Allison Rupp writes the magnificent journey to Lhasa in his article The Sky Train on CNN.com only three days before the exiled Tibetans in India began their march to China to protest Beijing’s hosting of the Olympic Games. The March 10th protest coincided with the uprising against China that forced the Dalai Lama into exile in 1959. Protests in India and Nepal were marked with violence. News of unprecedented world-wide protests were reported all over the world. The Chinese government ignored the issue for couple days, but as the protests grew more violent, China reacted by saying that the whole episode was orchestrated by the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama has condemned China's statements and extreme actions.
Ever since the protests began, CNN.com has written more than 70 articles to date, and has posted nearly 140 videos on the Web site. This is a remarkable media coverage given the time span of just three weeks.
Let me briefly discuss how CNN.com reports present the Tibetan side of the story more positively or neutrally and the Chinese side of the story more neutrally and negatively. These reports cover violence in different parts of the world, mostly in India and Nepal. The write-up is based on my experience of reading and watching stories posted on the Web site over the period. I haven't employed any empirical methods to come to a conclusion, hence I must warn you the evaluation might seem subjective!
As violence continues across Lhasa and Nepal, the international community has appealed for peace. The European Union has appealed China to handle the Tibet crisis peacefully calling for respecting Tibet's cultural heritage and maintaining China’s integrity at the same time. The Dalai Lama has called this crisis a ‘cultural genocide’ and the Chinese government blames him for perpetuating violence deliberately.
In the CNN.com reports, what is most glaringly seen is the viewpoint of the Tibetans mostly and not that of the Chinese. The Tibetans have a human interest frame, whereas the Chinese have only the official version which is mostly the denunciation of the Dalai Lama. But as we go to alternative media like YouTube, there are several videos counteracting what the western media have been portraying about the protests. These response-videos and blogs have mostly targeted the western media for overweighing the Tibetan’s cause. In doing so, they have used this medium to put forth their own biased message. One of the YouTube videos shows why an independent Tibet is not acceptable to the Chinese.
The video attempts to expose the myth of the ‘crackdown’ in mainland China. It shows images that were actually taken in Nepal and printed by the western media, including the BBC, Bild Zeitung, CNN, Aljazeera, and others. Very clearly, this video itself presents a slant, but the international media haven’t been fair either in reporting the exact nature of violence that erupted in the streets of Lhasa or in Nepal, India or other parts of the world. This is an excellent example of how the gatekeepers control the message in the newsroom. The Tibet crisis also brings the question of whether international media have differing parameters in tackling issues of the Communist regimes like Russia, China, and some Latin American countries. The historical aspect of the country in the present crisis is completely ignored.
The history of how Tibet was a part of China during the Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties until the making of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 is what is often referred. China ‘regained’ Tibet in 1950 when it was under the influence of the British Colonial Empire. Historians contest whether Tibet is a suzerain of China or an autonomous region. But the Chinese consider it as part of the territory, much like Taiwan and Hong Kong. While the relationship with Taiwan isn’t what the Chinese want to discuss, Tibet’s case has brought infamy to the Chinese. A majority of the Chinese believe the Dalai Lama is funded by the CIA ever since his exile in 1959. In the news covered by the CNN.com, there is no indication of any covert funding, but the US has sponsored a radio station and a Web site. The Chinese see this as signs of anti-China policy, and actually an instance of supporting the Tibetans cause in breaking away from China.
The media have, however, not reported the history behind the present crisis. News reports have merely focused on the event itself, and long form report that occasionally report the historical facts use most of their space talking about how the upcoming Olympics will be hurt.
Once I had an opportunity to talk to a Chinese student regarding this crisis. He candidly remarked that it’s the so-called ‘fair, western media’ that actually propagates ‘Free Tibet’ slogan more vociferously than the Tibetans themselves.
The Chinese model of authoritarian press doesn’t permit independent reporting. In China, you ought to support the state, and it’s the state’s interests that matters most. The press is the product of the regime.
When the only journalist from the western media -The Economist - was invited to visit Tibet, Chinese official had hoped a more positive coverage based on the subsidy granted. However, the nature of violence was too brutal to be ignored. The magazine reports that Lhasa television “broadcast over and over again, alternately in Tibetan and Chinese, a government statement accusing the “Dalai Lama clique” of being behind the violence by a ‘small number’ of rioters.”
Where can you find a truly objective media?
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
April 01, 2008
February 19, 2008
Can BBC fail?
Let me discuss whether a journalist's superficial knowledge about a particular event could undermine the credibility of a reputable news organization.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is unquestionably the most trusted name in the media when it comes to reporting. Its regional services have been expanded to several countries, including Nepal. These services have been providing international news in local languages. They have been equally resourceful in chronicling a local event and making it international. Local natives who work in the BBC newsroom act as an interface between the larger corporation and the smaller versions of the BBC.
Most times this relationship works, but at times it doesn’t work that well. This leads to not just misinformation but misrepresentation of an event. A case in point is how the BBC Web site in its recent story “Nepal strike hits petrol supplies” on 15 February reported by a BBC correspondent misrepresented facts about the event. It’s not that the news distorts the truth, but it does not tell the truth accurately.
There are two facets to this reporting:
1) Opinion of the reporter
2) Misrepresentation of the situation
While the news story is just a brief overview of the overall situation prevailing at that given time, the story somehow doesn’t correctly say the cause of the event which is the consequence of the larger scenario.
The event behind the news is acute fuel crises in the Kathmandu valley due to strikes in the terai (southern part of Nepal) by various political parties demanding equal representation in the forthcoming constituent assembly. The deck head hints at what the situation is and it is a correct representation of the event in itself. It says, “Nepalese petrol stations have been hit by severe fuel shortages, largely triggered by protesters blockading key roads in the south of the country.”
Being a landlocked country, Nepal is mostly dependent upon India for commerce. One of principle commodities that we import almost entirely is natural gas. But the BBC correspondent does not really investigate this fact. The news says, “Roughly 90% of Nepal's imports travel from India via the southern roads.” The truth is, it is almost 100 percent.
Such arm-chair reporting not only harms the credibility of the news organization but gives out false information. This could have been avoided if the reporters from the regional desks were consulted.
Similar misrepresentation of truth is exemplified by another example in the same story. Toward the end of the story it says, “BBC correspondents say the shortage has also been caused in part by Nepal's failure to pay its sole oil exporter, India, for outstanding fuel bills.”
In the statement above, the actual reason is not the non-payment of outstanding bills alone, but other management issues like leakage and artificial shortage created by dealers. These facts are not highlighted. Instead, the reporter is more interested in stating the fact that “almost half of Nepal's population lives in the impoverished, largely agricultural Madesh region.” Due to the reporter’s weak frame of reference objectivity in reporting is not achieved. Perhaps the news story is an outcome that merely fulfills the basic professional compulsion to cover the event.
Such reporting tactic diverts the readers’ attention from the actual event. Organizations like the BBC have a double responsibility toward its readers: First to say what is accurate, and secondly, say it in a balanced way.
Several questions arise with such reporting style.
1) Who is responsible to verify the information that comes from reporters?
2) Is the fact checked with the right sources?
3) In this case, is it proper to quote other BBC correspondents as sources for the news?
4) What purpose does it serve when a news report try to editorialize?
Since media messages have the potential to influence readers almost instantly, reporters must be careful enough in what they actually say. This is especially true in situations when nations that are poorly represented in the media are covered on the merit of an event that took place, like the fuel crises in Nepal.
What the audience expects to hear about an event should be distinguished from what the audience ought to know. It is this difference that separates good versus bad reporting.
British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is unquestionably the most trusted name in the media when it comes to reporting. Its regional services have been expanded to several countries, including Nepal. These services have been providing international news in local languages. They have been equally resourceful in chronicling a local event and making it international. Local natives who work in the BBC newsroom act as an interface between the larger corporation and the smaller versions of the BBC.
Most times this relationship works, but at times it doesn’t work that well. This leads to not just misinformation but misrepresentation of an event. A case in point is how the BBC Web site in its recent story “Nepal strike hits petrol supplies” on 15 February reported by a BBC correspondent misrepresented facts about the event. It’s not that the news distorts the truth, but it does not tell the truth accurately.
There are two facets to this reporting:
1) Opinion of the reporter
2) Misrepresentation of the situation
While the news story is just a brief overview of the overall situation prevailing at that given time, the story somehow doesn’t correctly say the cause of the event which is the consequence of the larger scenario.
The event behind the news is acute fuel crises in the Kathmandu valley due to strikes in the terai (southern part of Nepal) by various political parties demanding equal representation in the forthcoming constituent assembly. The deck head hints at what the situation is and it is a correct representation of the event in itself. It says, “Nepalese petrol stations have been hit by severe fuel shortages, largely triggered by protesters blockading key roads in the south of the country.”
Being a landlocked country, Nepal is mostly dependent upon India for commerce. One of principle commodities that we import almost entirely is natural gas. But the BBC correspondent does not really investigate this fact. The news says, “Roughly 90% of Nepal's imports travel from India via the southern roads.” The truth is, it is almost 100 percent.
Such arm-chair reporting not only harms the credibility of the news organization but gives out false information. This could have been avoided if the reporters from the regional desks were consulted.
Similar misrepresentation of truth is exemplified by another example in the same story. Toward the end of the story it says, “BBC correspondents say the shortage has also been caused in part by Nepal's failure to pay its sole oil exporter, India, for outstanding fuel bills.”
In the statement above, the actual reason is not the non-payment of outstanding bills alone, but other management issues like leakage and artificial shortage created by dealers. These facts are not highlighted. Instead, the reporter is more interested in stating the fact that “almost half of Nepal's population lives in the impoverished, largely agricultural Madesh region.” Due to the reporter’s weak frame of reference objectivity in reporting is not achieved. Perhaps the news story is an outcome that merely fulfills the basic professional compulsion to cover the event.
Such reporting tactic diverts the readers’ attention from the actual event. Organizations like the BBC have a double responsibility toward its readers: First to say what is accurate, and secondly, say it in a balanced way.
Several questions arise with such reporting style.
1) Who is responsible to verify the information that comes from reporters?
2) Is the fact checked with the right sources?
3) In this case, is it proper to quote other BBC correspondents as sources for the news?
4) What purpose does it serve when a news report try to editorialize?
Since media messages have the potential to influence readers almost instantly, reporters must be careful enough in what they actually say. This is especially true in situations when nations that are poorly represented in the media are covered on the merit of an event that took place, like the fuel crises in Nepal.
What the audience expects to hear about an event should be distinguished from what the audience ought to know. It is this difference that separates good versus bad reporting.
November 15, 2007
Public interest, intrusion of privacy and news value
News value and good journalism are synonymous. But what are the limits of the media in reporting events that are not intended to be made public? Or, what is the relationship between public interest and the right to privacy?
For most people, privacy is guaranteed by the virtue of them enjoying less important position in the society. Yet there are others whose status in the society alone is sufficient to arouse interest of the media at any given point of time. Here, media professionals like to defend news value by calling it “public interest.”
Two popular tabloids in the UK, The Sun and the News of the World are found to be highly intrusive into people’s privacy. The nature of reporting in these tabloids is mostly gossip and story of “affairs.” These tabloids have functioned as channels that report the unacceptable behaviors of individuals. Perhaps these are the values the society ideally seeks for. At the other level, however, public interest also serves as a democratic ideal of open government where the public has the right to inspect public figures.
One important issue is: How much of news judgment should the media apply to distinguish between celebrity-type sensational news and genuinely decent public service news?
The 9-11 incident is one recent example that has brought this issue to the forefront. Was it proper for the media to publish videos or photographs of people jumping off the building, either live or within few hours of the incident? What purpose did it serve? Did it intensify the “horror” factor even further? Moreover, how much close-up shot of a dying person is just about right?
While attempting to dramatize an event or intruding into a celebrity's life or dealing with a private grief, I believe editors should weigh as much on taste and decency as they should on news value. The public is also best served by feeding less sensational stories.
For most people, privacy is guaranteed by the virtue of them enjoying less important position in the society. Yet there are others whose status in the society alone is sufficient to arouse interest of the media at any given point of time. Here, media professionals like to defend news value by calling it “public interest.”
Two popular tabloids in the UK, The Sun and the News of the World are found to be highly intrusive into people’s privacy. The nature of reporting in these tabloids is mostly gossip and story of “affairs.” These tabloids have functioned as channels that report the unacceptable behaviors of individuals. Perhaps these are the values the society ideally seeks for. At the other level, however, public interest also serves as a democratic ideal of open government where the public has the right to inspect public figures.
One important issue is: How much of news judgment should the media apply to distinguish between celebrity-type sensational news and genuinely decent public service news?
The 9-11 incident is one recent example that has brought this issue to the forefront. Was it proper for the media to publish videos or photographs of people jumping off the building, either live or within few hours of the incident? What purpose did it serve? Did it intensify the “horror” factor even further? Moreover, how much close-up shot of a dying person is just about right?
While attempting to dramatize an event or intruding into a celebrity's life or dealing with a private grief, I believe editors should weigh as much on taste and decency as they should on news value. The public is also best served by feeding less sensational stories.
October 09, 2007
Love your job, happiness follows automatically
KENT – “If you want to write, do it.” These are Terry Pluto’s first advice for wanna-be journalists.
The award-winning sportswriter was speaking to a group of freshmen at the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Kent State.
There’s more to know about the passion to write from a person who rolled out a book when he was 23. For him, having the ability to write and having a heart for it is not the same thing. Pluto knows that the misgivings of his well-wishers about how to make a living out of writing were not entirely unfounded.
“If you are around negative people, they will drive you down,” he told the class. “They will make you look like a fool talking about your dream. Don’t hang around with them.”
For Pluto, moving from routine things to taking risks is a daily business. He knows that people fear to change. The pain gets bigger because people don’t want to change, and the pain will take us over.
“If you are stuck in the routine thing, that’s bad,” he told. “You will be stunned to find what a routine person you are.”
So, what you do about it?
Pluto says, “Take risks.”
The work of a journalist is scrutinized daily and some people are ready to cast it down.
“That’s OK,” Pluto said. “It’s like some people who don’t like your looks. But there are people who will always support you.”
***
Pluto crafted his own background the hard way and the chores never make him complacent. His advice to enthusiasts is to know that the art of writing is “continuous introspection.”
“I had stories that go, what I call the Mississippi way,” he told. “You gotta check your own work, just to find out how you are doing. You have to be ready to fail.”
He recollected his natural ambition during his rookie days working at Cleveland press. He frankly said he desired to be like one of those sportswriters.
“We just don’t want to admit we want to be like somebody,” he told. “It’s time to do a heart check and find out what you want.”
It’s annoying for him if somebody says they want to be a sports writer because they like sports.
“That’s not what it is,” he said. “The key is writing. If you want to be a sportscaster, you don’t bother with the scores. You are casting it.”
The veteran also had a journalistic tip: Learn to ask questions without assuming the answers. Talk to people other than the “usual suspects.” He believes that such non-judgmental approach works well in interviews.
“To get fresh stuff is to get fresh people,” he told. “You need to have a real curiosity to find what the other person is like.”
***
Pluto’s interest in the people and their performances has given him the real fulfillment that one seeks in a profession.
“I would not trade my job with friends who are corporate lawyers and earn $500,000.”
The award-winning sportswriter was speaking to a group of freshmen at the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Kent State.
There’s more to know about the passion to write from a person who rolled out a book when he was 23. For him, having the ability to write and having a heart for it is not the same thing. Pluto knows that the misgivings of his well-wishers about how to make a living out of writing were not entirely unfounded.
“If you are around negative people, they will drive you down,” he told the class. “They will make you look like a fool talking about your dream. Don’t hang around with them.”
For Pluto, moving from routine things to taking risks is a daily business. He knows that people fear to change. The pain gets bigger because people don’t want to change, and the pain will take us over.
“If you are stuck in the routine thing, that’s bad,” he told. “You will be stunned to find what a routine person you are.”
So, what you do about it?
Pluto says, “Take risks.”
The work of a journalist is scrutinized daily and some people are ready to cast it down.
“That’s OK,” Pluto said. “It’s like some people who don’t like your looks. But there are people who will always support you.”
***
Pluto crafted his own background the hard way and the chores never make him complacent. His advice to enthusiasts is to know that the art of writing is “continuous introspection.”
“I had stories that go, what I call the Mississippi way,” he told. “You gotta check your own work, just to find out how you are doing. You have to be ready to fail.”
He recollected his natural ambition during his rookie days working at Cleveland press. He frankly said he desired to be like one of those sportswriters.
“We just don’t want to admit we want to be like somebody,” he told. “It’s time to do a heart check and find out what you want.”
It’s annoying for him if somebody says they want to be a sports writer because they like sports.
“That’s not what it is,” he said. “The key is writing. If you want to be a sportscaster, you don’t bother with the scores. You are casting it.”
The veteran also had a journalistic tip: Learn to ask questions without assuming the answers. Talk to people other than the “usual suspects.” He believes that such non-judgmental approach works well in interviews.
“To get fresh stuff is to get fresh people,” he told. “You need to have a real curiosity to find what the other person is like.”
***
Pluto’s interest in the people and their performances has given him the real fulfillment that one seeks in a profession.
“I would not trade my job with friends who are corporate lawyers and earn $500,000.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
