Above all, the difficulties for reporters working in Iraq came through Wednesday as U.S. and Arab journalists joined Lt. Colonel Steven Boylan to debate the media’s coverage in Iraq. Reporters can’t follow their basic instinct to “see, smell and hear” if they can’t linger in the streets to talk to people, said Roger Cohen of the New York Times. Iraqi journalists are fearful of being considered collaborators with the American military if they are seen
working as journalists, said Zaki Chehab, political editor of Al Hayat.
You can find the panelists and the five bloggers expected to post on the Reuters-sponsored event with this link. Reuters will post the video of the debate and highlights of a live chat with bloggers Thursday.
Global Voices’ Rebecca MacKinnon, the moderator of a live chat during the event, on Thursday posted that the “consensus among bloggers in the chatroom was that the media does indeed fail to provide a comprehensive or truly objective picture of what is happening in Iraq. However people disagreed on why, or what is to be done.”
One point of agreement among the panelists is that U.S. media coverage “is too polarized between ‘good news’ and ‘bad news’ and all sides are missing out on a complete picture,” Reuters reporter Claudia Parsons writes here. (Photojournalist Ghaith Abdul-Ahad pictured left)
You can add your comments on the media coverage below. Salam Adil, an Iraqi living in London, posted in Asterism: “I heard a lot of talk at the Reuters event for and against the media. But here is the problem - things happen and the media is flailing around for answers. There is no good background reporting to explain why things are happening.”
Trackback
11 comments so far
where does this idea that sunnni’s and shia’s have always gotten along come from? Shia’s remember the death of Husayn at the hands of the Sunni Caliph Yazid on Ashura. Simply because people, day to day, are not killing each other or spewing hate, does not mean conflict is not inert. On most days in America, African Americans and Caucasions get along fine - but under the surface there will always differences that manifest themselves during economic, political, and social conflict.
- Posted by SteveI do not beleive it should be the media’s position to find answers to questions but report on the facts.The idea that the Sunni’s and Shia’s get along is something the West is trying to mediate and find common ground for the people to build a government. I do not beleive this is necessarily the correct or best approach as most religions have fundamental views and opinions as to who is more correct. However, the Iraqi people are not used to this type of freedom and rely heavily upon old ways and ideals to make decisions. It will take some time for all of the Iraqi people to understand that with freedom comes choice. How to determine the correct choice in a democracy is usually influenced by the majority. The problem is in the new foundations of this New Democracy the “majority is overwhelmingly opposed to the freedom of choice.” Something that is hard to report on with out some type of prejudice in one veiw vs. another on the same point.
- Posted by CompassionateIn a free and open society, it has never been a duty of the media to present any news or views that lend support to the government; the media can and should act independently. And when criticized by the government for its coverage, so long the news reporting is factual, the media owes the government no apology or “debate” about itself such as the one we are seeing now.
- Posted by GregThe American war in Iraq is a serious criminal act covered by the message of freedom and democrasy. Media should focus on the fact that it seems ok to kill for ideology (all sides), even in the name of some God. The debate should not more be about Iraq - the war is lost and I think that is why this debate pops up. The debate should be focused on the possibilities this have opened for other future solutions to conflicts - it has been a good study in how fear can be used to mislead people and many newsagents are very good at just that.
- Posted by Thomas HolmSure Thomas Holm,
Its a “war crime” to remove a man with the blood of a million innocent Muslims on his hands and replace him with democracy.
What an inhumane idea…..
man are you shameful
- Posted by MarkI agree with Claudia Parsons. The general media shows two neg. and pos. extreams. We can realize that a common ground is needed and take action or continue to just throw up rocks and stones, but we will not get anywhere with bruses on our hands.
- Posted by TheaThea
http://sensiblecommunicator.blogspot.com
The Media’s duty is to show events happen as they happen and not edit out details that their government’s dont want their people to see. American media is not doing a good job at this. Check out CNN or Fox and you will see that they do less reporting of the facts than spreading fear which is the weapon of this administration.
- Posted by SamuelThe Iraq war that was started on a lies is coming back to haunt us. I wonder if the oil wells are worth the lives of thousands of American Soldiers and Iraqi Civilians. I think it is a shame that Americans did not secure the borders of Iraq when they went to war, which enabled the foreign Jihadis and Al Qaeda to enter Iraq, form their base and kill thousands of Shias and bring Iraq in the brink of civil war by inciting hatred between Shia and Sunnis. Only way out of this mess is that Americans accelerate the training of Iraqi army and hand them the control of the country because they can better judge their enemies if trained properly.
Sam
Dear editors,
The questions below keep plaguing me since the onset of the operation Iraqi Freedom.
I profoundly regret deficiency of serious analysis of the current status quo in international affairs. Now, two years after invasion of Iraq, our planet is far more dangerous place to live in. Terror threat is omnipresent and omnipowerful. Oil price is running berserk. Troops are bogged down in the desert trying to achieve unachievable - defeat spirited nothing-to-lose opposition that fights for the glorious cause on their own land and regards them as final incarnation of absolute evil. Western values are under-mined. Peoples trust is undermined because politicians stick to their half-truths/half-lies.
Who is responsible for all this? Was it not clear from the very beginning that attacking
Iraq would unite most reactionary anti-western Islamic forces? Was it not obvious that taking out Saddam would only create power vacuum soon to be filled with rogue unmanageable factions united by hatred to US and the allies? Did it take a feat of clairvoyance to predict that the oil prices would rise sharply in the ensuing circumstances? Is there a link between the decision to go to war, the oil prices, Texas-based oil companies and their profits? Where do the weapons companies fit in the equation? And finally and maybe most importantly, what are fundamental causes of the profound hatred towards the West that inspires so many Islamic radicals? Obviously, it goes beyond a simple case of have-alls and have-nots. Is there a lesson to learn, something to change? The fact that these issues are not at the center of the mass-media discussion may point to an underlying serious problem with the freedom of word. Have we grown so much used to living with comfortable lies that we are totally indifferent to the fate of our children?
Sincerely,
Dmitri Andreev
- Posted by Dmitri AndreevWell, I support the troops even though they are homeless. Homelessness is a problem world wide, and anything that will draw attention to it is important. People sleeping by the roadside is dangerous, and improvised erected domeciles are hard to spot. Moreover. plumming seems to be inadequate with in surging and no out surging. Allinall, I think the troops are homeless by choice.
- Posted by robertWhy are the anti-government foes called insurgents when their previous leader was a Jordanian and their present leader an Egyptian?
Why does nobody point out that an estimated 200,000 Algerians have been killed in a similar conflict.
Why are American news media often reporting casualities in numbers followed many times with comments like, “Killed in the last three days.” or “Killed in the last several days.”, or Killed X days ago.”
There are many more questions in this same vein.
- Posted by Monty BellThe reports from the media from our soldiers cannot be as accurate as we would like. Although our soldiers are “fighting for our freedoms” They themselves (our soldiers) have lost many of theirs.
- Posted by Donna LoveThey are repeatedly told that they will suffer repercussions if they speak any negativity towards the war with any of the media. Our young soldiers are already suffering lose of freedoms, just being in Iraq. Know that most anytime you hear from a soldier, through the media, that he or she has been prompted and threatened to speak what your government wants you to hear. Kind of sounds like what the POW’S have to do. What happened to their FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!