.Iran Reporting = MSM Fail?
Iran has clamped down on foreign media, effectively confining reporters to their offices as the country braces for more anti-government demonstrations. Press cards have been invalidated, and foreign reporters have been informed they cannot cover “unauthorized” demonstrations, forcing news agencies to use screen grabs from government television. A BBC correspondent says these are the “most sweeping restrictions” on reporting that he has ever encountered.
Covering Iran isn’t easy. The authorities have tried to block both citizen journalists and mainstream media outlets from relaying words and images from the opposition demonstrations. Just getting a visa to report from Iran is a major hassle: It took me three tries before I finally got permission for a short reporting trip in February 2007.
So is this the moment when citizen journalism will show its real potential, and put the bad ol’ MSM to shame? After all, social media like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have become one of the primary ways for circumventing the government’s information blockade. Here’s video of a protest in Shiraz, posted on YouTube:
Many smart observers have complained of less-than-stellar coverage by mainstream outlets. Over the weekend, the Twitterati slammed CNN for offering a menu of infotainment while massive election protests unfolded in Iran. (My favorite poke at CNN, from user NordicClick: “While Twitter provided updates to the world, Larry King gave us Jeff Foxworthy.”) And New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller got a fair amount of flak for parachuting into Tehran — and writing a rather tepid news analysis that was quickly overtaken by events. (A New York Times spokeswoman explained that Keller “had long wanted to visit Iran and the occasion of the election seemed like a great time to do so, accompanying our reporter, Robert Worth. Bill had not planned to write articles but when the story got so big, he did so.” Umm, better not mention that expenses-paid jaunt to the angry worker bees of the Boston Globe!)
It’s fun to bash traditional media for their cluelessness. The reality, however, is a bit more complex. CNN, perhaps shamed into action by the Twitter critics, has now stepped up its coverage. The New York Times is throwing a lot of resources into the story, and The Lede blog has been posting a steady stream of updates. Even if Iran’s government bans members of the foreign press from covering rallies in Tehran, it’s a fair guess that reporters will find a way to get out there.
As we learned last year during the war between Georgia and Russia, the world of new media often failed to deliver on its promises, and citizen journalists often merely amplified local propaganda rather than delivering facts. The sheer volume of information coming out of Iran, however, is something entirely new and remarkable: It’s created a tremendous mosaic of coverage that has actually complemented traditional news reports.
Wired
Covering Iran isn’t easy. The authorities have tried to block both citizen journalists and mainstream media outlets from relaying words and images from the opposition demonstrations. Just getting a visa to report from Iran is a major hassle: It took me three tries before I finally got permission for a short reporting trip in February 2007.
So is this the moment when citizen journalism will show its real potential, and put the bad ol’ MSM to shame? After all, social media like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have become one of the primary ways for circumventing the government’s information blockade. Here’s video of a protest in Shiraz, posted on YouTube:
Many smart observers have complained of less-than-stellar coverage by mainstream outlets. Over the weekend, the Twitterati slammed CNN for offering a menu of infotainment while massive election protests unfolded in Iran. (My favorite poke at CNN, from user NordicClick: “While Twitter provided updates to the world, Larry King gave us Jeff Foxworthy.”) And New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller got a fair amount of flak for parachuting into Tehran — and writing a rather tepid news analysis that was quickly overtaken by events. (A New York Times spokeswoman explained that Keller “had long wanted to visit Iran and the occasion of the election seemed like a great time to do so, accompanying our reporter, Robert Worth. Bill had not planned to write articles but when the story got so big, he did so.” Umm, better not mention that expenses-paid jaunt to the angry worker bees of the Boston Globe!)
It’s fun to bash traditional media for their cluelessness. The reality, however, is a bit more complex. CNN, perhaps shamed into action by the Twitter critics, has now stepped up its coverage. The New York Times is throwing a lot of resources into the story, and The Lede blog has been posting a steady stream of updates. Even if Iran’s government bans members of the foreign press from covering rallies in Tehran, it’s a fair guess that reporters will find a way to get out there.
As we learned last year during the war between Georgia and Russia, the world of new media often failed to deliver on its promises, and citizen journalists often merely amplified local propaganda rather than delivering facts. The sheer volume of information coming out of Iran, however, is something entirely new and remarkable: It’s created a tremendous mosaic of coverage that has actually complemented traditional news reports.
Wired
posted by madtom at 10:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home