spangler@kvue.UUCP (Lance Spangler) (03/24/85)
This past week, while conducting its "Iron Fist" policy of withdrawal in Southern Lebanon, two freelance employees of CBS News were killed by a shell fired from an Israeli tank crew. There have been conflicting reports on whether the crew was (1) in the company of armed terrorists/guerilla fighters, (2) visable/recognizable to the tank crew, and (3) in a location approved by the Israelis for TV news crews. As in any war situation, the journalist must take some chances. The central American conflict, Vietnam, Korea, the 1967 mideast war, and others are good examples. But I believe it's incumbent upon the various factions to take extra precautions to prevent the death of ANY journalist covering the event. Public opinion often plays an important part in any armed conflict. In this nation, the perception of the American public can sway administration policy. I would think such a "public relations attitude" would be especially important to both the Israelis and the various Moslem and Christian factions fighting in Lebanon at this very moment. But the Israelis have forbidden any Beirut journalists from covering the withdrawal, since they have to travel from North to South. They have said that Israel based journalists may cover the withdrawl, but only under Israeli Defense Force rules. These rules include telling the various news crews what they may and may not shoot. Often the only thing they are allowed to shoot are pictures of tanks withdrawing from an area. They may not take pictures of the Israelis killing "suspected" terrorists. They may not take pictures of the weapons the Israelis say they take out of homes in Shiite villages. They may not take pictures or report on the interrogation of suspected terrorists. Please understand that I am NOT supporting either the Israelis or the other factions. A journalist can not take sides when covering an issue or conflict. And while I am not in Lebanon covering the event, I am presenting the facts to a very large viewing audience, helping shape public opinion in the process. What I am looking for is someone who can possibly make me understand what gives the IDF forces the right to take the lives of two innocent, impartial journal ists who are simply doing their job. I would hope that someone can supply these answers. Because at this moment, I harbor some very hostile feelings toward the Israeli government. They have killed two co-workers of mine, brothers of the cloth so to speak. In an attempt to head off some flames, let me say that I am working quite hard to prevent these personal feelings from influencing my news judgement, and I believe I have done just that since the murders occured. UUCP: ihnp4!ut-sally!kvue!spangler Lance Spangler Telco: 512-459-1433 (Pvt. biz line) Senior Producer Telco: 512-346-4447 (Home / evenings) KVUE Television Austin, Texas The only thing we have to ((P. O. Box 9927)) fear is computing itself! :-)) zip------> 78766
plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (S. Plunkett) (03/25/85)
An interesting piece from someone of the media: > This past week, while conducting its "Iron Fist" policy of withdrawal in > Southern Lebanon, two freelance employees of CBS News were killed by a > shell fired from an Israeli tank crew. > ... > Please understand that I am NOT supporting either the Israelis or the other > factions. A journalist can not take sides when covering an issue or conflict. > ... > What I am looking for is someone who can possibly make me understand what gives > the IDF forces the right to take the lives of two innocent, impartial journal > ists who are simply doing their job. Their right comes from their primary duty to complete a military mission. What right do journalists have in wandering about--on enemy lines--and not expect a very low probability of survival? > I would hope that someone can supply these answers. Because at this moment, I > harbor some very hostile feelings toward the Israeli government. They have > killed two co-workers of mine, brothers of the cloth so to speak. I'm under the impression, given the nature of your article, not to mention the subject line accusation of MURDER, that you are not so much after answers as a confirmation of your hostility not only against the IDF (they did it deliberately, knowing they were meddling journalists), but also the Israeli Govt. (their whole Lebanese policy is immoral). This is a fair example of the bias which the net has argued about recently. One may well have passionate resentment against the particular commanding officer that directed the fatal shell fire, but to immediately extrapolate this to a broadside attack on the Israeli government hints at an unspoken bias. The allusion to a religious order, "brothers of the cloth," is not well taken. It suggests an entirely inflated sense of importance, and some strange implication that journalists hold a sanctified status. It is ludicrous that military operations that can be lost in a matter of moments must somehow accomodate reporters dashing about along enemy lines. In summary: Your profession would be better served by giving a little less of the rage and more of admiration for these newsmen who in all likelihood understood what they were doing, knew what they had to do, but lost out. ..{ihnp4,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkett
dxa@bentley.UUCP (DR Anolick) (03/27/85)
I just posted a 90 line article to net.politics in response to the
title article which was posted in net.tv as well as net politics.
This discussion has little to do with the type of discussion which
takes place in net.tv. It belongs in net.politics. I hope that
other people who follow up this article will keep this in mind.
Droyan David Roy Anolick
ihnp4!bentley!droyan {or dxa} ^ ^^^ ^^wanttaja@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ronald J Wanttaja) (03/28/85)
How in the world can you blow up an isolated incident into a government policy? Have you watch the subsequent CBS coverage of this tragedy? CBS now says that the Israeli tank was "hundreds" of meters away (based upon reports of other reporters on the scene). The car the men were driving was clearly marked as a media representative, all right... a white card, 5 by 8 inches laying on the dash of the car. How readable would that have been, 500 feet away? Could it have been recognizable AS A MEDIA ID? IF it was even seen, could it have been mistaken for a road map (lying on the dash, after all), a handkerchief, a first aid kit? Put yourself in the place of the Israeli tank commander. People have been shooting at him for days (don't flame me about whether he should have been there, line troopers don't make foreign policy), he's hot, dusty, and 500 feet way some men are crouching by a car. Both men are dressed in plain civilian clothes, the same as the adversary forces (I will not call them terrorists, as they are in their own country, fighting invaders). One man lifts something out of the back seat and places it on his shoulder. The other runs to him with a case. The first man swivels and points the object at your tank. You now have seconds to decide... is it a camera, or are you and your crew going to burn to death when an antitank missle hits you? It is very possible for a camera to be mistaken for a antitank weapon- after all, this is happening hundreds of feet away, and both devices are used similarly (shoulder held, with an assisant to load/work sound). I have news for you...all nations do not *worship* media reps. Your implied comments about media privleges reminds me of hundreds of Americans in foreign jails, saying dazedly, "But I'm an American citizen!!!" It doesn't wash. "Freedom of the Press", as guarranteed by the Constitution, ends when you leave US territory. You are at the mercy of whoever you meet. I mourn the CBS rep's deaths as I mourn any senseless death, but when you wander into a war zone... Sir, you scare me. Your deliberate attempts to sound "fair" as you slip in every dig at the Israelis is not an unknown tactic, but it frightens me to the bone to read it from media representative. What are your newscasts like? Does your station use it's power to fairly report the news, ensure justice, and protect it's viewers, or is it twisted in a way to win viewers to your own private politics? Feel free to present you politics openly, identified as an editorial, but did your newscast on this event start... "Israeli storm troopers executed two unarmed CBS reporters today..." Great power is a massive responsibility, are you using it for good or evil? ***FLAME OFF*** As a suggestion, you may want to remove the site identification from your path and .signature. Should your station ever be sued by someone, you postings could be used as evidence in court as offical statments, and I'm not sure that a standard disclaimer would help, as the courts are interested in the "mental processes" of reporters. For instance, should I post an article critical of Boeing airliners, it could be used in a lawsuit in an attempt to prove the "internal opinion" of Boeing products. Ron Wanttaja (ssc-vax!wanttaja) "...Get the widow on the set, we need dirty laundry..."