Warning this is long... but interesting.

Here is the link to this conversation

I admire Christiane Amanpour a lot because of her style of reporting. But this interview caught my attention because of her talking about the kind of news reporting we are getting today is halfa$$ed to say the least and I agree with her. It's hard to tell what the real story is when you get the commentators opinion or bias instead of the facts. Very interesting what she has to say about Iran. I'll post part of it here and you can go read the rest if you like. I started it here on page 4 because it's about Iran.


LESLEY: That brings me back to Iran, because I wonder – this is always asked of me as a reporter – what are your biases? What are your opinions? How hard is it for you to cover anything in Iran, given your own family background?

CHRISTIANE: I understand people asking that question, but I always reject it. I really … I ask people just to look at my body of work. And nobody knows my biases. Do they think I’m against? Do they think I’m for? They don’t know my biases. They don’t know where I come from in this. I just try very hard to report the facts and to tell the stories as best as I can. I am not part of the current crop of opinion journalists or commentary journalists or feelings journalists. I strongly believe that I have to remain in the realm of fact, and from there delve deeper into a society. And I will say one thing very clearly: The lack of information about Iran, in the United States especially but also in the rest of the world, in a way makes my job … it’s sort of like an open well to plumb because anything I say, you know at least increases people’s awareness of what’s going on. And I think the one thing that I have really tried to do over the last now 19 years of covering Iran as a reporter, is try to go beyond the inevitable cliché and the stereotype, which is found strongest in the United States, because the U.S. bases its relationship and its knowledge about Iran on 30 years ago, and has very little impartial reporting to go on. And that’s what I try. But you look right now, if you just look at the television screens right now, all the so-called experts on Iran, 99 percent, are exiles based in the United States, have their own experience, their own history and their own agenda. And so that makes it very difficult for anybody to get a really clear view of what’s going on. That’s what I believe.

LESLEY: Well, let me ask you then about the state… of where objective journalism is heading.

CHRISTIANE: Yes.

LESLEY: I come out of the same background that you do. I always – I guess the right word is to say, sat on my own opinions because we do have our opinions, you can’t deny that. But I tried as hard as I could to overcome them and to be as impartial a reporter as possible. But I find as I look out on television, and even in my reading, that there’s less and less a market for that kind of reporting. The future seems to be with people who slant their stories. Even my own child, whom I put in that younger generation, says she hates reporting that doesn’t tell her where the correspondent is coming from. And I think she’s representative.

CHRISTIANE: She may be, and she’s obviously reacting to something that’s growing like wildflower now in our business. But the thing is, I get afraid when I read something and I just don’t know – is that the fact, is that the truth, is that somebody’s political bias, or somebody’s cultural bias? And that frightens me. Of course there’s a major role for opinion commentary and there has been since time immemorial. But I strongly think that unless we are able to present people with the objective facts of what’s going on, how are they meant to know what is going on? For instance, right now in Iran I’m telling you with confidence that nobody knows what’s going on there, really, because when you’re just getting Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, amateur videos – and no explanation, no reporting – you just don’t know what’s going on. It’s speculation, it’s guesswork, it’s patchwork.
CHRISTIANE (CONT’D): Now, people may think that makes an interesting movie, but it’s not fact and it’s not the reality, and it doesn’t show you or help you understand where this is going. And I can see that because – and I don’t know where this is going, because even though I’ve been there, even though I wouldn’t even tell you where it was going if I was standing in Iran right now – but I have heard commentary on American television that suggests that there’s a green revolution taking place, or a cyber revolution, or something. And it’s just words that are flung around by people who’ve never been there and who probably do have their own opinions, but have no idea what’s going on on the ground. And I find that – I actually find it dangerous. It’s dangerous to our society, it’s damaging. It might be interesting but it’s not the reality.

LESLEY: Well, you know, I’m listening to you and I would think in general that those kinds of reporting – little snippets of things, people spouting off, whatever – is not helpful. But when you’re dealing with a situation where even one of the finest reporters in the world, which is you, would say to me, "Even I don’t know really what’s going on" —

CHRISTIANE: Well, yes, and it’s a fact. I don’t know how many people are gathered in any square at any given time. And there are so many conflicting reports. And I speak the language and I know where to go on the websites. People don’t even know which website is speaking for Mousavi.

LESLEY: Right.

CHRISTIANE: Did he say that, "I’m prepared for martyrdom," as Facebook said? Or did he make a much more rational speech to the people as we’re now told the official website says? And even now the website is being slowed down and closed down, and it’s difficult to get access to it. You know, people want to believe that they know everything sitting back and just watching, or interpreting for themselves, without any parameter, without any knowledge or information or any experience.

LESLEY: But you would admit that if we didn’t have the Twittering and the people doing little tiny, short reports with their cell phones, we would actually know less than we know.

CHRISTIANE: That’s true. That’s true. But I still am not prepared to say that we know exactly what’s going on. There’ve been accounts of Twitter being hacked, of Facebook being hacked … just look at Jim Sciutto, who’s been all over CNN for days and probably his own air, saying that his own account was hacked and false messages were being sent out. No there isn’t a sure way, and that’s why there is no – in my view there is no substitute for honest-to-goodness, on-the-ground reporting, eyes and ears, by professionals who have a code of conduct. And that’s to verify –

LESLEY: Well what do you do when they start, one, throwing out people –

CHRISTIANE: Well, you have to base a little bit on, obviously, on what you can get. But you have to always put umpteen warnings out that we can’t verify practically 99 percent of it. On the other hand, I’m not dismissing – and nor would I ever – the bravery of those people who are going out there and taking their cell-phone films and the ingenuity of this highly tech society there, which is getting the word out. I’m just saying that as journalists we can’t verify it all.

LESLEY: Let’s go back to you for a minute. You had been the person, for years and years, I think for almost 20 years, who whenever there was any atrocity in the world, whether it be war or genocide or refugees fleeing, desperate poverty, you were the first one on the ground. And then you would stay for a long time and –
CHRISTIANE: Yes.

LESLEY: – do your reporting and, as I said before, you have accomplished a body of work that’s one of the finest ever, certainly in broadcast journalism. But I’m wondering what the effects have been on you. You have spent the better part of 20 years watching such horrors. Do you have nightmares? Do you –

CHRISTIANE: You know, it’s several effects. One the one hand I know and I’m sure that I have a comfort level in being able to operate in those situations. When I say comfort level, I don’t mean it as comfortable, but I’ve managed to be in those situations and as they get progressively worse and more dangerous, and I get older and more experienced, I’m able to, I think, report and be able to make judgments that are based on experience and am able, I hope, to be able to give real credible reporting and information. And, again, that’s why I think this job is so important, to be able to spend time and get that experience, and then be able to report through a prism of 20 years of experience. So that’s the one thing. In terms of how it hurts and harms, yeah, you know, it does. Yes, I find it very difficult to witness the incredibly heartbreaking things that we do, and it gives me not so much nightmares when I’m asleep, but when I’m awake it gives me, you know, flashbacks and moments of poignancy, which I sometimes stop and think about, and I get emotional. But usually when I’m actually doing it, a different imperative kicks in, and this is, I know I have to keep my wits about me, I have to use my experience, I have to use my calm that somehow I have managed to keep about me, to be able to report, and increasingly, now, to hold the line against a deluge of anchors and so forth, experts and analysts who have their own theories. And they come at you with questions on the air, and I just have to stand very still, very calm, and report what’s actually happening, not what they wish was happening, or that they think was happening.

LESLEY: Have you ever said on the air, to one of these people, "Are you out of your mind?"

CHRISTIANE: Not in so many words, but I’ve implied it.

LESLEY: You implied it. OK, very diplomatic. Now you have a child. You have Darius. How old is he now?

CHRISTIANE: Darius is nine now.

LESLEY: Nine!

CHRISTIANE: Yes.

LESLEY: And you have said that that’s changed you a little.

CHRISTIANE: Oh, a lot. It made me more sensitive, perhaps, to the plight of children out there, and to the depths of the humanitarian woes that are out there. But it’s also made it more difficult. I don’t want to be away from my son and I think every mother understands that. And so it has made it more difficult. But I strongly believe that – I really do, and I don’t think it’s just professional nonsense or self-serving, you know, claptrap – I strongly believe that the strong democracy and a strong society needs a strong, independent, fair and rigorous class of journalists, a professional class. And without it your country wouldn’t be the same, my country wouldn’t be the same, Iran, many of the emerging democracies wouldn’t be the same. I think strong journalism is what carries us through these crises and these problems in the world, because we are out there trying to bring the truth, and holding those who need to be held accountable, accountable. And I think that’s just … you can’t do without.
LESLEY: As a person, obviously, who’s carrying the banner for good, old-fashioned, hard-leather reporting, let me ask you about this New York Times reporter, David Rohde.

CHRISTIANE: Yes.

LESLEY: Rohde was held captive in Pakistan for seven months and not only did The New York Times, his home newspaper, never report it, The New York Times went out and persuaded virtually every single other news organization, including CNN, not to report it. This is astonishing in every way. What are your opinions on that? Should we have reported this, in your view?

CHRISTIANE: I would love to talk to David about this and see what he thought. I don’t know The New York Times’s reasoning on that and I don’t know what they know that we didn’t know, in terms of who they were dealing with.

LESLEY: Let me interrupt for one second. Because Bill Keller, the executive editor of The New York Times, said last night that David Rohde thanked him and he was grateful. So that’s what David Rohde thinks. But, of course, no one knew that. No one knew what he thought at the time.

CHRISTIANE: Well, I can only assume that The New York Times wasn’t doing anything nefarious and that they were doing what they thought they should do for his safety.

LESLEY: Right.

CHRISTIANE: There are many people who have said, certainly with the Taliban, the more the plight of a kidnappee was publicized, the longer that he would be kept and the more money would be asked for him. That, for sure, I’ve heard for businesspeople who’ve been kidnapped, and others in Afghanistan. I’m just delighted it seems that David escaped. I’m glad he was able to do that. Seven months is a heck of a long time. Remember, though, back in the ’80s when people like Terry Anderson were kept. I think he was kept for six years or so. But there’s a double-edged sword toward how to behave when one of your own is taken in. Some people think that excessive publicity harms them; others think that it shows those people that they’re holding somebody who they need to release; that it is a journalist, that it’s not a spy, that it’s not anybody else – it’s a journalist. It works different ways in different places.

LESLEY: Well, it was a toughie, but I’m with you. I’m just so glad that David Rohde is out and free, alive and healthy and all of that.

CHRISTIANE: If I’m kidnapped I want you, personally, to lead the charge and make sure people know about it.

LESLEY: You do? You would want –

CHRISTIANE: I do, actually. I do.

LESLEY: Well it’s a big debate here now and we’ll see where it leads. There are troubling aspects to it because you and I know that we’ve been trained that our first obligation is to the public, and we should report whatever we know. So when there are exceptions to that it needs to be explored and looked at and discussed, and I hope we do more of that.

CHRISTIANE: I think, in these instances, you also have to think about the security of the person involved, and I think there are many people who advise … and we don’t always get it right, but who knows? Look at poor Daniel Pearl – how much publicity was done. I’m not saying it would have worked a different way, but he was beheaded. You know, I don’t know what would’ve happened. On the other hand, Roxana Saberi’s case was heavily publicized and she was released because the president of the United States basically said that she was not a spy for the U.S., and the Iranian government, the president of Iran, Ahmadinejad – who’s now such a lightning rod – he’s the one who told the judiciary in so many words to basically get her out.
LESLEY: Christiane, before we let you go, I know that you’re starting a new program on CNN and I’ve been waiting anxiously for it. Tell us all about it. Will we be able to see it in the United States?

CHRISTIANE: Well, in short, it’s going to be five days a week, five nights a week, on CNN International, which, if you have the right cable system, you can see in the U.S. But it will be one day a week in CNN in America as well, and that’s great. As far as I’m concerned the more foreign news and the more understanding about our complicated world for Americans, the better. It’ll be hopefully bringing my 20 years’ experience in the field into the studio, but also we’ll travel the program. And it’ll be an attempt to put a big issue of the day, or of the week, or whatever, in context, in perspective, and really dig deeper – which is not happening anywhere on television right now. Except, of course, on "60 Minutes, Lesley.

LESLEY: And when will it start?

CHRISTIANE: It’s starting mid-September. I don’t know the precise date, but it’s mid-September.

LESLEY: Alright. Well everybody who’s reading this interview will be anxiously awaiting, and thank you. I know you’re in London. Come home. You live in New York now.

CHRISTIANE: I’m away for the summer, working and spending some time with my family.

LESLEY: Alright. Well we’ll see you in September.

war and peace

I've always known 24 hour news was most BS. Its not news, its FARK

Admittedly, I didn't read the whole thing. But my take on the current state of journalism is this. The story is written first. Then the "reporter" goes out to find anything or anyone who will back up the story.

The next problem is this "equal time for both sides" bullsh!t. Which results in a "reporter" just regurgitating what he/she is told by individuals on either side of an issue.

The last problem is money. Reporters work for for profit organizations. What sells is what goes on the air. Ratings are king. Not truth.

The days of a real reporter going out and collecting facts, then reporting what the findings are are gone. Very sad.

yeah instead of fitting the story to the facts they fit the facts to the story

I dig Christiane though

I'll read this later

all this micheal jackson orgy of adoration has given me a headache

Bingo

Well that is pretty much what she said. I remember the last time I was watching a documentary she hosted (i think that is the word) I couldn't help thinking to myself.. but what do you think Christine..

See? I have been conditioned like many to expect comments from the person giving the news. It's much like gossip. Though I am keenly aware that what we have today is not news, it is however exactly what the people want or it would not be that way.

For instance, people who hang on ever word coming out of Rush, love him because he caters to their prejudices and bias, just as every other source of talk or news. HOw is one supposed to know the real deal, they don't, period.

I used to find my self yelling at the screen, Shut the F up and just tell me what happened. I haven't had tv in 4 months now. I am so calm compared to when I have it. I think I will suspend it another 6 months.

Yes, yes, love straight forward approach, and her honesty. Micheal Jackson? I must have missed it, probably good that I did..

Hey boo. I have 300 channels or whatever and I watch about 5. We need a la carte TV.

During the height of the Junior Bush era, I started watching Countdown with Keith. A show like his was necessary to help balance the prevailing sentiment in the news media, which for the most part was the kissing of Junior's ***. However, now, even his show does not fairly represent the truth, though I admittedly tend to agree with his points of view. Even though I tend to agree with his points of view, I still want the facts and want them fairly presented.

Don't get me wrong. If the choice is believing what Fox Noise Channel says and what MSNBC says, I'm going with MSNBC. It just would be nice to return to the days when news was news regardless of the source.