Again and again the most prestigious journalism prizes are awarded to reporters covering human rights abuses or human tragedies. The 2009 Knight International Journalism award has been given to a daring Chinese reporter and to a DRC (Congo) radio reporter covering sexual violence against women.
http://www.icfj.org/News/PressReleases/KnightAward2009PressRelease/tabid/1371/Default.aspx
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Saturday, June 20, 2009
David Rohde escapes to freedom. Another way to solve hostage-taking
The escape to freedom of New York Times reporter David Rohde and local journalist Tahir Ludin, is great news. David is one of the finest U.S. journalists, someone dedicated to digging up the truth and holding all governments accountable. His work in Bosnia has been one of the most compelling and led him to a well-deserved Pulitzer Prize, thanks in particular to his coverage of the Srebrenica massacre and his indictment of the passivity of the international community.
This story requires reflection on how to deal with kidnappings of journalists. David Rohde, with the endorsement of his paper and his family, knew that he was taking risks to cover the Afghan war. And the decision to try and get the information was certainly the right one. There was no folly or irresponsibility here.
However the way the NY Times decided to deal with this abduction is a break with other cases, like the highly publibicized cases of French reporters Florence Aubenas, Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot. All media and press freedom organizations, in particular the New-York based Committee to Protect Journalists (www.cpj.org) that were told by the Times to keep silent kept their promises and decided not to campaign publicly for the release.
Is it the right model? This very good news is a great opportunity for journalists' organizations to revisit the issue of abductions and what to do about them.
The answer has never been to stay away from risky zones. Wars, mass crimes and tragedies have to be reported. Journalists are not candy sellers, they know they are in a sometimes dangerous trade. The answer to the attempts by rogue governments or non-state actors to control the news by intimidation is neither retreat nor self-censorship. It requires very careful measures to assure that journalists and their employers take all the necessary precautions and think "outside of the box" to get the news.
Both models -publicity and secrecy- have succeeded in bringing back hostages to freedom. It is time now to analyze all the scenarios to draw lessons for best practices.
The world needs journalism and especially journalists like David and Tahir that go out and get the real story and do not limit themselves to comment and "punditize"on the basis of trash news and junk info retrieved from the Internet.
This story requires reflection on how to deal with kidnappings of journalists. David Rohde, with the endorsement of his paper and his family, knew that he was taking risks to cover the Afghan war. And the decision to try and get the information was certainly the right one. There was no folly or irresponsibility here.
However the way the NY Times decided to deal with this abduction is a break with other cases, like the highly publibicized cases of French reporters Florence Aubenas, Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot. All media and press freedom organizations, in particular the New-York based Committee to Protect Journalists (www.cpj.org) that were told by the Times to keep silent kept their promises and decided not to campaign publicly for the release.
Is it the right model? This very good news is a great opportunity for journalists' organizations to revisit the issue of abductions and what to do about them.
The answer has never been to stay away from risky zones. Wars, mass crimes and tragedies have to be reported. Journalists are not candy sellers, they know they are in a sometimes dangerous trade. The answer to the attempts by rogue governments or non-state actors to control the news by intimidation is neither retreat nor self-censorship. It requires very careful measures to assure that journalists and their employers take all the necessary precautions and think "outside of the box" to get the news.
Both models -publicity and secrecy- have succeeded in bringing back hostages to freedom. It is time now to analyze all the scenarios to draw lessons for best practices.
The world needs journalism and especially journalists like David and Tahir that go out and get the real story and do not limit themselves to comment and "punditize"on the basis of trash news and junk info retrieved from the Internet.
The Iranian protests lost in Google translation...
Language is often a problem for international solidarity. Fluency in English is a key element for global outreach, which hampers smaller grassroots groups especially in countries or areas where English is not generalized.
Languague courses therefore may become a very useful assistance for these marginalized groups. The English language in that context is not a sign of "cultural imperialism" but a way to give a voice to the voiceless and in particular to help them convey through their own spokespersons (and not through "foreigners") their views and perceptions on a particular issue.
The Iranian protesters have shown that they have very talented English speakers that can connect with the international community. However a lot of the protest takes place in Farsi and therefore in a well-meaning move Google has started a system of automatic translation. However the results are a little bit confusing, as this story from CNN relates.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/06/19/iran.internet.google/index.html
Languague courses therefore may become a very useful assistance for these marginalized groups. The English language in that context is not a sign of "cultural imperialism" but a way to give a voice to the voiceless and in particular to help them convey through their own spokespersons (and not through "foreigners") their views and perceptions on a particular issue.
The Iranian protesters have shown that they have very talented English speakers that can connect with the international community. However a lot of the protest takes place in Farsi and therefore in a well-meaning move Google has started a system of automatic translation. However the results are a little bit confusing, as this story from CNN relates.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/06/19/iran.internet.google/index.html
Friday, June 19, 2009
Iran Internet Filtering with the help of Western firms
www.opennet.net
The use of social media and internet has been at the centre of international reporting on Iran. As many foreign reporters were octracized or forced to stay in their hotel their newsrooms resorted to the Iranian blogosphere. May articles have been published on the battle of the Internet, describing the cat and mouse "game"between the regime and its opponents.
To understand better how the regime controls the web and the blogosphere I advise you to read the report just published by the OpenNet Initiative, a joint venture of four prestigious universities (Cambridge, Harvard, Oxford and Toronto).
Amon the many interesting details provided by the report there is one short reference to the role played by some Western firms in helping the Iranian authorities to monitor communications and therefore to spy on and intercept messages by dissidents or protesters.
The formulation of the report is cautious but it raises an important issue: "In 2008, two European companies reportedly sold a sophisticated electronic surveillance system capable of monitoring Internet use that could be utilized for tracking and monitoring the activities of human rights organizations and political dissidents. TCI (the state-controlled Telecommunications Company of Iran) is said to have received the equipment from Nokia Siemens networks, a joint venture between the Finnish cell phone maker and the German company Siemens".
The Committee to protect bloggers (www.committeetoprotectbloggers.org) has more on that issue.
The use of social media and internet has been at the centre of international reporting on Iran. As many foreign reporters were octracized or forced to stay in their hotel their newsrooms resorted to the Iranian blogosphere. May articles have been published on the battle of the Internet, describing the cat and mouse "game"between the regime and its opponents.
To understand better how the regime controls the web and the blogosphere I advise you to read the report just published by the OpenNet Initiative, a joint venture of four prestigious universities (Cambridge, Harvard, Oxford and Toronto).
Amon the many interesting details provided by the report there is one short reference to the role played by some Western firms in helping the Iranian authorities to monitor communications and therefore to spy on and intercept messages by dissidents or protesters.
The formulation of the report is cautious but it raises an important issue: "In 2008, two European companies reportedly sold a sophisticated electronic surveillance system capable of monitoring Internet use that could be utilized for tracking and monitoring the activities of human rights organizations and political dissidents. TCI (the state-controlled Telecommunications Company of Iran) is said to have received the equipment from Nokia Siemens networks, a joint venture between the Finnish cell phone maker and the German company Siemens".
The Committee to protect bloggers (www.committeetoprotectbloggers.org) has more on that issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
