The
Dean speaks... writes War
Reporting Pushing Journalism
Newsplex became a broadcast newsroom the week that
war broke out with Iraq. South Carolina Educational Television broadcast
a three-hour special report from the college's facility, showcasing
the ability of Newsplex to blend media -- interactive and broadcast.
Students and faculty from the College of Mass Communications and
Information Studies culled, reported and posted worldwide material
to an SCETV war Web site. The Newsplex newsroom was linked to SCETV
studios around the state and doubled as an interview set for statewide
public officials, military veterans of the first Persian Gulf war
and experts from USC.
Newsplex was originally
planned not as a production newsroom, but rather as an experimental
laboratory. But it proved the point that convergence in journalism
is what you make of it. And Newsplex will, as director Kerry Northrup
describes it, always be a work in progress evolving to both the
needs and the possibilities.
War reporting always
pushes the envelope. The U.S.-led war with Iraq is - or was - no
exception. The heavy combat phase now seems over, though danger
is not dismissed.
This war has introduced
us to the Pentagon's latest effort at working with the media, "embedding"
the correspondents with the advancing field units. Of course, it's
not actually a novel concept. Peter Arnett slogged with the troops
in Vietnam. Ernie Pyle died with them in the foxholes of the Pacific
in World War II.
It was a turnaround,
though, for the military. Some, of course, blamed the press rather
than policy for the U.S. defeat in Vietnam. As a result, when President
Reagan sent a force onto the Caribbean island of Grenada to remove
a Cuban foothold, the media were run off at gunpoint. Accepting
a pool of reporters to observe the mission to capture Panama strongman
Manuel Noriega did not mean letting the pool get anywhere near the
action. Pools were a means of controlling media access in Gulf War
I, but were neither satisfactory nor satisfying. To the military's
own consternation, hardly anyone saw what the military did well
- the swift overland attack that ended the combat, though not the
dilemma of Saddam Hussein's autocratic rule.
Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld had good reasons to approve the plan for some 600 journalists
to ride along. There was the realization the media would be there
anyhow. Moreover, after the last experience the media were likely
to reject a pool system and would have the technology to file or
broadcast from just about any place on the battlefield. And there
was the sense the media serve a valuable purpose for the U.S. government.
"We need to tell
the factual story - good or bad - before others seed the media with
disinformation and distortions, as they most certainly will continue
to do," the Defense Department guidance on "embedding
media" states. Cynical, perhaps, but purposeful.
From the media's perspective,
it's important to remember the key word i s "embed" not
"in bed" with the military. In return for access, the
news organizations had to agree only to maintaining operational
security =96 not reporting all the details of the operation. The
media would also have to carry their own gear and be able to keep
up with the troops.
So I've watched my old
colleagues go to war: ABC's Ted Koppel at the Iraqi border; CNN's
Walter Rodgers in the green glow of a night vision lens; Anne Garrels
of NPR waiting through the bombardment of Baghdad for whatever was
to come; and Arnett was again in Baghdad, first reporting for National
Geographic/MSNBC and in typical Arnett fashion getting sacked for
offering a blunt assessment of the war in the wrong place on Iraqi
TV.
"Do you miss it?"
I'm often asked. No, I don't. I'm busy enough here, thank you. There
are other reasons.
There's a lot of adrenaline
flowing on the battlefield. Some reporters thrive on it. Warriors
can be heroic, but war itself is brutal. It's not a "good story."
It's a horrific event that happens to be a compelling story. I did
not know Washington Post columnist Michael Kelly or NBC's David
Bloom well, but they gave their lives in pursuit of this story.
I covered the 1983 Yom
Kippur war in the Mideast from the relatively safe perspective of
Beirut. I was in Prague in 1968 and 1969 during the Warsaw Pact
occupation of Czechoslovakia. Soviet tanks roamed the streets of
the Czech capital, but my reporting experience came largely in the
Cold War, not the hot wars.
I was back in Prague
the week before the war against Iraq began. War was much the topic
of conversation in my meetings with journalists and students. The
Czechs are now allies of the United States through their recent
membership in NATO. A Czech army unit specialized in combating chemical
warfare has been deployed in Kuwait. A medical unit has been in
Afghanistan. Czech public opinion tended to oppose the war, but
the opposition was soft and not very demonstrative.
Czech journalists were
interested in how the war would be covered. Would CNN regain its
primacy over Fox and the other news networks? Would journalists
be subject to censorship?
Government public affairs
officers, in another meeting, wanted to know how to deal with reporters
who sensationalize a story or report false information. They complained
about reporters who lacked familiarity with the subject they were
covering. Sound familiar?
Even more familiar was
the complaint of Romanian journalists in Bucharest that they could
not get information out of either their officials or the American
government about the 4,000 U.S. troops staging for the war at a
Romanian base near the port of Constanta. Romanian reporters are
eager, but a bit uncertain, about exploiting their new sense of
journalistic freedom.
Eastern Europe is fertile
ground where the seeds of a free press have germinated. It's a struggle.
The economics of too many newspapers and television stations and
too little advertising revenue is sure to diminish the number of
players. But the journalism program at the University of Bucharest
is full. The students are fluent in English and ask the right questions.
For example, should they have to choose between print and broadcast
journalism? Of course, not. Let me explain convergence.
After all the years
I spent dealing with the dreary Communist press, it was exhilarating
to see the enthusiasm the young Romanian journalists exude. One
reporter at ProTV was eager to get to Iraq, but concerned he might
not get a visa after Romania expelled seven Iraqi diplomats. Another
ProTV reporter was en route to Israel, but worried Christian Amanpour
would get all the good interviews the ProTV reporter sought. Don't
most journalists share that worry?
Whether it's war or
post-Cold War, there's not a day without journalistic dilemmas.
That's the way it should be. If this job were easy, almost anyone
could do it. |