POW: Robert Fisk

Here is a very good lecture by Robert Fisk, sponsored by Georgetown’s Center for International and Regional Studies from about a year ago.  He discusses how western and US media in particular have become subservient to government authority, and how that perverts public discussion of foreign policy.  The themes will be familiar to fans of Glenn Greenwald, but it is more powerful hearing about them from someone inside and “on the ground” among foreign correspondents.

Worth listening to for the story of the soldier from the 82nd airborne 33 minutes in.

Walter Pincus Essay

Via DeLong, Here is an essay by Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus.  Much good stuff.  The nutshell thesis:  Modern journalists have shied away from the necessary and valid role they play in influencing the federal government.

Pincus attributes this phenomenon to the pursuit of objectivity, to the desire to stay above the conflict of ideas.  That may go a long way as explanation, but I'd throw in something else. 

It seems to me that people are extremely pessimistic about the capability and utility of the federal government.  There is a sense that the major social conflicts and tensions such as poverty, race relations, and terrorism cannot be solved or even improved by government.  The gospel of Reagan.  And if the government is going to get it wrong no matter what, then who cares what it does?  Maybe journalists trivialize politics because they cannot imagine it having more then trivial significance.

Off the Record

Here is a critique of a critique dealing with the quote that got Obama aide Samantha Power canned. Greenwald breathes fire because American journalists tend to give more room to interviewees when it comes to declaring 'off the record' then British journalists.

Boiled down, the question is who has the power to decide what is off the record? The British style clearly assigns the right to the journalist, an interviewee may offer a comment with the condition that it not be quoted, the interviewer can accept or reject the condition and the interviewee responds accordingly. The American style seems to assign the right of determination to the interviewee. The interview is conducted with interviewee indicating as they go what is off the record or on, and the journalist just follows their instructions.

That's a pretty big difference in relative power. Has it always been this way?