S 640 Blog Posting # 1/Reaction to a current IF news item.
(I have already submitted this posting to Oncourse using another Blog site.) I have returned to Blogger so I will just resubmit this then will use Blogger from now on.
Disclaimer: I am not using this website as an example of my opinion of the current situation in Gaza.
There are so many IF issues out there, but one thing came to mind as I scrolled through both ALA and online sites. After selecting the current Gaza situation, and including news censorship as a search subject, I noticed a topic consistent with most websites I read through, (regardless of their support for one side or the other,) which was that U.S. news coverage was either limited/nonexistent, or biased toward the Israeli point of view.
With this in mind, I decided to select, at random, one website that used this topic to represent the large number of websites with the same opinion.
I found the If Americans Knew.org website, from which one author (among many) states: “we are attempting to fill in the many important news items – most of them about incidents in the Palestinian territories – that are not available in the U.S. media. “
My reaction to this statement, (whether or not it is a fact), resulted in my question: In reporting the news, is omission of certain facts also a form of censorship?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hello Maywin! I had posted a comment to this (on your other blog site), and now I don't see it...
ReplyDeletedid you??
Journalists have a code of ethics as well. Maybe they are faced with similar ethical decisions when having to decide what stories to cover, knowing they can't cover every single event, just as librarians wrestle with the selection of materials with a limited budget.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I have been trying to work out which blog to use...sorry for the confusion...
ReplyDeleteYou could be right about journalists having to pick and choose without making mistakes just like librarians.
I saw that you got my message on Oncourse, but I thought I'd go ahead and try to put my comment on here one more time. Sorry for the repeats!
ReplyDeleteI recently watched an episode of The Daily Show (You can catch the episode here: http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=215936 ) where they discussed this very issue in an interview with Abderrahim Foukara, a representative from Al-Jazeera.
There are many forms of censorship, and failing to report all sides of an issue certainly constitutes it (just as neglecting to select books representing differing opinions on an issue). In journalism schools, they are taught to try to be as objective as possible, though we know that true objectivity is rarely the case. The country of broadcast may censor the media and the journalists themselves censor with their choice of story. Also, every news outlet is first and foremost a business with a specific audience to which they cater.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGretchen, you are so right about finding things. Sometimes I access the BBC site and along with NPR can usually find varying opinions and content.
ReplyDeleteExcellent question, Maywin. Just as omitting certain facts can be viewed as censorship, what do you think about shelving a book in a restricted area? Isn't that a similar type of situation?
ReplyDeleteI imagine (selective) omission of certain facts is much easier to accomplish but is much more dangerous because no one can prove an author's intent.
ReplyDeleteThe more blatant (obvious) act of censorship would be shelving materials in a restricted area. I guess there is no possible way to put a stop to censorship.
Acts of information omission and restricted access of materials in libraries are alive and well/