J
Hmm ... slow start you must still be thinking about it, maybe this will aid your deliberations ??
http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,7558,605828,00.html
http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,7558,605828,00.html
A quote from said article:
By the time we get to the wars in the former Yugoslavia the conventions had changed utterly. Wearing a jacket with "press" badge and travelling in a civilian vehicle flying a white flag actually attracted fire. Several correspondents there recalled driving for their lives as snipers from both sides tried to pick them off. One said, "The locals feel we are leeches sucking away at their misery."
Glad to see the world agrees on something.
By the time we get to the wars in the former Yugoslavia the conventions had changed utterly. Wearing a jacket with "press" badge and travelling in a civilian vehicle flying a white flag actually attracted fire. Several correspondents there recalled driving for their lives as snipers from both sides tried to pick them off. One said, "The locals feel we are leeches sucking away at their misery."
Glad to see the world agrees on something.
Some owners of media groups (no - I won't name names - do you want me to become their favoured target ?) would like to think that EVERYONE works for the media in one way or another.
ps. I don'think the phrase 'The locals feel we are leeches sucking away at their misery' was taken out of any context, more of a truism across the globe.
ps. I don'think the phrase 'The locals feel we are leeches sucking away at their misery' was taken out of any context, more of a truism across the globe.
Slow to start, mainly due to it's lacking in stimulation.
As for journalists being considered 'legitimate targets', I don't have a problem with that.
If you are stupid enough to put yourself in a situation, usually against the specific instruction/advice of those who know better, then you get what's coming. If you manage to get out of it with 'the big scoop!' you'll be quick enough to take the money/career enhancements for the story/photos and any of the accolades that 'hacks' receive at their annual backslapping piss ups. If you f*ck up and get slotted.......tough, at least you've made the headlines though, just not in the manner by which you had originally intended.
I'm all for freedom of the press.....and you're free to get yourselves shot if you so wish. You're also free to dress up as para militaries, which is probably the reason why your presence comes to the attention of those who 'top' you, in the first place.
I'm just not concerned when a member of the press gets some. In fact, if I'm honest, it makes my day.
The media done for themselves with that old boot 'Kate Adie'. All she wanted to do was to be seen as some sort of 'action woman'...............whatever happened to her? It's OK I'm not really looking for the answer to that.
As for journalists being considered 'legitimate targets', I don't have a problem with that.
If you are stupid enough to put yourself in a situation, usually against the specific instruction/advice of those who know better, then you get what's coming. If you manage to get out of it with 'the big scoop!' you'll be quick enough to take the money/career enhancements for the story/photos and any of the accolades that 'hacks' receive at their annual backslapping piss ups. If you f*ck up and get slotted.......tough, at least you've made the headlines though, just not in the manner by which you had originally intended.
I'm all for freedom of the press.....and you're free to get yourselves shot if you so wish. You're also free to dress up as para militaries, which is probably the reason why your presence comes to the attention of those who 'top' you, in the first place.
I'm just not concerned when a member of the press gets some. In fact, if I'm honest, it makes my day.
The media done for themselves with that old boot 'Kate Adie'. All she wanted to do was to be seen as some sort of 'action woman'...............whatever happened to her? It's OK I'm not really looking for the answer to that.
I've just logged on and I feel better already!!
OK Jake, you cannot be surprised at the reaction you got. To aswer your original questions, it's yes to both IMHO.
I am assuming that if any of us agrees with a) you will come back with the question "including the military Executive?" Again, I would answer yes, but the trouble is with journalism, it is never, ever carried out without meeting someone's agenda, usually the political agenda of the journo's employer.
I don't think soldiers would object too much to honest, unbiased reporting - which is pretty much a contradiction in terms...
Your view please Jake.
OK Jake, you cannot be surprised at the reaction you got. To aswer your original questions, it's yes to both IMHO.
I am assuming that if any of us agrees with a) you will come back with the question "including the military Executive?" Again, I would answer yes, but the trouble is with journalism, it is never, ever carried out without meeting someone's agenda, usually the political agenda of the journo's employer.
I don't think soldiers would object too much to honest, unbiased reporting - which is pretty much a contradiction in terms...
Your view please Jake.
J
Prodigal - the answer to a) has to be yes, and would cite Watergate, Apartheid, Profumo and the like ...
as for b) its too simplistic to give an unqualified yes, but I would not advocate the US model of 'tell all' - provided it is not abused I do support the principle of the 'D' notice (now DA Notices).
www.dnotice.org.uk
as for b) its too simplistic to give an unqualified yes, but I would not advocate the US model of 'tell all' - provided it is not abused I do support the principle of the 'D' notice (now DA Notices).
www.dnotice.org.uk
