Archive for September, 2008

Jon Snow: “Editors sold their souls” to MoD

Thursday, September 25th, 2008

Jon Snow, Channel 4 news anchor, reveals his anger on Radio 4 at the news blackout on Prince Harry’s deployment to Afghanistan. On a programme stacked with pro-war journalists, he was asked by media analyst Steve Hewlett how he felt when he found out there had been an embargo. Snow replied:

I was absolutely enraged. I couldn’t believe that 400 editors could have signed up to this.

Why?

Because we have a protocol which we live by on every working day of the week which is that if someone vulnerable in terms of national security is making a movement or whatever we may well know about it but we won’t in fact tell the listener

If Brown is going off to Iraq you know perfectly well because you have to make your own arrangements but you don’t talk about it

It seems to me that there was nothing so very different about a movement of Prince Harry to Afghanistan and if they wanted complete secrecy it could fit with that protocol

The argument from the media organisations that went along with it was that this was in essence what they had sort of done.

No, and it’s not true. I am certainly aware that the basis of the discussion was: if you do not sign up to this he will not go, we will not deploy. Therefore the media suddenly became charged with a role in the deployment of a soldier to Afghanistan, which seemed a most bizarre position to be in.

This was propaganda, this was not journalism, this was not ferreting about to get at the truth, this was doing somebody else’s bidding, this was the picture that the Ministry of Defence and others wanted put across the front pages of the newspapers, this was a hole in one for the Palace, the military authorities and Prince Harry, there was no journalism involved at all, not one element of it.

The media, certainly the BBC, who were in this like everyone else, would dispute that, they would say that the quality of access, that one of the reasons that the deal took some time to stitch together was that arguments over – it appears to me anyway, they appear to be saying – the quality and amount and depth of access, so they are saying that the access enabled them to tell more of the story, to let listeners and viewers see more of what is really going on in Afghanistan because of the access they got because of the deal they had done.

That’s complete garbage, isn’t it.

Do you think…?

Absolute garbage. What was going on? What was going on was a number of posed photographs. Did they say: “We moved around the village and Harry posed on a motorbike. Whose it was we don’t know, it was red, it was probably nicked from some Afghan.”

What was the truth? Does an air traffic controller actually shoot from a machine gun nest? The BBC didn’t reveal this to us.

No, this was a series of manipulated photo-opportunities, it was not journalism and did not in any sense describe what was going on in Afghanistan.

Were you surprised at the reaction to your comments?

Not remotely. Not remotely. Do you think 400 editors who have sold their souls for a mess of pottage are in some way going to start being nice to me about my one lone voice of rebellion? No, absolutely not.

But I know I was right. And I have to tell you, I have had a vast mailbag from editors, friends, journalists, other people saying: “Spot on mate” – and viewers too.

Has it done the prince any good?

I think it’s done the press a lot of harm. Has it done the prince any good? Of course. Of course it’s a much better image than someone rolling around in the street half drunk.

“Imprisoned in largest internment camp in history”

Sunday, September 7th, 2008

Lauren Booth, a Palestine campaigner and freelance journalist who writes for the Mail and Mail on Sunday, has been trapped in Gaza for the past two weeks after breaking the Israeli blockade in a boat laden with medical supplies. The Israeli authorities are now preventing her from leaving, ostensibly because she entered the country illegally.

Two peace boats, the “Free Gaza” and the “Liberty”, sailed from Cyprus to Gaza almost three weeks ago carrying 45 activists seeking to bring attention to Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

Most of her fellow protesters left on the same boats they arrived in last week, but Lauren and several other activists chose to remain behind.

Israel controls all access to Gaza, although there is one border crossing at Rafah for pedestrians into neighbouring Egypt. Israel insists, however, on the right to screen all goods travelling from Egypt to Gaza and the pedestrian crossing opens rarely. This means crossing into Israel is now the only realistic means for Lauren to leave.

“This is a punishment, and it’s a warning to the people who may in the future want to come on the boat: imprisonment in the largest internment camp in history,” Lauren told the Times.

“It seems we are political prisoners, if you like, of Egypt and Israel’s blockade of Gaza,” she told Press TV.

Lauren is Tony Blair’s sister-in-law. Tony Blair is official Middle East peace envoy.

A third peace boat is due to arrive in Gaza on September 22 carrying doctors and members of the European parliament.

“Collateral” tragedies: Civilian deaths in Afghanistan

Sunday, September 7th, 2008

The United Nations has found convincing evidence, based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, that some 90 civilians were killed, including 60 children, by Nato bombers in Afghanistan on August 21.

The UN investigation found that “the destruction from aerial bombardment was clearly evident with some seven to eight houses having been totally destroyed and serious damage to many others. Local residents were able to confirm the number of casualties – including names, age and gender of the victims.”

This is far from an isolated incident.

In the latest case at the end of August over 70 people are believed to have been killed in a massive bombardment of villages in southern Helmand province.

In July, coalition troops admitted that air strikes in Helmand killed civilians, as local people claimed that between 50 and 80 people, many of them women and children, had died.

Also that month, 47 people were killed and nine wounded on their way to a wedding in eastern Afghanistan. Among the dead were 39 women and children, including the bride-to-be.

More than 200 civilians were killed by coalition troops in Afghanistan in June, far more than are believed to have been killed by Taliban militants. The growing toll of civilian deaths came as the US airforce disclosed that it dropped over 272 tonnes of bombs on Afghanistan in June and July this year – more than the whole of 2006.

And how has this story been covered in the British media? Paratroopers shot dead four Afghan civilians on July 26, close to the site where, less than 48 hours earlier, snipers had killed a British army dog handler – and his dog.

None of the media coverage named the dead Afghans. But several outlets named the dog that died, and its pedigree.

How the press swallows MoD propaganda

Sunday, September 7th, 2008

Last month the press reported how friendly fire in a bungled assault killed a British soldier in Helmand last year. They all neglected to remind their readers, however, how they first reported the operation – as a noble tale of heroism and comradeship.

In January 2007 the British papers went wild over a “Rescue bid by heroes strapped to helicopters“. Describing how British soldiers had tied themselves to the wings of a helicopter to retrive a soldier’s body, an army spokesperson told the Mail:

“It was a leap into the unknown. It was an extraordinary tale of heroism and bravery of our airmen, soldiers and Marines who were all prepared to put themselves back into the line of fire to rescue a fallen comrade.”

Under the headline “Heroes of Helmand: the first amazing pictures“, the Observer talked of “a mission that carried echoes of Saving Private Ryan”, “a trip into the unknown, a mercy mission that has already etched itself into contemporary military folklore”.

The Guardian effused that the mission evoked “the manner of the heroes of the second world war film Flight of the Phoenix”.

The Times had this wonderful line: “Reports said that soldiers from 45 Commando Royal Marines did not want their 30-year-old section commander falling into the hands of insurgents, who they feared would mutilate his body.” Top marks there for demonising the enemy.

The Telegraph reported the operation’s success, followed by an army spokesperson’s words that it showed “the level of camaraderie and bravery of those soldiers involved.”

Now that the full MoD report on the mission is out, however, we learn that it was a tale of “poor training, confusion and friendly fire“. In the midst of the chaos, a British gunner had opened fire and shot another soldier dead. “A devastating board of inquiry report released by the Ministry of Defence exposed a catalogue of errors,” said the Guardian.

Of course most papers buried this news, and the Sun managed to tell it as a story of “MoD betrayal“.

So – when will the British media learn not to take MoD press releases at face value?

Dave Crouch