All Blog Posts from Public Eye

We previously told you all about the Israeli media censor and how that person exercises control over just about any war reporting from the country as a condition of operating there. We noted that CBS News operates under those rules, which pertain to reporting potentially sensitive military information obtained unilaterally – such as the location of incoming missile strikes. Today, CJRDaily’s Lawrence Lanaham looks at the other side of the issue. He notes a Fox News report which relayed a Hezbollah request to U.S. media outlets not to show locations from which missiles have been launched into Israel. Both requests came from enemy combatants eager not to give their enemy important information – much the way reporters with U.S. military units are forbidden to reveal troop positions. Lanaham thinks these are decisions best made by judicious news organizations:

Seeing news organizations negotiating with foreign militaries isn't that unusual -- access always comes with a price, such as embedding -- but it does seem escalated this time. If the next conflict involves more parties, say four or five, the negotiating calculus will be even more perilous.

Ideally, editors and producers ought to put their collective foot down: ignore demands for censorship, and make circumspect, judicious decisions about battle footage on a case-by-case basis. Rockets may look cool, but there is no need to amplify the risk to reporters in an already dangerous battle zone just for higher ratings. At the same time, battle footage is necessary to portray the reality of war; the sensitive details it betrays must serve journalistic values, clarifying and giving context for viewers and readers. If, in their decisions, editors and producers independently take into account the possibility of losing official access or angering reckless militias, they can remain sensitive to troop movements and civilian safety without signing off on anyone's demands.

Read full post…

In covering a story like the current conflict in the Middle East -- wrought with a long and complex history – the information that gets lost in the headlines is the sometimes the most basic. On the “Evening News” Monday night, correspondent Richard Roth’s segment set out to explain some of the more basic questions about Hezbollah and its motivations. It's the type of story that has its challenges -- especially in the context of television (how do you explain Hezbollah in two minutes?) What follows is Roth’s story behind the story – how the segment came about and how it was executed:

Some of what transpired in this assignment and its execution is, I think, a reflection of some of the healthy introspection that goes on in a news organization. I didn't “pitch” the story; it was assigned to me. I kind of figured my day in Beirut would be busy - and productive - enough that I'd have a credible "hard news" piece to offer the “Evening News.” I had some ideas to pursue and some people I'd made appointments with to meet.

But Monday morning I woke up to an e-mail saying the “Evening News” wanted a story answering two questions: "What's Hezbollah?” and "What do they want?" I'd been copied on some internal e-mail traffic, and as I read it, it seemed to me some of the inspiration to try and take a small step back had actually come from a CBS News colleague. He'd been watching the broadcast, and as a viewer he had some questions - which he mused about in an e-mail.

The assignment made good sense to me, though actually I thought the questions had been asked and answered in a section of another story done for “Evening News” the week before. I did make it known that I had some other editorial business that I thought might bear fruit and that I wanted to pursue - and mentioned to a producer that I thought the "who and what" about Hezbollah might end up being just a part of my story that night.

Read full post…