|
By
Sarah Lasenby
Let's
have more balanced broadcasting and less of this boring wall-to-wall
war reporting.
Now
you might think that I would value all the information about the
war that I could lay my hands on.
It’s fine to use words such as 'liberate' if we are quoting
other people. What is not acceptable is to incorporate such
language in our own coverage  |
| Read
comments by the BBC's deputy director of news at the foot of
this page |
As
a strongly anti-war person I am keen to keep up with the latest
moves of the so-called coalition troops, so I can use the information
in my campaigning for more peaceful ways to resolve this ghastly
situation.
But
I too am completely tired of the coverage.
It's
as if there were no other news anywhere and it's terribly boring.
It's
boring morning, noon and all through the night on World Service
too.
But
more serious than the boredom is the fact that there is no proper
balance in the BBC's broadcasts.
The
occasional interview from a peacenik in no way balances the interminable
war, war, jaw, jaw.
|
The media are playing into the propaganda game of this government,
who want us to back their probably-illegal action in attacking
Iraq |
| Sarah
Lasenby |
This
sort of thing also happened at the death of Princess Diana.
It
was as if broadcasters were engineering our hysterical mourning
of this extremely sad event, whipping up an enormous reaction from
masses of ordinary people.
Well,
if those people felt as I did - very sad - then they had all kinds
of ways to express that without having a blackout of all other news
for days.
This
time I am more worried that intentionally or by default, the media
are playing into the propaganda game of this government, who want
us to back their probably-illegal action in attacking Iraq (and
even vote them back into power at the next election!).
But
despite so much propaganda being drip-fed by the media, people won't
be shifted from being against this war to supporting it, as the
government hopes - especially
now the war is taking so much longer than was expected.
The
decision makers in the BBC should realise that it is very exciting
for journalists to go into war reporting mode and that they need
a stronger hand on the helm to see that we get a more obviously
balanced diet on these very influential airwaves.
Let
us have much more news about things not connected with either war
or peace as well as more really dispassionate analysis.
Mark
Damazer, deputy director of news, defended the BBC’s coverage
of the war in a debate on public service broadcasting.
He
admitted mistakes had been made but said the BBC’s remit to present
stories "fairly and impartially" had been maintained.
He
agreed that journalists must choose their words carefully and not
repeat language issued by official sources such as the Pentagon.
"It’s
fine to use words such as 'liberate' if we are quoting other people,"
he said. "What is not acceptable is to incorporate such language
in our own coverage of events when we do not have enough information
to hand to know whether the Iraqi people want to be liberated or
not."
Mr
Damazer also praised Al Jazeera television, saying the world needed
a broadcaster based in the Middle East. But he said the BBC’s coverage
could not be compared to Al Jeezra precisely because the BBC was
UK-based.
Audience
members claimed the BBC was not giving voice to the continuing anti-war
sentiment, but Mr Demazer cited a two-minute report on anti-war
demonstrations broadcast on the the television news and on Panorama.
|
