnian
war, is now doing the same with her one-sided
anti-Serb CNN perspective of the civil war now raging
in Kosovo. At the same time, Mr. Rubin is touting the
anti-Serb position from the State Department, which is
in effect: If the Serbs do not sign on the dotted
line, NATO will bomb the Serbs. If the Kosovo
Liberation Army (KLA) does not sign on the dotted
line, NATO will still bomb the Serbs!
The American people should be asking
themselves, "What gives? Is CNN running the State
Department, or vice versa?" There is clearly a
conflict here. Mr. Rubin should step down as spokesman
for the State Department. How can he have any
credibility considering with whom he shares pillow
talk? How can there be any semblance of journalistic
impartiality with such a relationship between a "news"
agency and the government? If there was any doubt
before, the identical slant of Ms. Amanpour's
"reporting" and Mr. Rubin's "official statements" out
of Rambouillet should make it perfectly clear.
Don't underestimate Ms. Amanpour's
influence, not just on the news, but on U.S. foreign
policy.
You need only ask yourself if we would be
involved in Bosnia if CNN, driven by Ms. Amanpour, had
not had Bosnia on the tube night after night. "Where
there's a war there's Amanpour," wrote Stephen Kinzer
of The NY Times Magazine, Oct 9, 1994. She certainly
has the drive and an instinct for the big stories;
Haiti, Rwanda, Bosnia and now Kosovo. But what happens
when she gets there? In her own words, from a New York
Times article regarding Peter Arnett's involvement in
the discredited CNN story about U.S. forces allegedly
using poison gas in Vietnam: "The bottom line is that
a television correspondent's most important contract
with the public. Trust and credibility are the
commodities we trade in; without them we are
worthless." It's only fair to ask ourselves how well
Ms. Amanpour has lived up to her own standard.
The Stephen Kinzer article gives part of
the answer in a quote from a longtime T.V. associate
of Ms. Amanpour: "She just insisted on going there
[Rwanda], and the impact of her coverage forced the
other networks to follow. It was another example of
her great news instincts." But this same insider has
doubts about Amanpour's commitment to objective
journalism. 'I have winced at some of what she's done,
at what used to be called advocacy journalism,' he
said. 'She was sitting in Belgrade when that
marketplace massacre happened, and she went on the air
to say that the Serbs had probably done it. There was
no way she could have known that. She was assuming an
omniscience which no journalist has. Christiane is a
journalist more in the British than the American
tradition, more willing to take sides on a story. And
I think she has a little of that traditional British
contempt for America.' " The fact that a UN classified
report concluded that Bosnian Muslim forces had
committed the Markale marketplace massacre seems of no
consequence to Ms. Amanpour. Deutsch Presse-Agentur of
June 6, 1996, wrote: "For the first time, a senior
U.N. official had admitted the existence of a secret
U.N. report that blames the Bosnian Moslems for the
February 1994 massacre of Moslems at the Sarajevo
market." Christiane Amanpour has yet to inform her
viewers of this fact, but continues to allow them to
believe the massacre was a Serbian atrocity which
United States and NATO used as an excuse to drop over
6,000 tons of bombs on the Bosnian Serbs.
During her interview on the Charlie Rose
show of 25 November 1997, Ms. Amanpour said, "an ABC
journalist was killed [in Bosnia]." She omitted the
fact that U.N. and military experts believe that David
Kaplan, the ABC journalist, was killed by Muslims.
Another big CNN story early in the Bosnian conflict
was the killing, allegedly by Serb snipers of two
"Muslim babies" on a bus. Who could not have been
horrified by the tragic sight of the funeral service
for those innocent Muslim babies? Where were Ms.
Amanpour and CNN to set the record straight? If it had
not been for French 2 TV that covered the funeral,
this writer would never have known that the babies
were Serbian (not Muslim) killed by a Muslim sniper,
as was made painfully clear by the presence of a
Serbian Orthodox priest conducting the funeral
service. . . before it was interrupted by a grenade
attack. However, in the CNN coverage the priest had
been cropped out, leaving the American audience to
believe that Serbs were not only the assassins, but
were also responsible for the grenade attack.
Mr. Kinzer goes on to say, "Advocate or
not, Amanpour has developed a style of her own. She
has a strong ego, and is satisfied only when she can
dominate a story, as she has in Bosnia." I guess that
includes a little stage management when appropriate.
According to another journalist who was with Ms.
Amanpour during a visit to Kosovo, some of the
journalists were taken on a orientation flight along
the border between Kosovo and Albania by helicopter
and were advised to wear flak jackets for the flight
because of possible ground fire from Albanian
positions. When the flight returned, Ms. Amanpour,
wearing a flak jacket, taped her report for the CNN
audience with scenes photographed from the helicopter
in the background...really dramatic stuff. The only
problem is, she had not accompanied her camerman on
the flight. The flak jacket and the taped film of the
flight were all for effect. And to think that Cokie
Roberts was criticized for wearing a coat and having a
picture of the apitol Building in the background when,
in fact, she was being filmed in a studio.
In a full-page Washington Times ad of July
29, 1998, a Vietnam veterans group wrote, "Now that
the Sarin gas fraud has been exposed -- what about
Bosnia coverage by Christiane Amanpour who fed the
American people a nightly diet of slanted reports and
chilling images? Her biased reporting promoted the "We
Must Do Something" approach that enabled President
Clinton to send American GIs to Bosnia without facing
the hard questions from American taxpayers and their
elected representatives: What national interests
justified that decision?" We could be asking the same
question today: What national interests justify the
decision to send GIs to Kosovo? It appears the "We
Must Do Something" mentality once again prevails due
to the biased anti-Serb reporting by the media.
The United States has always said that we
would never negotiate with terrorists, yet the Kosovo
Liberation Army with its connections to Osama bin
Laden was invited to negotiate in Paris. NATO's
Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, US General Wesley
Clark, as has Secretary of State Madeleine Albright,
met with key leaders of the rebel Kosovo Liberation
Army (KLA) in the Paris region. The question should
be, "Why are we negotiating with known terrorists?" In
his AP commentary, "Ethnic Albanians Sensing Victory,"
George Jahn writes: "Life or death, bombs or peace.
The outcome of the faraway talks on Kosovo seems
irrelevant for many here, where ethnic Albanians are
convinced they are winning their independence struggle
and many Serbs sense defeat."
Take the "ouillet" out of Rambouillet, and
what do you get? RAMBO! Whether as Rambo or her role
model Xena, Warrior Princess, U.S. Secretary of State,
Madeleine Albright, in her macho cowboy hat, kowtows
to KLA terrorists and threatens the Serbian people
("Yugoslavia will 'Pay a Price,' Albright Warns," The
Washington Post, 8 March 1998). All the while Ms.
Amanpour and Mr. Rubin sing her praises in close
harmony.
Christiane Amanpour, James Rubin and
Madeleine Albright. What a troika!
---
# distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl