Post on 08-Sep-2014
description
1
Questions to consider today
• Why do some journalists risk their lives to get stories?• What can the mainstream media show us? Should there be limits?
Why/not?• To what extent is it possible to separate fact from propaganda/spin?• How complicit are journalists in this process during wartime?• How might the demands for copy/footage/stories impact upon public
knowledge?• Can embedded journalism be balanced? Or should journalists strive
to be free from military oversight?• What motivates a journalist to become a war correspondent?
2
3
Since 1992 the total confirmed journalists death stands at:1051 (March 2014)
616 of those were murdered with impunity
2013: 211 journalists imprisoned
Between 2003-9 89 journalists in Iraq were murdered. 50 more were caught in crossfire
Madrid 2004
4
Madrid 2004
• Guardian changes colour
5
Madrid 2004
• The Times airbrushes
6
Madrid 2004
• The Telegraph airbrushes
7
8
9
What can the news actually show us?
10
What can the news actually show us?
15
16
Ahmed Chalabi
• Interim oil minister in Iraq April-May 2005 and December-January 2006
• Deputy prime minister from May 2005 until May 2006.
• Pre-2003 invasion, under his guidance the Iraqi National Congress, supported by lobbyists BKSH & Associates, provided substantial info on which U.S. Intelligence based its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, including reports of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al-Qaeda
• 2007: acted as political intermediary between Iraqis and US security forced during Bush’s “surge” offensive
17
Useful viewing material
Control Room (2004, Jehane Noujaim)
WMD: Weapons of Mass Deception (2004, Danny Schechter)
Panorama Special: In The Line of Fire (9th Nov 2003, BBC)
18
Original news report
• 6th April 2003: audio only – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fg_pUgmP-w
• This is the video package that was broadcast– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z3AtgDRjHU
20
In the Line of Fire
• BBC Panorama• Broadcast November 2003 – 7 months after the incident;
5 months after Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech• Edited version resold to UKTV History channel for pre-
watershed broadcast. • Features a unilateral/non-embedded team of journalists
who have stolen over the Turkey/Iraq border to find news not covered in military controlled circles.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulHpAjUPco0
21
Useful viewing material
Control Room (2004, Jehane Noujaim)
WMD: Weapons of Mass Deception (2004, Danny Schechter)
Panorama Special: In The Line of Fire (9th Nov 2003, BBC)
22
Control Room
• Footage from Al-Jazeera documentary that was recorded in Central Command during the war.
• Al-jazeera journalists were frustrated with the way in which double-standards seemed to be in operation– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWdDMAH6Kvw
• Does it appear like there are double-standards in place here vis-à-vis objectivity, neutrality, truth, etc?
23
How should journalists show the reality of warfare?
Clip from C4 show “Iraq: The Hidden Story” (2008)
Which broadcaster got it right?
24
25
Ofcom: Section 1• Violence and dangerous behaviour
• 1.11 Violence, its after-effects and descriptions of violence, whether verbal or physical, must be appropriately limited in programmes broadcast before the watershed … and must also be justified by the context.
• 1.12 Violence, whether verbal or physical, that is easily imitable by children in a manner that is harmful or dangerous:
– must not be featured in programmes made primarily for children unless there is strong editorial justification;
– must not be broadcast before the … unless there is editorial justification.
• 1.13 Dangerous behaviour, or the portrayal of dangerous behaviour, that is likely to be easily imitable by children in a manner that is harmful:
– must not be featured in programmes made primarily for children unless there is strong editorial justification;
– must not be broadcast before the watershed (in the case of television) … unless there is editorial justification.
26
Ofcom: Section 2
• Harm and Offence
• 2.4 Programmes must not include material (whether in individual programmes or in programmes taken together) which, taking into account the context, condones or glamorises violent, dangerous or seriously antisocial behaviour and is likely to encourage others to copy such behaviour.
• 2.5 Methods of suicide and self-harm must not be included in programmes except where they are editorially justified and are also justified by the context.
27
2011: British troops in Afghanistan
28
Footage found in September 2012 following a police search of a laptop (link)
Audio of incident (2:02)
Homs, Syria - 21 February 2012
29http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17120484
Homs, Syria - 22 February 2012
• Marie Colvin
• Remi Ochlik
30
Restrepo (2010, S. Junger & T. Hetherington )
31
Restrepo
• The Korengal Valley• Sebastian Junger and
Tim Hetherington• Embedded with Second Platoon,
B Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment (airborne), 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team of the U.S. Army
32
Trailerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DjqR6OucBc
Embedded
• Audio: http://youtu.be/2-CH3IZys_4
• Tim Hetherington claims the film was not censored and not political
• Is this feasible when embedded?
• Can any coverage of war be apolitical?
33
How to cover conflicts?
• Restrepo has been accused of privileging a soldier’s subjective experience of war.
• The filmmakers are embedded with the US forces for a year and its rare for any other perspective to appear.
• The filmmakers risked their lives to tell this story, but was it worth it? Why make a film about soldiers 8+ years into a conflict?
34
‘Grunt documentaries’
• ‘by privileging personal experience over historical awareness, these accounts construct a version of the war in which it becomes impossible to apprehend such atrocities as Haditha, Ramadi, Abu Ghraib’– Tony Grajeda 2007
35
Misrata, Libya - 20 April 2011
36http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHC-djUmxWs
Questions?
1. So we have ‘nowness’, we have immediate coverage, we have words and images but what do we know about war?
2. Should war reporting be for information or an extension of the war effort?
3. As viewers we can watch the news non-stop – does this mean that we understand the news as a construction (as provisional, disputed, happening as journalists speak)?
4. Does news become reduced to narrative with points of closure – do we stop viewing when the statue is pulled down? When do we start to watch again, or really listen, or even think?
5. How long did our interest in Iraq last? Are we concerned with it today? Should we be?
37
Additional resources
• David Leigh, 2003, ‘False Witness’- examples of military disinformation and the media. Available at – http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,9
29319,00.html
• Report of faked war report from Sky News. Actual footage available at: – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3078693.stm
38
The DA-Notice system
• http://www.dnotice.org.uk/
39
Non-voluntary alternatives
• Criminal lawOfficial Secrets Act(s) Terrorism Act 2000/2006Prosecution follows publication
40
• Tension between free speech and national security/media and government
• DA-Notice system is voluntary and extra legal
• Arrangement between government and media not to publish certain information
41
Free Speech
• Various theories justifying free speech – ‘free speech as an argument from democracy’ most relevant here
• Not an absolute right – national security is a legitimate reason for limiting free speech?
42
DA-Notices: Still Useful?
• No the internet has increasingly changed the way the
public accesses news and information increased information available in the ‘public domain’
(international news, war bloggers, www.arrse.co.uk)
• YesSystem still useful for old technology – hard copy print
media, radio & television (also have internet platforms that need policing)
Represents an alterative conciliatory approach
43
44
Princely PR
• Caroline Gammell, March 1 2008, The Telegraph, ‘How the Prince Harry blackout was broken’ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1580111/How-the-Prince-Harry-blackout-was-broken.html
• Non attributed, March 2, 2008, The Independent, ‘The people's prince: with Harry in Afghanistan. Dog of war or PR pawn?’ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-peoples-prince-with-harry-in-afghanistan-dog-of-war-or-pr-pawn-790323.html
• Peter McKay, March 2 2008, Mail, ‘Prince Harry in Afghanistan: Oh! What a lovely PR stunt’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-524341/Prince-Harry-Afghanistan-Oh-What-lovely-PR-stunt.html
• Peter Wilby, March 3 2008, The Guardian, ‘'Harry's war' - it's just a blatant PR stunt’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/mar/03/royalsandthemedia.pressandpublishing
45