>>During the last Gulf War, the British journalist Robert Fisk declined to be part of the reporting pool in the Middle East, which was being controlled in every way by the American military (where to stay, where to go, what to look at, which tanks to get rides on etc - and of course the journalists loved it, because it made them feel like soldiers). Fisk decided to wander off to check out some of the things they were being told - wanting to see them for himself. He was "caught" and told to re-join the pool, and when he did, the people who rounded on him the most were the other journalists! Said he was "risking spoiling things for everyone else." So in this case even the journalists were accepting that the notion of truth was secondary to whether they got "the story" i.e. whether they got a version of events from a source who would be considered reliable (the military) by their news organizations. Whether it was true or not, could be left to the Fisks of this world to explore, but AFTER the war please, so as to not screw things up for the network correspondents. And then of course when journalists like Fisk do investigate events after the fact, they're the only ones to reach their conclusions, and so are not believed because of that - but they're the only ones to say these things because they're the only ones who went looking for the truth, rather than just accepting "the story" that was dished out to everyone else. Sarah<<
Hi Sarah, A clarification and a (friendly) warning. My paper is not (only) about deniability. It is called 'Economical with the Truth? How language is the first casualty in the British governments' propaganda war in Northern Ireland', and the title is self-explanatory. I have it as a Word document if you want a copy. As to the warning, I see that above you mention Robert Fisk, who is, along with John Pilger, the journalist I most respect and believe. Unfortunately, mention of Fisk's name on this list is likely to cause extreme reactions among some people here. In the aftermath of September 11 there was a long, sometimes bitter debate about 'anti-American' feelings, comments and journalism. Fisk was one of the most savaged in this regard and although I find his writing wonderfully clear and definitely 'against the grain', I am in the minority here. Your post (above) perhaps explains why. If you intend to refer to Fisk as a 'good guy', put your helmet on NOW. mike in bcn NP Disposable Heroes of Hiphopcrisy - (If ever I would stop thinking about) Music and Politics
