News

[Roger Hicks]

Let's be honest. Most of us are pretty parochial in the news we read/ listen to/ watch (for some American readers: no, 'parochial' is nothing to do with schoolgirls in tartan skirts). For the Libyan struggle, I've been looking at Al-Jazeera and (to a very much lesser extent) Al-Arabiya as well as my usual BBC. It's quite intriguing to see the way in which the same story is reported by different channels -- and to try to work out the extent to which they are telling the 'truth', via an analysis of how far their stories overlap.

Is this a political comment rather than photographic? Hardly. Those who cling to the myth of 'objectivity' are often those who also cling to the fewest sources, often with the most predictable stances. We take pictures that reflect our world-view, and if we don't, we're probably really bad photographers. Of course we can be really bad photographers even if we do take pictures that reflect our world view, but at least there's the chance of a bit of passion in them.

Al-Jazeera English in particular provides a very interesting slant on many stories from elsewhere in the world, and I am profoundly grateful to whoever it was on RFF who first posted a link to http://english.aljazeera.net/ Do I believe every word they say? Of course not. But they are a superb antidote to believing everything else that anyone else says...

Cheers,

R.

 

[ktmrider]

Don't Even Have to Go Foreign

Don't Even Have to Go Foreign

Hell's Bell's, in the US we don't even have to go foreign for different perspectives. We have Fox News vs CNN vs MSNBC. In my opinion, the most balanced broadcasting are the news programs on public TV.

Back in the early 1980's, I was a pilot with the US Marines and the Multi-National Peace Keeping force in Beirut, Lebanon. I was really innocent and having been a journalism major in college thought the news was objective. Imagine my surprise how different the reporting of the operations in Beirut was as reported by NEWSWEEK vs SOLDIER OF FORTUNE. And by the way, in the specific incident I am talking about SOF was the more objective.

 

[pakeha]

Far too many people are simply `headline' readers. That is,they read a headline and think they know all there is know about a subject in the media. Best method is to get info from as many sources as possible, check the language used to imply fact , then make up your own mind with some balance.
At least AL-J have not been caught phone hacking...yet. Some of the AL-J in depth programmes are very good.And i like getting stories from all over the world, as opposed to `our world'.
The Cafe is often quite an interesting programme, last one i saw was on youth unemployment in Bosnia, they actually had some youth in the studio !!
regards
CW

 

[pakeha]

reported by NEWSWEEK vs SOLDIER OF FORTUNE. And by the way, in the specific incident I am talking about SOF was the more objective.

love irony as humour😀
regards
CW

 

[Peter_Jones]

If you want to know what's going on in UK, don't bother with BBC - Russia Today (RT) is, bizarre as it may seem, much more accurate and objective.

 

[kram]

Yep, everyones got there own slant with a bit of true in it (but not the whole truth or overall picture). I watch Russia today now and again, to get a different view, and to get news stories which don't seem to appear anywhere on our usual news channels.

 

[Jamie123]

Al-Jazeera English in particular provides a very interesting slant on many stories from elsewhere in the world, and I am profoundly grateful to whoever it was on RFF who first posted a link to http://english.aljazeera.net/ Do I believe every word they say? Of course not. But they are a superb antidote to believing everything else that anyone else says...

Cheers,

R.

Al-Jazeera is indeed a very good news outlet. I keep finding myself surprised when I read their articles because I've come to expect much less from "news".