ABC's Baghdad correspondent Neal Karlinsky [...] seems to be complaining that breaking news keeps getting in the way of reporting the newsBut like Karlinsky says in there also, there are good news stories, but it's hard to do a feature about life in Baghdad getting back to normal when there's a car bombing nearby that kills half a dozen people.
Whether they are based in Baghdad or in Washington, journalists are obliged to report the news on the ground, not as "good" or "bad" but as news, regardless of how it fits with the vision the administration would like Americans to see.
This is my take on it. In Washington (or any other western city) you are obliged to report the news on the ground, agreed. For the most part that is boring, mundane, everyday life. In those places reporters seek out and editors demand something out of the ordinary. In Iraq, or in the city of Baghdad, I think things can be said to be different. The everyday news coming to us in the west is of violence in Baghdad. In that context the stories that are out of the ordinary are the positive ones about everyday life.
Flipside of the news value coin. If spectacular loud noises, explosions and deaths are commonplace, then the kid making it to school today, the successful surgery or the free discussion of ideas is more newsworthy.
Damn the man.
the earley edition - Posted by Dave @ 5/29/2004 01:37:00 am || ||