Journalist reactions

Donna Liu, a former veteran CNN producer who has worked all over the world - and whose husband has also - emailed this comment:

Journalists ARE targetted by military all the time (I'm not necessarily saying U.S., although the Al-Jazeera incident has yet to be thoroughly investigated.) and now that whole issue, which merits some attention, is being sidelined for the sake of media gossip. I mean, I've looked down the barrel of a gun a couple of times... I'm sure you have... [name of her husband] certainly has... And think of the people we know who have been injured or killed under those circumstances.  I hope the issue doesn't die.

Here is an excerpt from another former colleague who was also in the audience at Davos. He hasn't responded to my emails asking whether I can use his name (his mailbox is full and I keep getting "bounce" messages), so I'll leave it anonymous and am taking out identifying information, but I think it's worth sharing:

Well I am NEVER going to make fun of blogging again!.  The meaning I got was that Eason was using the word "target" as pointing the barrel of a gun rather than the meaning that's been construed. What is amazing to me is that he and others did not do a more spirited job of defending the premise. ... Seems  to me this is/was a perfect opportunity to push the Congressmen for an investigation....   Pretty sad affair all in all.

Both emails are very representative of the kind of sentiment I've been hearing a lot in journalist circles over the past couple of days.  Many rank-and-file journalists feel that the heads of news organizations are letting them down by not engaging in a substantive discussion of a serious and unresolved issue.

Comments

[K.Nelson]

I read from other journalists about times they have been saved by GI's under fire who took extra risks to themselves to save the journalists.
What I don't read from journalists is why they only chase bombs. What ahout getting to know some Iraqis and reporting on their lives, experiences, views, hopes, etc. What about learning enough Arabic to translate some of the lively Iraqi press we hear about?
If you only cover explosions, don't be surprised if some of you get hurt or killed. Explosions aren't the whole story, but they are the only story we get.

[David Stern]

Part of this Davos experience and its aftermath is due I suggest as how journalists view themselves and their profession. In the U.S. they believe that when they follow their occupation they are protected by law. When they pursue news in a war zone they should have a different mind set. In a war zone they are not special, and since most interpret what they see in a way that could be seen as critical to the mission of the troops, it is not surprising that incidents arise. I am waiting to hear what Robert Kaplan and others like him have to say.

[Jeff Jarvis]

Ms Liu: What evidence and reporting do you have to say that "journalists ARE targetted by military all the time." That's a most serious allegation -- and a big story if true -- so what do you know? On what basis do you say this? What are your facts? Without any of that, it is just rumor. Journalists should not traffic in rumor. You seem quite sure of this. So, please, tell us what you know.

[Sisyphus]

Targeting Journalists

Jules Crittenden: Eason Jordan's remarks, as reported, are highly irresponsible and repugnant. But it didn't start with him. The myth about the military targeting journalists in Iraq has a long history, dating back to the Hotel Palestine incident and beyond that to the as-yet unresolved deaths of the ITN crew. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who are willing to think the worst of the US military, and ascribe malicious intent to accidents of war. The head of CNN would appear to be one of them.

The Palestine incident was twice written up, by the Committee to Protect Journalists ("Permission to Fire") and Reporters Without Borders ("Two Murders and a Lie") in biased and sloppy reports that fuel this myth. So when Jordan tells congressmen the military targets journalists, he is only reflecting a view that has been given respectability by deeply concerned professional organizations that have been eagerly seeking out evidence of targeting, and when they can't find it, suggest it must be what happened anyway.

[Logan Anderson]

Ms Liu, et. al.:
My personal political views are 180 degrees from Rep. Barney Frank's, but from his comments that have appeared in several so-called MSM accounts of the Jordan controversy, he DID press Jordan and other CNN executives for information to begin some sort of congressional inquiry, both while at Davos and after arriving back in the States. HE ONLY GAVE VAGUE "WE'LL BE IN TOUCH' REPLIES. And then silence. I'm a daily newspaper editor, and we've got to constantly keep in mind that our readers/viewers are NOT stupid. They can spot our personal biases from a mile away! And when they do, and we don't acknowledge it, they tune us out in droves.