Topics

  • Abu-thumb-w-gray
  • Nick-Berg-thumb-w-gray
  • Dover-casket-thumb-w-gray
  • Fallujah-thumb-w-gray
  • saddamsons-thumb-w-gray
  • Bush-photoop-thumb-w-gray
  • Related-Issues

Search This Site


Special Projects


  • Photography & War Issue
Blog powered by TypePad

Mamoun Fandy: "Where's the Arab Media's Sense of Outrage?": July 4, 2004

Mamoun Fandy is a columnist for two daily newspapers, Asharq al-Awsat in London and al-Ahram in Cairo. He is a senior fellow at the United States Institute of Peace. This commentary discusses trends in reporting by Arab media.

"As I scanned Arab satellite channels and Arabic newspapers, I found a lot of reporting on the brutal attacks, but very little condemnation and a widespread willingness to run the stomach-turning video and photos again and again. [...] I have watched perhaps a dozen Arab channels and read countless newspapers in recent weeks. I found that few Arab commentators and journalists noted either that major shift or its significance. [...] I am aware of only a handful of columnists, most notably the Kuwaiti journalist Ahmed al-Rubai, who condemned the killings unequivocally. Some reporters and analysts intimated to me that they were afraid to denounce the beheadings; others provided distorted coverage that blurred the line between terrorism and Iraqi resistance to the U.S. occupation. [...] Al-Jazeera is the same network that calls every Arab suicide bomber a shaheed, or martyr. And yet its anchors take care to refer to Abdul Aziz al-Maqrin, who claimed to have beheaded Johnson, as the 'man who Saudi Arabia and Washington call a terrorist.' [...] I went directly to Abdul Rahman Rashed, the head of al-Arabiya, and asked him why most Arab commentators remain silent about these horrific acts of violence and why his channel and al-Jazeera give so much airtime to the terrorists. Rashed blames both contemporary Arab culture and the culture of Arab newsrooms. [...] I also talked with fellow Arab writers and journalists to seek further answers, and it became obvious that many were outraged over how the beheading stories had been handled and why so many Arab journalists are afraid to express their anger publicly or put it in writing. [...] Islamic radicals have killed writers in Algeria, Egypt and elsewhere whose work challenged the logic of martyrdom and 'random jihad,' or killing foreigners in the name of Islam. But the lack of condemnation of the beheadings, despite their barbarism, is a direct result of a broad and dangerous trend in Arab media and in Arab culture broadly. The Arab world today swims in a sea of linguistic violence that justifies terrorism and makes it acceptable, especially to the young. [...] In each country, I was struck that al Qaeda and its ideas are no longer perceived as extreme. Indeed, al Qaeda has become mainstream and being part of the movement is 'cool' in the eyes of young people. Why? Arab culture is being corrupted by the media that glorify violence, but also by schoolbooks that present only one role model for Arab children: the Jihadists and those who excelled at battling non-Muslims. [...] This trend must be reversed -- and the responsibility for doing so lies not just with the media. Unless Arabs themselves muster the courage to speak out against these heinous acts and those who perpetrate them, very little success can be made in the war on terrorism. [...] The American media should also stop replaying images of violence from al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, because when the Arab media air these gruesome images, they animate the logic of terror. They export fear to America. If the Americans did not import these pictures, the Arab media would stop manufacturing them. That could be a first step toward defeating the terrorists who kill not just for Allah and jihad, but for airtime."
[Washington Post]
[Reprinted by Houston Chronicle]

Deborah Fallows & Lee Rainie: "The Internet as a Unique News Source": July 8, 2004

"During some of the most turbulent weeks of the Iraq war nearly one quarter of Internet users (24%) went online to view some of most graphic war images that were deemed too gruesome or horrific for newspapers and television to display. Further, of those who have seen the images, 28% actively sought them out. Overall, however, Americans are conflicted about the idea of these disturbing images being available online. By a 49%-40% margin, Americans disapprove of the posting of such images. A strong cultural divide emerges between Internet users and non-users: Internet users approve of the images being online by a small margin of 47% - 44%, while non-users disapprove by an overwhelming 58% - 29% margin. These are some of the results of a nationwide phone survey done between May 14 and June 17 - a period just following massive world coverage of the murder and dismemberment of American contract workers in Iraq's strife-torn town Fallujah, pictures taken at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, and the capture and beheading of U.S. civilian Nicholas Berg. The horrific nature of many of the war-related images that have appeared online have left Internet users with a range of feelings. The data show that millions of Internet users want to be able to view the graphic war images and they see the Internet as an alternative source of news and information from traditional media. But many who do venture outside the traditional and familiar standards of the mainstream news organizations to look at the images online end up feeling very uncomfortable. Women are particularly opposed to the display of the images and are much less likely than men to have viewed the images online."
[Pew Internet & American Life Project]
[Report in PDF format]

Mother Allows Photos Of Solidier's Coffin To Protest Ban: June 28, 2004

"The mother of a soldier killed in Iraq summoned news outlets to photograph her son's flag-draped casket arriving at Sacramento International Airport to protest a Pentagon policy banning media coverage of America's war dead. [...] Sunday night's brief ceremony, however, did not violate the policy because it applies only to military facilities. The airport and the California National Guard worked Sunday to arrange the event."
[NBC]

Lynn Smith: "Web Amplified Message of Primitive Executions": June 30, 2004

"Right now, they're coming into your home. It's like they're using technology as a vehicle for war." [...] Ritual beheading is as primitive as war gets. But 21st century technology is making the grisly details of such killings visible to millions around the world. [...] "Nick Berg" was the second most popular search request on Google in May, following "American Idol." Last week, the most popular search was for "Paul Johnson." [...] "The point of terrorism is to strike fear and cause havoc — and that doesn't happen unless you have media to support that action and show it to as many people as they can" [...] In the United States, news executives who traditionally draw the line at depicting the most graphic war violence now face a media landscape where millions get unfiltered images on the Internet almost instantaneously. [...] [Robert Thompson:] Do media outlets limit themselves, knowing the videos are widely available? Or do they show everything and run the risk of doing exactly what the terrorists wanted? [...] overwhelming online interest in such images belies the notion of viewer squeamishness. For reasons that may include a simple desire to keep up with the news, morbid curiosity or salaciousness, people are digging past the mainstream news sites to find the raw footage. [...] Beheading is a powerfully brutal act that taps into very primal human fears, Kalayjian says. Watching video — on TV or the Internet — can trigger symptoms in the same way seeing the act in person can. "Now we're not just reading it in the newspaper. We're seeing the process, hearing the outcries, the suffering, pain and terror," she says."
[Los Angeles Times]

Pittsburgh Tribune-Riview Publishes Three Photos of Executed Paul Johnson: June 22, 2004

"So why publish it? Because the statement with its photos - issued so casually, like some bland press release - demonstrate compellingly the brutality, the inhumanity, and the deadly danger of the enemy we face. Words alone could not fully convey the cold-blooded savagery of this graphic declaration, with its gloating tone and its threat of more such acts. Americans must know without doubt, without flinching, without averted eyes, that threat's gravity and inhumanity. [...] The photos published in Saturday's edition should offend and horrify you."
[Frank Craig: "Why Publish Images of Death?"]

Rob Dreher: "What's Wrong With This Picture?": June 1, 2004

"A CBS News poll released on May 24 revealed that 61 percent of those polled believe the news media are spending too much time on the Abu Ghraib story. This jibes with what some of us on the editorial board have been hearing more and more: that average Americans believe the news media are obsessed with bad news from Iraq and aren't paying enough attention to the good things going on there. AP_soldier_school-smallWe decided to search photo wire service archives for the past month, looking for images of U.S. soldiers engaged in helping Iraqis instead of shooting at them. We were startled to discover that the photo [click image to enlarge] accompanying this text was the only image of its kind that moved on the wires in recent weeks. This newspaper's photo department told me that if news photographers aren't shooting those pictures, it's because media back home aren't interested in those stories. [...] Are editors stateside more likely to risk the lives of their personnel to have them shoot battle scenes, or pictures of soldiers handing candy to Iraqi kids? It is understandable that breaking news eats up the limited journalistic resources on the ground, but this means that Americans are not getting the complete story from their media. [...] Jay Rosen, head of New York University's journalism department, says that the problem isn't that the dispatches from Iraq are too negative, but that they're too narrow – and that this poses a challenge for our democracy in a presidential election year expected to be a referendum on the Iraq war."
[Dallas Morning News]
[Picture above: AP photo: "Marine Sgt. William Perry passing out school supplies at elementary school in Kandrai, Iraq, May 11.]

Jin Hyun-joo: "Korea: Kim's Execution Video Banned": June 24, 2004

"The government and Internet portal sites said yesterday they would take stern measures against the possible spread on the Internet of the video showing the beheading of the Korean hostage. [...] Yahoo Korea: "Considering Korean people's condolences toward the deceased, we are going to delete any pictures or video footage that show the killing of the Korean hostage...As the beheading of the hostage was not aired, it is less likely that the footage would proliferate on the Internet as it did in the Nicholas Berg case." [...] With its emergency monitoring system running for 24 hours, the Ministry of Information and Communication said it would advise Web sites to get rid of the clips as soon as they discovered them. "The Web sites that fail to follow through the instructions will be subject to shut-down or police investigation," an official at the ministry said."
[Asia Media]

Pictures and Video of the Beheading of Korean captive Kim Sun-il Posted By US Website. Koreans Hack To Shut Down The Sites: June 23, 2004

"Police assume either the Iraqi armed group distributed the tapes to the site or the site purchased them from other Muslim sites, considering the site put out an ad seeking videotapes of Kim Sun-il’s beheading since June 22. The videotapes contain a scene showing a masked man beheading Kim after declaring “Allah is great.” Netizens who saw the tapes showed strong emotional responses, saying, “It was too cruel and I couldn’t help myself from bursting out into tears. [...] Many netizens are holding a campaign not to watch the videotape at all. Opinions such as: “Please, let’s not watch the videotape even though it may be just us Koreans who don’t watch it. It is the same as allowing Kim Sun-il to be killed twice. Imagine how painful it would be if his family and friends watch it. Let’s not watch it and delete it even when it is in your hand,” have been posted on most Korean internet portal sites. Kim Ho-ki, Professor of Sociology at Yonsei University, pleaded with the government, citizens’ groups, and netizens to control unnecessary expressions of emotion and impulsive behavior, saying, “I am concerned that the videotape may provoke sentiment against Iraq and intensify the dispute on the army dispatch.”"
[Donga]
[Ogrish.com]

South Korean Kim Sun-Il Beheaded: June 22, 2004

[Washington Post]

kim_sun_il"Police assume either the Iraqi armed group distributed the tapes to the site or the site purchased them from other Muslim sites, considering the site put out an ad seeking videotapes of Kim Sun-il’s beheading since June 22. The videotapes contain a scene showing a masked man beheading Kim after declaring “Allah is great.” Netizens who saw the tapes showed strong emotional responses, saying, “It was too cruel and I couldn’t help myself from bursting out into tears. [...] Many netizens are holding a campaign not to watch the videotape at all. Opinions such as: “Please, let’s not watch the videotape even though it may be just us Koreans who don’t watch it. It is the same as allowing Kim Sun-il to be killed twice. Imagine how painful it would be if his family and friends watch it. Let’s not watch it and delete it even when it is in your hand,” have been posted on most Korean internet portal sites. Kim Ho-ki, Professor of Sociology at Yonsei University, pleaded with the government, citizens’ groups, and netizens to control unnecessary expressions of emotion and impulsive behavior, saying, “I am concerned that the videotape may provoke sentiment against Iraq and intensify the dispute on the army dispatch.”"
[Donga]
[Ogrish.com]

South Korean hostage Kim Sun-il is beheaded by captors who forward video of the event to Al-Jazeera television for broadcast: June 22, 2004
[Washington Post]

Video of Kim Sun-il Pleading for His Life
An hysterical Kim Sun-il pleads for his life. No violent images in this clip, but deeply disturbing.
[CBS News]

High School Teachers Placed On Leave For Showing Berg Video To Students: May 6, 2004

nickberg-small"Students said he wanted to make the point that atrocities are committed on both sides of the Iraqi war. The video showing the 26-year-old Berg's execution by Islamic militants has been one of the most widely watched items on the Internet since it was posted Tuesday, according to Web sites that track search requests. The execution has left its mark on other media, too. A pair of Portland-based disc jockeys were fired this week after playing the audiotape of the incident on the air and joking about it. And Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau is apologizing for a cartoon, which he created before the Berg killing, that shows a man's head on a platter."
[Teachers placed on leave]

Fallujah: What Is the Effect of Large-scale Web Images?

Typically we see atrocity photos reproduced as small, fuzzy pictures in newsprint or on the computer screen. Below is a link to a large-scale image that has been used in debates about which images to publish. Does the vivid sense of "being there" produced by scale, detail and the like change the meaning of a picture?
[Altert: This is perhaps the most disturbing image on this site—a charred body of an American contractor hanging from a rope on a bridge while the crowd below celebrates.]

Modern Media Institute: "The Case: Death of a War Correspondent"

Following controversy about the publication of a graphic photograph of a war correspondent, MMI publishes the frontpages from four leading Polish newspapers for comparison. Plus case materials for discussion.
[MMI] [Full Case Study in PDF]
[Further commentary by Kehrt Reyher]

Randy Dotinga: "Press Wrestles With Grim Clips": May 26, 2004

"American news organizations are walking a fine line between good journalism and bad form as they try to cover the war in Iraq without alienating readers and viewers. [...] Many Americans support the media's watchdog role of investigating and exposing prisoner abuse, while others worry that repeated display of shocking photos may cross boundaries of propriety at home or prompt new attacks on Americans abroad. In seeking the right balance, mainstream news organizations are grappling not only with their own traditions but with emerging rivals, such as the Internet and talk radio. [...] Local and national radio talk-show hosts, including Fox News commentator and bestselling author Sean Hannity, aired the unedited audio of the Berg video, complete with the victim's gruesome screams. "I know you don't want to hear this. But you should make yourself hear it, because it is ... evil in your midst," Mr. Hannity said. [...] 52 percent [of Americans] disapprove of the release of the prison-abuse photos. A similar question in a CBS News poll found 43 percent objecting to the images' release. [...] liberals wanted to see more prison photos, while conservatives clamored for more images of Berg to show terrorists are "barbarians.""
[Christian Science Monitor]

Trade Association "Military Reporters and Editors" Worries About Backlash: May 25, 2004

"...those who blame the Post and other newspapers for publishing photos -- instead of questioning the military's actions in Iraq -- risk crippling the press's power at a time when the nation is polarized. "People are filtering this through their political views...People ought to be thinking about what is the truth." [...] the backlash against journalists not only blocks the truth of the war, but makes true press coverage more difficult. [...] "For some, particularly Republicans, it takes on a political edge. They see it as a political story instead of a news story." [...] "We were the enemy then when we covered anything negative...I think the backlash is stronger this time because it is an election year and the Republicans see the war as more of a bite on them." [...] As public backlash grows against the press for reporting the growing problems in Iraq, Christenson fears the growing trust between the military and the press will be ruined. "With people saying to us, 'you are losing the war,' before long, everything we built will be destroyed. But this war will not be won or lost on any story that is written," he added. "It will be on what happens in Iraq."
[Joe Strupp in Editor and Publisher]

Michael Arrieta-Walden: "Searing Images": May 23, 2004

The Oregonian newspaper reflects what and why to publish.
[Oregonian]

Jeff Greenfield: "The Lure of the Lurid": Aired May 21, 2004

"An American captive in Iraq is beheaded by his captors. We are outraged, appalled, disgusted. An Internet tracking reported last week that video of the Berg beheading had replaced porn and celebrity items as the most frequently searched item on the Net. A princess dies in a car crash. We are witness to the ritual of grieving. Six and a half years later, a major U.S. broadcast network airs photos of the dying princess. More than nine million people watch. Americans degrade prisoners in Iraq and photograph their humiliation. We are outraged, appalled, disgusted. And within days, those pictures with no detail omitted are posted prominently on countless Web sites, where they're among the most popular fare. In all the debate about what should be seen and what should be concealed, there's one factor as unpleasant to mention as it is unavoidable. There is and always has been a huge appetite for the grisly details of violent death. Its appeal has often been compared to pornography. But with sex so readily available these days, the image of death may be more alluring precisely because they remain forbidden.

There is a long ignoble history here. Public executions in the United States and Britain were treated as entertainment spectacles, with hawkers selling portraits of the condemned and details of their crimes to the mobs. In 1928, when a "New York Daily News" photograph snapped this picture of Ruth Snyder in the electric chair, the paper sold an extra 775,000 copies and ran the photo again on the front page the next day. The memorials to the slain president, as this "LIFE" magazine special, all contains pictures from the famous Zapruder film, and at least one publisher openly wondered where the appeal of these tributes was in part the morbid fascination with a murder captured on film. There was no need to wonder about "The Faces of Death" videos that surfaced in the mid-1980s. They featured graphic scenes of human and animal killings, suicides, executions, ritual slaughterings, and proved a hot item in video stores across the country. Why this appeal. Maybe it's nothing more than the dark side of human nature, the same impulse that makes us slow down and look at a traffic accident or makes some people watching a prospective suicide shout, jump.

Maybe it's a way of dealing with the most primal and unavoidable fear of all. (on camera): Forty years ago, folks singer Phil Ochs wrote a song about the Kennedy assassination. "Tell me every detail. I've got to know it all," he wrote. "And do you have a picture of the pain?" Well, we have more and more of those pictures now and more and more outlets of them and apparently more and more of us do want to know it all."
[CNN transcript]

Poynter Institute's "Dealing With Shocking Images": An Online Seminar For Journalists: May 20, 2004<

Visitors are welcome to watch and or listen to a replay of this one-hour seminar. Requires RealPlayer.
[Poynter]

"The Nausea" website publishes the most gruesome images from Iraq

The site's Statement of Rationale: "The nausea" is a non-profit project of different individuals all over the world. This is NOT a "politically correct" web. We do not share any particular political tendency except our rejection to violence in every way. We believe that getting close to first degree violence will avoid any patriotic or romantic fantasy about war. Children DO NOT have any nationality. They should not suffer. Their lives, our lives can never be replaced. We are not against any nationality but just against people that are able to handle a weapon against another human being or making economic profit out of it. We are against the military that turned this century into a hell killing 20 civilians for each military fallen in action (it was exactly the opposite 100 years ago).

If you feel a nausea after visiting our web we have accomplished our goal. Do not put the blame on us, we have not produced all this violence. It is better that you think twice to whom you vote. Our aim is to distribute information to everyone that demands it. Every information will NOT be manipulated before being posted. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth... and, at the end everyone blind and without teeth". You can help just resending an email to everyone who is sensitive to this topic."
[The Nausea]

Roy Peter Clark: "You Be the Editor"

"On the front page of The New York Times and the St. Petersburg Times, for example, viewers saw a version of this image, in which the charred and dismembered remains of American civilians are hung from a bridge, a group of Iraqis cheering in the foreground. Today we want you to be the editor. Let's build a conversation about news judgment and journalism values around these three sets of questions: whether to run that image, how to run it, and the consequences of running it."
[Poynter]

John O"Sullivan: "Media Off the Mark With Rumsfeld Potshots": May 18, 2004

In the last week the coverage of Iraq by the U.S. media has exhibited at least four separate failings:
1. Inferentialism. Several media reports of the Abu Ghraib scandal have been, in effect, prosecuting briefs for the theory that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld either knew about or authorized the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. Since the evidence for this is scanty, reporters build inference upon inference to make the case. [...]

2. Selective agonizing. Ever since the Abu Ghraib photos emerged, the media have shown them on every possible occasion, along with reports and editorials on America's shame and the world's revulsion. [...] Then again, worse rape and brutality than that displayed in Abu Ghraib are known to occur daily in America's prisons without arousing any media interest at all. [...]

3. Taking dictation from terror. Before we leave Berg, we should note that a vast number of news outlets reported that he was murdered "in retaliation for" the Abu Ghraib abuses. That was the terrorists' own justification. They shrewdly judged that the Western media would eagerly accept it. And they were right. The "retaliation" explanation transferred the blame for Berg's death from the actual murderers onto George W. Bush and the United States. [...]

4. Willing gullibility. Two newspapers -- the Daily Mirror in Britain and the Boston Globe -- have published fake photographs of British and American soldiers abusing prisoners. In the British case the fakes were quickly detected once they had been published, and in the U.S. case, they had been detected before the Globe published them."
[Chicago Sun-Times]

Jay Rosen On Showing the Nicholas Berg Video: July 7, 2004

"The argument surfaced last week: the gatekeepers in Big Media are mistaken--clueless, biased, disconnected--for filtering out the full horror of the Berg beheading. [...] Call it a test of news judgment. Should the full graphic horror of the Nicholas Berg beheading be shown on national television, and documented by photographs in the newspaper? So far the answer from major gatekeepers is no. But I'm not certain that will hold through next week. [...] News Judgment New (the Web user's hunger to know, see, publicize and discuss) is set against News Judgment Old (the gatekeepers and their ideas about news, the public interest, and "taste.") [...] the Berg video, what's actually shown and said in it, and what it means for Americans are a far more urgent story than further images and details leaking out about prison abuse in Iraq. Normal sensitivity scales for violence and blood do not apply to a political murder and international crime such as this. We should look the Berg beheading full in the face; then we'll know what we're facing in the fight against terrorism. That's the argument. [...]

You can read the trajectory of reader interest in the progression from "nick berg murder" to the video of it, even though news of the video and murder arrived as one story. It's as if people let the news sink in, paused to register what beheading of an American, video-taped and broadcast... really means, and then said: Okay, now I want to see for myself. Show me, television set. Show me, newspaper. But there was no showing, so they went to the Web. It's not a discovery that people absorb the news in stages like this. But it's different when we can see it happening in real time, and "read" the shifts in demand and interest-- because we have Web tools like search engines, links and lists. (And yet those tools have many flaws.) From an alternative source of news, the Web has evolved into an alternative source for news judgment."
[Jay Rosen's PressThink]

Radio-Television News Directors Association Guidelines On Ethics Of Publishing Graphic Images: May 13, 2004

[RTNDA]

Poynter Institute: "It's a Great Image. Now What?": May 10, 2004

This is a discussion among newspaper editors about strategies for presenting "big" images. Centered around the use of Tami Silicio's Dover coffin photos, and offers a look at treatments in The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, and the Chicago Sun Times.

"You've got a powerful lead photo that is a story in itself -- along with multiple related stories -- for your centerpiece package. The question is how best to present the photo, and the story behind the photo, in a way that is clear and organized, and delivers maximum impact? [...] Your initial instinct might be to run the photo big, really big. It's so powerful, why not? But don't be seduced. Step back and ask yourself "What is the most effective way to bring this story to the reader?" Here are some things to consider. [...] It's no mystery that headlines are important. We know from EyeTRAC research conducted in the early 90s that readers enter a newspaper page first through the photo and then via the dominant headline. Because this image is so striking, the reader would look at the photo and immediately want more information. Readers will scan the headline and deck. If it doesn't fit, they may get confused and irritated, but will hopefully keep scanning until they find the info in the caption. The coffin image is so powerful that an unrelated headline could puzzle the reader. [...] Good captions give essential information that can draw the reader into the story, and hopefully, keep them interested enough to actually read it."
[Poynter Online]
[Large PDF of the Chicago Sun Times treament]

Phil Shook: "Readers Respond to Fallujah Photos": April 13, 2004

"Readers' outspoken but divided response to the images emerged when 29 news organizations across the country e-mailed 13,642 readers beginning Friday, April 2. They asked about a particular photo, which showed Iraqis cheering as the burned, mutilated bodies of two Americans hung from a bridge. By the following Thursday, 2,009 readers had responded. Of these, 58 percent approved of the image being published in a newspaper or on a website; 39 percent objected to using the picture."
[Poynter]