http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca A Blog for Media Justice (By Paul D. Boin) is part of the MEDIA JUSTICE PROJECT (www.MediaJustice.ca). Opinions expressed in this blog are those of the writer. Sun, 05 Sep 2010 13:17:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-528 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:37:51 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-528 I saw the footage within 6 hours of the death, and not since. Maybe there would have been a little more sensitivity at the administrative level if the athlete had been North American. But, you have already eloquently described the networks' reptilian reaction to a tragedy...ANY tragedy. North American or not, they would have showed it while they could. And, then pulled it when propriety dictated so (or, more probably Vanoc). It does not matter the nationality of the athlete. Our yellow journalists would have shown the footage for as long as they could have gotten away with it, and then pulled it when it looked improper (as they did). I have no faith in Canadian journalism. We do not stand on principle. I would be proud if we showed the footage to make a point that the IOC has been negligent. And, I would also have been proud if we had withheld the footage on the ground that it is too traumatic to be seen. Either way, I want Canadian journalists to take a stance. But, what they have done is yellow cowardly---showing the footage while they could get away with it and then bowing down to polite observation. Again, I am ashamed to be Canadian (and, that is sad because I love my country---usually). http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-527 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:25:26 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-527 The point of my blog entry was to point out the hypocrisy of network television decisions. I stand by my view that if the nationality of the luger had been Canadian or American, CTV and NBC would have likely not aired the death footage, as these same networks have often done when they decide to not broadcast similar images of Canadian and American soldiers dying in Afghanistan or Iraq, or innocent civilians in said countries. Show all or show none. But don’t dehumanize some, and humanize others. http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-526 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:16:18 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=19#comment-526 Look, you politically correct professor- I am a Canadian. A young man has died in my country. I feel responsible. I am angry that the luge course did not protect this athlete; and, I am ashamed that this is in my country. There have been complaints by Canadian lugers that this track is dangerous, and these complaints were ignored. I realize that there are thrill seekers who derive sick satisfaction from this death. And this gratuitous viewing should be curtailed-I agree with you. But, I do disagree that it should be hushed up and ignored, because that is what you are advocating (like it or not). We are hosting the Olympics and we contributed to the death of a young athlete through our negligence. I am aware of this because I saw the footage. So, do we derive a "machiavelian" pleasure in seeing this tragic accident?...I do agree, some do. But, I feel that my country was responsible for this atrocity through its negligence, and I could only realize this by seeing what happened (and, thus ironically, to do justice to what happened). We should be ashamed---the fasted track in the world and no safety precautions. http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-362 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:52:33 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-362 Related Article from Index On Censorship: Israel: Press anger over continued censorship 08 Jan 2009 Frustration is growing over Israel’s refusal to allow journalists into the Gaza Strip. Padraig Reidy reports The Foreign Press Association in Israel has expressed anger over the Israeli government’s continued refusal to allow foreign journalists into Gaza. Glenys Sugarman, Executive Secretary of the Foreign Press Association in Israel, told Index on Censorship that the Israeli government was still not allowing six journalists into Gaza, despite a ruling from the Supreme Court that journalists on a list compiled by the FPA must be allowed into the area. Israeli authorities have claimed the FPA has not finalised the list of journalists. ‘We have not changed the list, despite these claims,’ said Sugarman. ‘The government has the list of reporters we supplied a week ago.’ Sugarman said there is only one entry point where journalists can access Gaza. ‘The Erez checkpoint is the only Israeli checkpoint which will deal with international passports,’ she said. ‘There is no other way in to Gaza. Attempting to cross from Egypt means applying to the Egyptian authorities, which can take up to six weeks.’ Director of the Israeli government press office Daniel Seaman told Index on Censorship: ‘The Supreme Court ruling states that journalists could only be allowed into Gaza if conditions permitted. Conditions since the ruling have gotten worse, and there hasn’t been an opportunity to let journalists into Gaza. The army cannot guarantee security at the moment.’ A BBC cameraman yesterday gained access to Gaza, embedded with an IDF unit. Originally Posted at: http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/01/israel-press-anger-over-continued-censorship/ http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/01/israel-press-anger-over-continued-censorship/]]> http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=10#comment-20 Sat, 14 Mar 2009 11:11:32 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=10#comment-20 such a intresting story I found in this blog, resspect! http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=11#comment-10 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 03:36:33 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=11#comment-10 Thank you! http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-7 Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:25:32 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-7 Dr Boin, I commend you for raising this important issue. In November of last year, various international media organizations, including CTV, wrote Israel's Prime Minister to contest the decision to ban them from Gaza, (see "Global Media Executives Protest Gaza Press Ban" at http://ap.org/pages/about/whatsnew/wn_111908b.html). Part of the letter reads, "We are gravely concerned about the prolonged and unprecedented denial of access to the Gaza Strip for the international media." Clearly, the letter's signatories deplored the media blockade. However, by choosing a publicly subdued stance on the issue, they are effectively normalizing the notion that it is acceptable. I have observed this to be particularly the case in Canada. Perhaps a valid reason exists for this stance that is yet to be known. In the absence of a compelling explanation, I wonder if there is a convenience inherent in acceptance here. Perhaps on many levels, they find it safer to watch from the sidelines. Leila Kayali http://ap.org/pages/about/whatsnew/wn_111908b.html). Part of the letter reads, "We are gravely concerned about the prolonged and unprecedented denial of access to the Gaza Strip for the international media." Clearly, the letter’s signatories deplored the media blockade. However, by choosing a publicly subdued stance on the issue, they are effectively normalizing the notion that it is acceptable. I have observed this to be particularly the case in Canada. Perhaps a valid reason exists for this stance that is yet to be known. In the absence of a compelling explanation, I wonder if there is a convenience inherent in acceptance here. Perhaps on many levels, they find it safer to watch from the sidelines. Leila Kayali]]> http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-4 Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:10:04 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-4 It certainly is possible for reporters to refuse to be escorted/embedded in battlefields if they choose. The CBC refused to be embedded in Iraq (not to mention that no other battlefield has such complete border control as Israel does of Gaza). In the context of my clearly defined parameters (evaluating the editorials on the current crisis in Gaza by the 6 major North American papers I listed) it does indeed constitute a thorough analysis. And they do represent a major/influential portion of the North American mainstream media. And the call amongst the rest of mainstream media for opening Gaza to the press has been virtually nonexistent. As for what information/stories might be gained by reporters being allowed to enter Gaza we'll never know until they're allowed in. http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-3 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:50:47 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-3 It's been along time since reporters had free movement on a battlefield. This piece lacks an awful lot of context. What is the norm now? What is different here compared with the Lebanon incursions, Iraq and Afghanistan, let alone conflicts like the Ethiopian incursion into Somalia or the recently-completed Sri Lankan conquest of the Tamil Tigers? Can Western reporters function inside Hamas-controlled areas of Gaza? Does monitoring editorial comment constitute enough research? Certainly, there has been come coverage of Israel's press curbs. Does this count? What of your blanket condemnation of "mainstreeam media", as though the media is monolithic? How many media outlets really want to take the risk of sending reporters into a war zone. What are their legal liability issues? Insurance issues? And what of the coverage if reporters were there? What exactly do you think we are missing? Would we get substantial reporting or just posing and short film segments with lots of explosions but little real substance? http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-2 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:07:18 +0000 http://mjblog.mediajustice.ca/?p=4#comment-2 to me "press freedom" means being unembedded.