The downsizing of journalism undermines its watchdog role

The downsizing of the newsrooms has consequences for the public’s right to know but also for the capacity of the media to assume their watchdog role. The lack of resources inevitably leads to dropping stories that require too much time and energy and these stories are often the most crucial to democracy, the respect of human rights and the rule of law.
Investigative journalism is the first victim of the media crisis. Others therefore have to step in to compensate “in the interest of the public”.

This development has been demonstrated in California with the investigation into the murder of Chauncey Bailey, the editor of the Oakland Post. Soon after the killing in 2007, in an initiative that refers back to the murder of Arizona journalist Don Bolles in 1976 and to the creation of Investigative Reporters and Editors (IRE), “a group of reporters, some retired some out of work”, writes Tim Arango of the New York Times, “with support from foundations and the University of California (Berkeley), banded together to continue his investigation into a local business (…) and to the role of the police in the investigation”.
Their investigation led to a series of revelations that rocked the city and led to a flurry of other investigations into the behaviour of the local police.

The lesson here for journalism and human rights defenders is clear. As Robert Rosenthal, the executive director of the Center for Investigative Reporting stated, “the decimation of local media precluded large-scale investigative work”.
The priorities of the media in assigning stories, their equation between their status as a business and their role as a public interest institution, are all issues that should be reflected upon. However in the absence of a strong commitment to watchdog journalism this essential function has to be performed. And increasingly it is being done by people “out of journalism”.
In foreign news it has opened a boulevard for investigative NGOs like Human Rights Watch or Global Witness or “interpretative” entities like the International Crisis Group.
As this trend is registered in most “beats” this is a major indictment of the press. And an added reason for journalists to rethink…

To know more about that story, go to the New York Times www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/business/media/23bailey.html
And to the Center for Investivative Reporting website www.centerforinvestigativereporting.org

Mourning Alison Des Forges

When I was told of her death I could not believe it. I tried to check on the Internet whether it was really true. And the search results were bringing back memories of her dedication to justice, compassion and freedom: her fight to save people threatened by Hutu extremists in the 1994 genocide, her testimonies at Arusha or Brussels trials, her hard hitting reports on the Great Lakes region. Senior advisor of Human Rights Watch on the Great Lakes region, a well-known historian of Rwanda, Alison Des Forges was one of the most famous international human rights activists concerned with the region crushed by genocide and violence. She coordinated the writing of a hard hitting investigative report on the Rwanda genocide of 1994 (Let no one tell the story), testifted in tens of trials at Arusha the Internationa Tribunal and in Brussels, she took part in hundreds of events that discussed the 1994 genocide, she advocated for justice and against impunity. And she did that with a keen sense of impartiality, indicting the Hutu Power genocidaires but also the Rwanda Patriotic Front, now ruling in Kigali, that committed war crimes and crimes against humanty in 1994.

Unfortunately the sad news was soon confimed by friends at HRW. And I was devastated.
As former European press director of HRW in Brussels I met her dozens of times and always with joy. I remember her regular presence in our office, her gentleness and sweetness, the care she took to inquire about friends and family, the chocolate croissants she brought from a pastry shop nearby, the succession of laywers, human rights activists, Rwandan refugees that rang the bell to see her. And the numerous calls that I received from the best journalists from around the world each time Rwanda was in the news. She was convinced of the "Power of the Word" to make thinhs change, although she always regretted that despite all her efforts in 1993 and 1994 she could not convince an indifferent world media of the impending catastrophe in Rwanda.


Alison Des Forges saved many many lives through her dedication to her work conceived as an commitment to humanity and impartiality. She also illuminated the life of all those colleagues and friends that had the immense honour of meeting her and sharing with her the hope that something can always be done to protect the human rights of others. She was the quintessential human rights defender, the emblematic example of intellectual depth and integriy, and above all the face of friendship and love.
I deeply share the sadness of her family and of all those that today mourn her.

Pope Benedict and Holocaust denial: deflecting news

Deflecting news is a major gimmick in communications strategies. Is it what the focus on Holocaust denier Bishop Williamson tries to do? By concentrating most of their coverage on the extreme case of Williamson the press takes the risk of neglecting that the other bishops rewarded by Pope Benedict XVI’s decision are as dangerous for democratic values, human decency, interreligious dialogue and religious freedom as his arch-conservative but less vocally anti Semitic partners.
The Lefèbvrists have been associated since the outset of their schism with the most brutal and hard-headed rightwing extremists in Europe and in Latin America, the most prone to anti-Semitism as well, like Videla’s dictatorship in Argentina. Their extremism was well known to all and in the first place to the Vatican hierarchy.

Therefore the Pope’s decision cannot be described as a “communications mistake” or justified by a contrite “I did not know”. The controversy should not die if Williamson recants or Pope Benedict XVI succeeds in making him say “I am sorry for the distress” caused not only to the Pope (what he already did) but first and foremost to the Jewish community. This decision has to be put in a wider context.
In a column published on February 1st in the Buenos Aires progressive daily Pagina 12, Horacio Verbitsky, the leading expert on the role of the Catholic church in Argentina insists that “the Holocaust denial by Williamson is only the most strident aspect of an episode that goes much beyond this ex-Anglican priest”.
Indeed, the “lifting” of the excommunication is seen as a victory by the Lefèbvrists to the extent that it implies that the “official Church” comes closer to their vision instead of forcing the schismatic bishops to make amends and return to the fold.
Pope Benedict has reeemphasied his opposition to Holocaust denial and his denunciation of anti-Semitism but some of his moves since his inauguration are creating an atmosphere that opens a wide space for the revisionists of all stripes. “Pope Benedict, recalls Horacio Verbitsky, authorized the reestablishment of the prayer for the conversion of the Jews on Holy Friday so that the Jews can get out of their darkness”.

This example shows how journalists have to be careful and strive to provide the whole picture, instead of letting one spectacular issue dominate and obfuscate the other aspects of a story. Some Catholic media have focused most of their attention on Williamson not only because they sincerely considered his views as outrageous and hurting basic values but also because his case might provide a way out for a Pope with an excuse from the Holocaust denier.
Most Catholic writers still fear to question and criticize the Pope. Even more of them are afraid of linking this evolution to the reign of John Paul II that led the Church on such a conservative path that it was bound to lead to this kind of ethical dead end.