Archive for the ‘Ethics’ category

‘Think Alan Johnston’

June 26th, 2007

I haven’t commented on the kidnapping of Alan Johnston yet on this blog. I felt that I couldn’t add anything significant to the global debate, so I opted to keep quiet.

But, after seeing the clip of him released by his captors yesterday, I feel I must comment now.

If you haven’t seen the footage, you can see it here.
Incredible. Alan Johnston has been in captivity for over 100 days now. Somehow, he delivered that piece to camera with extraordinary professionalism, clarity and bravery. He even keeps his journalistic morals intact. “My captors say” and “what they describe as” are two phrases that stuck out for me. Alan is being impartial, even at a time like this.

A member on a journalism message board I frequent wrote that it “made me sit up a bit straighter at my cosy desk”. A feeling I certainly agree with today.

There are times when I’ve been working, as a student, freelance or work experience fellow, and I’ve been scared to death to do things. Interviews with people that might be slightly scary. But now I have a different attitude. Next time I find myself confronted with a frightening situation, I will ‘Think Alan Johnston’ — for nothing I will ever do can compare to the sheer terror that Alan must be feeling each and every day.

I must always remember that.

Sign the BBC petition to release Alan Johnston here.

Regret

June 2nd, 2007

When I was working at the Hunts Post, one thing that I noticed was that people really do love to tell a newspaper they’ve got something wrong. A typo or something.

At the time I thought this was a little petty — but then this sort of feedback, however irritating, does make us strive for perfection that little bit harder.

This site showcases some of the ‘best’ mistakes in the world’s press. Some — most — of them are funny. But then, there’s some that really take you back. Errors so big that it shocks you that a journalist could have been foolish enough to make such an error.

There is insufficient protection for people wrongly accused by the press. An apology means little (as does money) when it comes to recovering from being branded a paedophile by a large newspaper.

Iran Rants

April 8th, 2007

Much has been made today about the news that the Iran captives have been given permission by the MoD to sell their stories.

Most commentators that appeared on TV were ex-soliders or seamen etc, and they seemed unanimously against the idea (at least I think it was unanimous, I spent most of today cramming chocolate into every last inch of belly — so I didn’t see too much TV).

There was one person, though, who made a very valid point about those condemning selling stories. They were all famous. And how did they become famous? By writing books, articles and whatever else about their experiences in combat… selling their stories.
Which lead me to think it wasn’t that they were annoyed with the stories being told, but rather the manner with which the ex-captives would go about it. Is there anything less gracious about sticking your story in the pages of the News of the World rather than amongst the hardbacks in Waterstones?

You could argue, successfully I’d say, that the tabloids would stretch and skew the story and make it a tad more dramatic to make it seem even worse than it perhaps was. But that is unavoidable. A solider writing his or her own book will also exaggerate to a point — except it won’t be in big bold headline font. An all round classier way to make money.

I’ll be looking at the coverage these captives get with great interest.

Some other reads from today

[THE OBSERVER] Lesley Thomas: Posh girls fight, borrow and steal too

I was debating bringing attention to this piece as this post will be categorised as ‘Good Reads’ — and this load of drivel certainly isn’t.

Drivel is maybe a little harsh. But this author has written about her anguish over the portrayal that it was only black women rushing into that Primark opening on Oxford Street last week. I hadn’t noticed. I don’t think anyone had, really, so this column is really just an excuse for her to say “Hey! I’m black! Let me write!”. Sadly The Observer replied with an optimistic “Hey! She’s black! Let her in!” attitude.

I’m not suggesting for one minute that the only reason she writes for The Observer is her colour — of course not — but I do resent having my intelligence insulted by an article that is so blindingly obvious that it beggers belief why Lesley Thomas thought we weren’t aware of it.

[GUARDIAN UNLIMITED] Bobbie Johnson: Blogs turn 10

Wow. Ten years these blogs things have been hanging about. Which makes me part of the old school, I think, as I started my first blog back in 2001. I took it offline a few years later and had it made into a book! Highly recommend.
This article from the Tech Guardian’s Bobbie Johnson takes a look at some of the defining moments in blogging history. The thing I like about this is the sheer range of things that are deemed historical. Iraq bloggers to prosititutes to teenagers pretending to be dead. All very different events with one thing in common: people talked about them.

[GUARDIAN UNLIMITED] Roy Greenslade: Celebrities playing paparazzi in surreality TV show

Shamefully, I’d never heard of this Greenslade man, but it appears he’s 1) very famous 2) very clever 3) doing just what I’m trying with this blog… but a lot better.

So, jealousy aside, I can admit that his post on the new ITV show ‘Deadline’ (in which a load of celebs run around trying to make a magazine) is pretty much spot on.

One commenter points something out as well: It’s a magazine, with a team. The team will, eventually, get kicked off until there’s a winner. Which leaves the problem of what happens when the team is too small to run the bloody magazine?!

We’ll see. Or rather, we won’t. It’s on ITV2, and who’s watching that? No-one.

One final thing, I’ve added a comment spam filter to this site so that now I won’t be advertising for viagra, sex toys or hot latino women. Well, not on this blog at least.

Saddam (again)

January 7th, 2007

There’s been great discussion on the Guardian Editors’ Blog about the coverage of Saddam’s hanging last week.

It mainly deals with the use of cameraphone images – including a close up of a dead Saddam – on the front page on New Year’s Day. My thoughts can be found here.

The debate has got people split down the middle. If you were offended by the treatment the hanging got, then be glad you’re not an American. Or at least, an American who likes to read the papers.

Yup, some of the U.S coverage of Saddam’s death was nothing sort of shocking. Even for a horrible, horrible man, the headline “Saddam Swings” (as found in the Boston Herald) is going too far.

“Baghdead” being another tasteless piece of journalism from the American tabs.

See a selection of U.S front pages following Saddam’s death here.

How important is the news?

December 29th, 2006

Over 160 journalists have died reporting in Iraq since the war began. 32 of the deaths were in 2006 alone, contributing over half the overall worldwide toll of 55 – the highest since records began. More information can be found here.
Reading all this mess made me wonder: how important is the news?

Knowing what is going on is one thing, but risking your life so that you can report live from the center of Baghdad for the Ten O’Clock news is another.
My Dad asked me the other day, Christmas day in fact, if I would take the opportunity to work in a warzone. I said yes, but now I’m not so sure. As the saying goes: “Today’s news is tomorrows chipwrap” … or something along those lines.

So is it worth it? Really?