Category Archives: TV/radio

Former Federal Reserve chair ties press freedom to economic stability

Posted on by

How does press freedom factor into current global concerns over the financial markets and the drying up of credit?

I just went to a conference that discussed the relationship between the economy and the rule of law. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was featured as the keynote speaker. (See “Former Federal Reserve Chairman Predicts Economic Rebound.”)

In the middle of his remarks on how legal guarantees accorded to property rights and ownership have elevated general standards of living since the early 18th century, Greenspan pointed to how a free press, along with the protection of minority rights, has proven “the most effective form to safeguard [private] property.”

His argument is that the watchdog role of the press and its ability to inform the population contribute to economic stability.

“[D]emocracies rarely allow discontent to rise to a point that leads to explosive changes in economic regimes,” he said. This stands in contrast with authoritarian states that, even if operating under a capitalist economy, are “inherently unstable because [discontent] forces aggrieved citizens to seek redress outside the law.”

He quoted Nobel laureate Amartya Sen’s observation that “no substantial famine has ever occurred in any independent and democratic country with a relatively free press.”

Why is this? According to Greenspan, it’s because the news media in authoritarian regimes tend towards self-censorship. “[M]arket-interventionist policies – the most prevalent cause of disrupted distribution of food – go unreported and uncorrected until too late.”

So, if you’re living in a society with a relatively free press, consider the possibility that all the gloomy stories you’re reading about the economy might be helping to prevent an even greater crisis.

Parasite Consumes Host, Part 2 – What’s up with U.S. election coverage?

Posted on by

To some observers, the current U.S. news coverage of the presidential campaign is becoming nasty and shallow, with recent furors over trivia misstatements rather than issues.

Only dire economic troubles have managed to divert the media’s attention away from the pettier aspects of the campaign in recent days. It’s tempting to join the many voices lambasting journalists for “dumbing down” an exceedingly crucial election, but perhaps the finger of blame can be pointed at the connection between public demand for “info-tainment” and the fierce competition for advertising revenue that is needed to keep the news industry afloat.

It’s not news that traditional media stalwarts like The New York Times and The Washington Post, which regularly offer in-depth coverage of the issues, have entered days of financial insecurity. And a quick check of their Web sites shows which stories the public is reading and e-mailing to friends. In the wake of Sarah Palin’s nomination for vice president, for example, her views on the Georgia-Russia conflict aroused considerably less public interest than her daughter’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy.

So, when you ask yourself why there are so few stories on the candidates’ positions on U.S. aid to Africa, but so many discussing whether or not McCain invented the Blackberry or debating Obama’s “celebrity” status, you need to follow the money. Or, thinking like an advertiser, follow the ratings.

As Digital Deliverance’s Vin Crosbie puts it: “The more consumers the vehicle attracts, the higher the rates the advertiser are willing to pay and the more money the vehicle earns.”

In the über-competitive world of news, the fight for advertising revenue means attracting the largest audience, which leads to “dumbing down” content to “attract a larger audience by appealing to a lower common denominator,” as Crosbie says. And that raises some questions about the role of the press in creating an informed electorate.

So, that’s what’s up with U.S. election coverage. Suggestions for improvement are welcome.

Is The Daily Show news in disguise?

Posted on by

The Daily Show, a wildly popular program on the U.S. Comedy Central network, offers an alternative to the mainstream news media – “alternative” because it lampoons the news rather than reports it.

The show won television’s Peabody awards for its 2000 and 2004 U.S. elections coverage. By early 2008, its satirical newslike reports on public figures and current events were reaching an average audience of 1.8 million. Compare those figures to Fox News’ primetime Hannity & Colmes at 1.9 million and CNN’s highest-rated show, Election Center, at 1.2 million, and you’ll start to appreciate the comedy show’s hold on American audiences.

The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ), which recently compared The Daily Show’s 2007 news content with that of mainstream news programs, concluded it “closely resembles the news agenda of a number of cable news programs as well as talk radio.”

PEJ also found the show might have a purpose beyond political humor. “The Daily Show performs a function that is close to journalistic in nature – getting people to think critically about the public square,” in the tradition of American newspaper satirists Art Buchwald and H.L. Mencken.

Like a news show, the program regularly lines up prominent elected officials for interviews, including presidential contenders Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, but any casual viewer quickly recognizes the main purpose of the show is comedy. Some major news stories are neglected, probably because host Jon Stewart and his crew couldn’t find anything funny to say about them.

Stewart, who maintains his program is solely for entertainment, rejects any journalistic responsibility. After being attacked on CNN’s Crossfire in 2004 for not asking tough questions in his interview with presidential candidate John Kerry, he seemed bewildered the CNN hosts were “look[ing] to Comedy Central for their cues on integrity.” Stewart said news programs, which exist to present news, were presenting theater at a time when journalists needed to take their profession more seriously.

Does the average viewer of The Daily Show know nothing about the global food crisis and everything about the “man-sized safe” in Vice President Cheney’s office? PEJ’s survey data suggest the show’s regular viewers are highly informed, perhaps the “most likely to score in the highest percentile on knowledge of current affairs.”

Obviously, Comedy Central is not these viewers’ only source of news, but it certainly takes their knowledge to a new and funnier level: The Daily Show continues to bill itself as “even better than being informed.”

<img src=”http://static.technorati.com/pix/fave/tech-fav-1.png” alt=”Add to
Technorati Favorites” />

Remembering Tony Snow

Posted on by

Former White House Press Secretary Tony Snow’s July 17 funeral is reviving memories among journalists who worked with him, including your “Freedom of Expression” blogger, a former White House correspondent.

When President Bush brought Snow into public service from his lucrative career at Fox News, I remember being concerned that a journalist from a conservative network was going to view the “liberal media” only in adversarial terms. But at the same time, there was also excitement that someone with many years in journalism would understand our need for information beyond the repetitive talking points on which his predecessor, Scott McClellan, relied.

First impressions were reassuring and disarmingly funny. One of Snow’s first official acts was to return the morning informal press briefing known as the “gaggle” to its traditional home in the press secretary’s West Wing office. As his office became crammed to capacity and his desk was buried in a small mountain of stacked recording devices, he quickly realized why the gaggles had moved to the much larger briefing room. Snow’s reaction: “This is a mess!”

I also appreciated Tony’s “bupkis list,” from a Yiddish term meaning “nothing.” When he didn’t know the answer, he didn’t fake it or dismiss the question. He’d turn to his staff and say “put it on the bupkis list” to be followed up on, an act I saw not only as personal modesty but also respect for our professional needs . Snow came directly from the news media with a special understanding of our need for answers.

He had his critics, especially when he sparred with reporters as if he was still a news show host. Washington Post columnist Dan Froomkin described Snow’s briefing style in 2007 as an effort to “win the half hour.”

From his first day at the White House, the cancer that eventually killed Snow lurked in the background. The press secretary, who had survived a prior occurrence, wore a yellow “live strong” bracelet. When a reporter asked about the bracelet during Snow’s first briefing, the jocular tone suddenly shifted and Snow had to take a moment to compose himself before answering.

“[J]ust having gone through this last year … was the best thing that ever happened to me,” he said. “I lost a mother to cancer when I was 17, same type — same type, colon cancer. And what has happened in the field of cancer since then is a miracle.”

As a cancer survivor “I feel every day is a blessing,” he said.

<img src=”http://static.technorati.com/pix/fave/tech-fav-1.png” alt=”Add to
Technorati Favorites” />

Covering the Beijing Olympics? Don’t forget your survival guide.

Posted on by

The Olympics might be the “ultimate choreographed event” according to Human Rights Watch, which estimates 25,000 journalists will be coming to China in August to cover the 2008 summer games.

This longstanding critic of the Chinese government has published a “survival guide” for sports journalists who stray into sensitive topics or find themselves confused as to their rights or how to respond to being monitored by the authorities.

One of the reasons many countries compete for the honor of hosting the games is their hope for prominent, positive media coverage. According to the Human Rights Watch guide, Olympics reporting “invariably includes coverage of the host country, its challenges, its policies, and the context in which the Games take place.” It anticipates “some of the most important stories will be found outside of sporting venues.”

But covering China’s culture and society in a manner that meets the professional standards of journalism could prove challenging for reporters not used to the sort of restrictions the Chinese government imposes. The guide gives practical advice such as documents to carry and useful contacts inside the country. It also offers background on human rights issues and stresses the importance of protecting Chinese contacts.

The release of the guide seems to underscore Human Rights Watch’s skepticism of assurances by Wang Wei, secretary-general of the Beijing Olympic Games Bid Committee, who promised the international media “complete freedom to report when they come to China” when the country made its Olympic bid in 2001.

<img src=”http://static.technorati.com/pix/fave/tech-fav-1.png” alt=”Add to
Technorati Favorites” />

Press freedom organization preserves memory of slain Lebanese journalist

Posted on by

More than three years after An-Nahar columnist Samir Kassir’s June 2, 2005, murder in Beirut — a crime still not solved — his friends and fellow journalists have created an organization that will monitor press freedom in the region, work to improve existing laws and offer assistance to journalists and bloggers under pressure in the Levant areas of the Middle East (Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and the Palestinian areas).

SK Eyes, named for Kassir, began operations June 16 after compiling a database of violations against press freedoms and documenting relevant legal cases in the Levant. It hopes eventually to expand its reach, according to one of its founders, Elias Khoury.

The organization plans to follow the example of Reporters Without Borders, which has hosted a seminar for the incoming researchers and journalists at SK Eyes.

Nevertheless “it is fundamental that we have an Arab organization to defend the rights of the media and culture in the region and that we do not continue to count on foreign organization to defend us,” Khoury told the Arab Press Network June 27. “We must be responsible for our own causes.”

SK Eyes plans advertising campaigns, nonviolent demonstrations, petitions and other activities to spread awareness of challenges to press freedom. But its efforts also will focus on legal defenses of journalists. The organization has been compiling relevant court cases and legal documents, including potential loopholes that can be used against the freedom of expression. It plans to pressure governments to appoint lawyers to defend arrested journalists.

Zimbabwe’s State Media a Partner to Violence?

Posted on by

In his quest to retain the presidency he has held since 1980, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe has set the human rights bar pretty low with the violent treatment of real and suspected opposition supporters.

So it shouldn’t be surprising that Mugabe’s state controlled media has been contributing in its own way to the “poisonous atmosphere” in the country, as U.S. Ambassador to Zimbabwe James McGee said June 19.

The Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC) routinely broadcast and published the Mugabe regime’s propaganda in advance of a scheduled June 27 presidential runoff vote against Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), but it refused to accept paid advertising from the MDC. In the past few weeks, McGee said, the state media also has broadcast “inflammatory material” inciting violence against the opposition party.

Independent press freedom watchers in the region, such as the Media Institute of Southern Africa and the Media Monitoring Project Zimbabwe, have voiced similar concerns.

According to Nation Media Group in Kenya, Zimbabweans rely heavily on the state media because there are no independent daily newspapers, television or radio stations. In fact, it says the MDC’s June 22 to withdraw from the race was completely blacked out. As of June 23, “the news was still filtering in courtesy of a few Zimbabweans with access to foreign media outlets.”

Swedish Press Chafes Under New Restraints

Posted on by

The country that scored highest in Freedom House’s 2007 survey of political rights and civil liberties and ranked fifth among 195 countries on its 2008 Press Freedom Report has given its intelligence services broad new surveillance powers.

Under a law approved June 19, Swedish authorities now can read all crossborder e-mails and faxes and listen in on overseas telephone conversations without first obtaining a court order. Supporters claim the measures are necessary to protect Sweden’s security from those who are using communications technology to plan attacks.

But the law faces strong opposition from civil liberties advocates and Sweden’s news media and blogging community. Agneta Lindblom Hulthén, who chairs the Swedish Union of Journalists, told Sweden’s The Local that privacy safeguards were under threat. As a journalist, Hulthén expressed specific concerns over being able to protect her sources and their rights to anonymity.

In a June 18 USA Today article, Arne Konig, president of the European Federation of Journalists, said, “The tapping of journalists’ telephones compromises the watchdog role of the media and puts at risk the right to inform the public.”

Challenges to the new law are sure to follow, but in the meantime, Swedish journalists are adapting to an age in which countries struggle to reconcile heightened security concerns with long-cherished freedoms.

I’ll check out that campaign speech for myself, thank you

Posted on by

Prospective voters might be relying less on journalists to track and interpret political developments and more on their own online research skills, at least in the United States.

The Pew Internet and American Life Project reported June 15 that nearly half the American adult population is using the Internet, text messaging or e-mail to get news on the 2008 presidential campaign or to inform fellow voters about the contest.

Of the 46 percent who told the survey teams they were using the Web for political activity, 39 percent said they have used it for “unfiltered” campaign materials such as videos of candidate debates, speeches and announcements, position papers and speech transcripts – all issued directly by the candidates.

At the same time, 60 percent agreed with the polling statement that the Internet is “full of misinformation and propaganda that too many voters believe is accurate.” Further, 48 percent say the news and information they get online is “just the same” as from other sources, with a slightly smaller number (47 percent) disagreeing.

Where am I going with all this? I’m taking it as further evidence that some of the public feels quite a bit of the campaign news they’re getting, whatever the source, has too much “spin,” and they increasingly are flocking to the Internet, where they have easy access to the primary sources, uncut and pundit-free.

This distrustful but self-reliant spirit might not boost the collective confidence of journalists, but if the trend continues, it does speak well to journalism’s goal of an informed citizenry. You can review the Pew survey results yourself on the organization’s Web site.

But if you’d still rather not do your own research on the 2008 campaign, see America.gov’s U.S. Elections.

CNN Solicits Citizen Journalism

Posted on by

In 2007 CNN began inviting its viewers to send in their reports for possible broadcast; the response was overwhelming. The network’s iReport.com Web site, launched February 2008, now makes every submission – more than 100,000 so far – available for view or comment.

Unless the material will be broadcast on CNN or CNN.com, the network completely absolves itself of responsibility for the online collection of “unedited, unfiltered news.” Basically, the network trusts its iReport.com audience to decide for itself what is accurate.

“Don’t kid yourselves. This content is not pre-vetted or pre-read by CNN. This is your platform. In some journalistic circles, this is considered disruptive, even controversial! But we know the news universe is changing. We know that even here, at CNN, we can’t be everywhere, all the time following all the stories you care about. So, we give you iReport.com. You will program it, you will police it; you will decide what’s important, what’s interesting, what’s news,” says the site moderator, adding her hope that the site will raise the bar on user-generated material beyond the “dancing monkeys and cute cats and dogs” found elsewhere.

However, the site does have its share of pet tricks, weddings and school reports, and observers may very well wonder what the real value is, and what separates iReport from, say, YouTube.

That’s why the “Need Help?” section on the lower left column is interesting. Its advice on what makes a good story or how to take a good photograph or video is very basic, not intimidating and seems perfect for a younger person who is just testing the journalism waters.

So there is a special value to iReport.com when you consider that amateur reporters, who are producing material to get it distributed on one of the world’s largest networks, are learning about and paying closer attention to journalism standards – thorough, accurate and original reporting – than they otherwise might have.

Have you submitted any “citizen journalism” reports? If so, why?