We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Media casualties A Reuters journalist Taras Protsyuk from Ukraine, has been killed and three Reuters colleagues injured after a shell from a U.S. tank hit the media hotel where they were working. A Spanish journalist for a seperate news organisation was also hurt, Reuters reports.
The rollcall of good and experienced reporters for organisations like ITN, Channel Four, Reuters, the Atlantic Monthly and others is long and depressing. Yes, I know these folk had a choice to work in dangerous places, but it doesn’t make their deaths any less sad. May these fine news gatherers rest in peace.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
According to this report a reporter for al-Jazeera was killed too, and another injured.
“They died so that others might know the truth…” which like themselves is often a casualty in this war. Unfortunately in their case the sword proved to be mightier than the pen.
Unfortunately, we know that the enemy uses women, children and reporters as human shields. And they’re starting to dress in womens’ clothing. We know at least 1 hotel is above a bunker, if not this one.
If they knew the thugs were there, they had 2 choices, leave or lose their objectivity and take them down.
Does anyone have any stats on how many, if any, journalists were killed in the first Gulf War. While the concept of “embedded reporters” didn’t yet exist, I would think being an embed is actually safer than wandering around in a war zone by yourself. At least as an embed you would have a platoon of soldiers or Marines to help keep you out of trouble.
Also, I find it bothering that the media is spending so much time mourning killed journalists, yet our own troops seem to get only a passing mention in the news. I completely understand that journalism, at least in the US, is a relatively small field, so most major journalists have at least met or know of their peers. But they must realize that to the public, the attention devoted to a dead reporter seems like narcissim when a dead Marine, who is no less of a person, warrants a mere five second mention on the 6:00 news.
Gregory, just because I mentioned the journalists in questions hardly means I am obsessed with their plight at the expense of the soldiers and ordinary folk of Iraq. I am a reluctant supporter of the campaign precisely in order to make the world a tad safer and give the Iraqis a break.
As a journalist myself, I guess I wanted to express solidarity with the friends, colleagues and family of the departed. Come on Mr Litchfield, accept my sentiments in the spirit they were meant rather than feel obliged to pile in with a “narcissist” jibe. That is both mean and misses the point.
So many journalists dead, and none of them Robert Fisk…there is no God.
On one side, a group of armed people fighting to the death for their cause.
On the other side, a group of armed people fighting to the death for their cause.
In the middle, a)civilians caught up in the conflict b)journalists making money and advancing their career by filming other people’s misery.
And who complains the most when they are hurt?
Zack, my comments to Gregory above apply to yours as well.
If you are dead, how can you complain, exactly? The journalist organisations I know of – and I know quite a few of the colleagues of the dead – accept the risks.
Oh well, it seems you cannot express words of sympathy for the dead and their loved ones these days without some folk trying to make a snarky remark. Signs of the times.
Johnathan, the fellow feeling of one journalist to another is not shared by folks outside that magic circle.
Perhaps you should bear in mind that not all of the sniping at the coalition forces has come from people with guns.
It is understandable that the media should feel strongly about the death of journalists and cameramen, however, if they are as professional as they like to claim they would manage their grief and not give such prominence to this handful of deaths.
Fair do’s! It is bad that anyone is killed. I just feel the media want their cake and eat it.
If you go into a war zone then don’t be surprised if you get hurt. Heat, kitchen.
You guys still don’t get it, do you? My original post was an expression of sadness, and I made it clear those guys chose to be there. I was not asking for special favours for the media. Quite the reverse. Unlike the Robert Fisks of this world, whom I despise, I have written before about the victims of Saddam, and the rightness of taking his vile regime down. Maybe you guys did not notice.
What the heck is wrong with expressing sorrow? As a pro-war libertarian blogger, I can hardly be accused of cry-baby attitudes, for crissakes.
These comment bars are sure flushing out some charming folk, aren’t they?
Zack, sorry if I went over the top on the last one. BTW, I endorse 100 pct what a lot of bloggers like Andrew Sullivan – and now our own Navy – have said about the BBC’s outrageous biased coverage of the campaign.
Man. It’s getting so you can’t post a memorial thread to idealistic American youth without some cynical wag wondering what Rachel Corrie was doing in front of that bulldozer, anyhow.