Honest Reporting has an interview with the defendant in the first Al Dura trial, Philippe Karsenty. This is a good, brief, primer for those who haven't been following the issue, as well as for those who have: Storm Clouds Over Paris
"France TV is owned by the government. France 2 is a subsidiary of France TV, the parent company . . . The general managers are people close to Chirac. Some of the general managers are people who were working at the government spokesman’s office." - Darsenty
Not all of French TV is owned by the government, but the French media in general are either owned or heavily subsidized by the government. This is scary, when you think about it, as the French government is hardly a disinterested bystander. While I am sympathetic to claims that the US media may be overly influenced by corporations, it doesn't mean that governments are, by definition, neutral and honest alternatives.
Darsenty also makes the point that French television can do a lot of harm because of its world importance. That was always something that's bothered me: the fact that the BBC and French media can do immense harm around the world---more so than, say, German or Italian media---because so much of the world understands French or English.
Regarding the US media: Frank Rich has just published what seems to be an interesting book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold," about how the US media has been supine vis-Ã -vis the Bush administration since 9/11, especially over Iraq. The US media, he says, are cowed by accusations of lack of patriotism if they question too harshly. And he says (I read the New York Times book review) that American journalists are generally tamed by their perceived need to stay in the good graces of important government personalities, in order to have access to them and quotes from them.
Still, Europe doesn't have anything on us when it comes to accuracy. Europeans perceive bias in our media, and they're right to a great extent. But they seem to be unaware of the broad range of opinions still expressed in our press, especially on our op-ed pages and in our magazines. Moreover, many Europeans seem to be strangely naive when it comes to their own press and broadcast media. The British, for the most part, trust the BBC implicitly, and the French believe that Le Monde is the dernier cri. I don't really believe anymore that the French receive a broader range of perspectives than do Americans.
The media in the US and in Europe shape and are shaped by the prevailing political cultures in their countries. Rather than challenging and correcting their society's conventional wisdoms, they reinforce them.
Karsenty notes "This image [Al Dura] is carried in everyone's brain. Everyone thinks it's true. Daniel Pearl was killed to avenge Dura."
Yes, the propagation of truth, as with the propagation of untruth, has consequences. Of course Pearl's killers may well have been satisfied with any excuse; fact is though we don't know that in Daniel Pearl's specific case, his specific situation. So will Enderlin evidence the least amount of remorse, the least degree of conscientiousness? Unlikely in the extreme.
"Serious, careful, honest journalism is essential, not because it is a guiding light but because it is a form of honorable behavior, involving the reporter and the reader." Martha Gellhorn
Honorable behavior in the MSM. What a concept.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
"France TV is owned by the government. France 2 is a subsidiary of France TV, the parent company . . . The general managers are people close to Chirac. Some of the general managers are people who were working at the government spokesman’s office." - Darsenty
Not all of French TV is owned by the government, but the French media in general are either owned or heavily subsidized by the government. This is scary, when you think about it, as the French government is hardly a disinterested bystander. While I am sympathetic to claims that the US media may be overly influenced by corporations, it doesn't mean that governments are, by definition, neutral and honest alternatives.
Darsenty also makes the point that French television can do a lot of harm because of its world importance. That was always something that's bothered me: the fact that the BBC and French media can do immense harm around the world---more so than, say, German or Italian media---because so much of the world understands French or English.
Regarding the US media: Frank Rich has just published what seems to be an interesting book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold," about how the US media has been supine vis-Ã -vis the Bush administration since 9/11, especially over Iraq. The US media, he says, are cowed by accusations of lack of patriotism if they question too harshly. And he says (I read the New York Times book review) that American journalists are generally tamed by their perceived need to stay in the good graces of important government personalities, in order to have access to them and quotes from them.
Still, Europe doesn't have anything on us when it comes to accuracy. Europeans perceive bias in our media, and they're right to a great extent. But they seem to be unaware of the broad range of opinions still expressed in our press, especially on our op-ed pages and in our magazines. Moreover, many Europeans seem to be strangely naive when it comes to their own press and broadcast media. The British, for the most part, trust the BBC implicitly, and the French believe that Le Monde is the dernier cri. I don't really believe anymore that the French receive a broader range of perspectives than do Americans.
The media in the US and in Europe shape and are shaped by the prevailing political cultures in their countries. Rather than challenging and correcting their society's conventional wisdoms, they reinforce them.
Karsenty notes "This image [Al Dura] is carried in everyone's brain. Everyone thinks it's true. Daniel Pearl was killed to avenge Dura."
Yes, the propagation of truth, as with the propagation of untruth, has consequences. Of course Pearl's killers may well have been satisfied with any excuse; fact is though we don't know that in Daniel Pearl's specific case, his specific situation. So will Enderlin evidence the least amount of remorse, the least degree of conscientiousness? Unlikely in the extreme.
"Serious, careful, honest journalism is essential, not because it is a guiding light but because it is a form of honorable behavior, involving the reporter and the reader." Martha Gellhorn
Honorable behavior in the MSM. What a concept.