Phil Taylor's papers
|
BACK TO : WAR & CRISIS REPORTING
Newsmen wrestle with perils of 21st century war by Martin Bell 
news.telegraph.co.uk Newsmen wrestle with perils of 21st century war (Filed: 24/03/2003) Martin Bell on how the media resolves its tricky relationship with the military The war has introduced a new word into the media lexicon, the "embeds". These are the 800 journalists embedded with the coalition forces - British and Americans. It is part of the allies' news management strategy to suggest that this enterprise has much wider support than is the case at the sharp end. One peril of embedding journalists is that they will accept the campaign's vocabulary and agenda. The idea of embedding journalists is new. Such journalists, although not required to wear uniform, are in many respects auxiliaries of the units to which they are attached. They work under censorship, including self-censorship, because to broadcast sensitive information might expose them and coalition forces to Iraqi counterfire. They have traded freedom for access, and the trade-off has some merit. It has provided coverage of the war more vivid and immediate than 12 years ago when the censorship was tighter and images were broadcast three or four days late. Now the images, fragmentary as they are, cascade into our living rooms hour by hour. We live in a civilianised society. Almost without exception, today's journalists know little of warfare and have never served in uniform. It does them no harm to experience the realities of soldiering. There are dangers inherent in the raising of this media militia, however. Conscripted reporters may have torn loyalties in the two areas causing most friction between the military and the media. One casualty is reporting: what can be said and when to say it, in view of the anxiety of families at home. The other problem is what happens when things go wrong - miscalculations and casualties from so-called friendly fire. Several incidents have happened already in this campaign. Journalists can be tempted to be more gung-ho than soldiers. An American television newsman, broadcasting live from an advancing column of the US army's 3rd Infantry Division, announced on air: "This is historical television! This is historical journalism!" It was certainly hysterical. Coverage of the campaign so far, for which we are largely indebted to the dedication of embedded journalists, is only part of the picture. Equally important is the reporting from Baghdad - a classic example of steadiness under fire. For the most striking images of the bombing campaign we must thank a camera crew from Abu Dhabi. There are two sorts of journalists in and around the battlefield - those embedded with the military units and those who, at much greater risk, operate on their own initiative and without US or British protection. They stand outside the pool system, so whatever they come up with is exclusive to their own news groups. These are the free spirits or "unilaterals", expert at seizing opportunities and negotiating their way past roadblocks. Journalism is always competitive, but never more so than in time of war. The embedded journalists are obliged to pool their material. Terry Lloyd of ITN was one of those working outside the pool system. He was a quiet, decent reporter, well regarded by rivals, of which I was one once, and colleagues. I have no reason to believe he took an unreasonable or uncalculated risk. The deaths of Terry and his colleagues remind us that warfare this century, computer-driven and precision-guided though it may be, is no video game. It is at least as dangerous as that of the 20th century and the risks are shared by those who report it. I shall be surprised and relieved if the ITN team are the only press corps casualties. This war is coming to us at a cost. © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2003 |