organised chaos

There’s a reason why I chose ‘Freedom of Information‘ as the topic for my EAP term paper 3 semesters ago. Despite the fact that the right to information isn’t restricted to media freedom alone, the importance and need of having a free press (especially when I live in a country with a press that ranks 124th out of 169 countries in the worldwide press freedom index as of 2008) is definitely one of the things that pushed me to research and write on it. In fact, I’d go as far as to say that establishing an objective media body free from political agendas and intervention is in itself already half the battle won in achieving freedom of information.

These days, I always remind myself to watch the news channels with a pinch of salt, even the Al-Jazeera network. The first thing I do is to weed out all the known media propoganda vehicles and focus on the remaining options. I believe it’s important for the masses to not accept a report at face value, because reports are delivered by reporters who are essentially human, and humans can never be completely detached from his own views and surrounding environment. It’s imperative to follow up on current events with a critical and open mind, and to study both sides of a story, because lets face it, a press absolutely free from bias is virtually impossible. They do the best they can, and the rest is up to us.

So yes, I’m all for impartiality and getting the facts straight.  This would also mean that if total media freedom can actually be attained, the people involved in the industry have to keep in mind that this freedom isn’t a weapon to be brandished about blindly. It isn’t about sparking controversies or digging up dirt or finding that headline-grabbing piece or coming up with a story that sells. It’s about reporting with responsibility, guided by a conscience, driven by an acute awareness of the social duty to let the world know the hard facts.

The following video would be an example of what I consider excellent reporting (got this off from Mardhiah) :

Watch Alex Thomson in action. That’s what reporting should be like. Forget those glossy ads they show of reporters getting down to business with their serious expressions down pat, notebook in hand, eyebrows scrunched in concentration. Please. Bring me hard-hitting interviews like this one, and I’ll know there’s hope with reporters like Thomson out there, brave and firm enough to stick his foot up that smarmy dude’s behind.

And you absolutely must watch this footage from Bethlehem in 2006:

“I don’t what we’re doing here. Purification, maybe. It’s dirty here.”

Admission of ethnic cleansing, right from the horse’s mouth. How about that?
Consider that this footage wasn’t even supposed to be shown in the first place.
This didn’t happen with a war/conflict going on. This is what happens every stinking day under Israeli occupation.

This is why I put so much weight on free press and freedom of information. People have the right to know what’s going on. The problem with most networks when reporting on Palestine is that they always begin with ‘what happened next’ instead of ‘what happened that set off what happened next.’

Unfortunately, recent events have put a twist on the principle of impartiality in the media.

Last week, the BBC refused to air an appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee, which is made up of charities, to raise funds for the people of Gaza. The reason?

“The BBC decision was made because of question marks about the delivery of aid in a volatile situation and also to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC’s impartiality in the context of an ongoing news story.”
- BBC

What. WHAT???

It’s an appeal for humanitarian aid, not an appeal to supply military arms to Hamas (which I reiterate, is the legit Govt of Palestine). How do you justify refusing to air an appeal on the grounds that it may appear prejudicial to one side? HOW???

It goes against all human decency, and to use the principle of impartiality as a ground to refuse airing the appeal is downright insulting to me, to what I believe in, and to the entire free media.

I am hugely disappointed with BBC. I’ve always valued its news (well, at least more than the pile of codswallop that is CNN), and now it’s somehow turned into the proverbial ‘politician for the party, not for the people.’ It’s probably aiming to please some Zionist big-wigs out there. I wonder who’s stepped in to take control over at BBC?

Ah well, Thomson works for Channel 4 (who FYI did air the appeal, which has raised £3m in a week. Bravo!) so at least there’s that.

This is what I mean by being selective over choosing the right news network.

I wish I knew how to end this entry with a bang, but I’m tired, it’s late, and really, all I wanted to do was rant.

But I hope I did some good tonight in writing this, and I hope something somewhere in the multitude of words above sticks, insya Allah.

Enough said here.