Thursday, March 29, 2007

Well I guess we're infidels, plain and simple.

Journalism; who, what, where, why, when, and how. As a distinct authority that is manifest through writing, Journalism is one of, if not, the oldest record of important events. The ability to write has allowed man to document and trace events that have been most important and influential to the development of society. According to Wikipedia (2007) “digitalization of news production and the diffusion capabilities of the internet are challenging the traditional journalistic professional culture” (par. 2). The monopoly of the press is quickly coming to a halt as participatory and/or citizen journalism allows the general public to publish and prodcue stories in between the cracks of professional media outlets. It is through this differentiation that deliberation has evolved. The ability of the group or the individual to enact attitude change has come a long way since the days of yellow journalism. Now, ordinary people are on the forefronts of journalism, reporting and uncovering what you and I may or may not read in the New York Times. However it is important to note that Blogging is not subject to direct editing, but rather indirect, through the eyes of those who read them. Therefore it is crucial to think critically while reading a blog, is what this person is saying biased or balanced, true or manufactured?

Wikipedia (2007) classifies print journalism as characteristic of “newspapers, news magazines, general interest magazines, trade magazines, hobby magazines, newsletters, private publications, online news pages and others” (par. 4). It has been through the facilitation of online and digital journalism that information can now be quickly spread and disseminated. Furthermore it is key to note that the growth of blogging has effected the media through the ability of blogs to “create news as well as report it, and blur the dividing lines between news and opinions” (“Journalism”, 2007, par. 15).

Thursday, March 29, 2007. The New York Times reports that the “U.S. Iraq Role Is called Illegal By Saudi King”, similarly JOSHUAPUNDIT writes that “The Saudis bash ‘illegitimate occupation’ as Bush’s Sunni Pals show their true nature”; here we have the same story, but different perspectives. You would have to have been living under a rock if you did not know that the United States’ role in Iraq has been a hotly contested issue. The aforementioned describes the fact that as of late it has been subject to direct criticism of the Saudi King, King Abdullah.

After reading the Times, I found that the article was very formal, objective, and displayed both sides of the argument. This article, by Hassan M. Fattah is clear and concise in its objective; that is to report the news. I feel this article is heavily influenced by the hope for peace in the Middle East; a fantasy at best for the moment. Nevertheless, Fattah writes that “King Abdullah said the loss of confidence in Arab leaders had allowed American and other forces to hold significant sway in the region.” This is important to note because the Saudis have been long standing allies with America, and King Abdullah’s recent cancellation of his state dinner at the White House has only tainted the disintegrating relationship between the two countries. Hassan also writes that Abdullah has “not publicly spoken so harshly about the American- led military intervention in Iraq before, and his alliance with Washington may be less harmonious than administration officials have been hoping.” This article concerns itself with the differing opinions of both governments rather than the putrid backlash that is sure to come. Similarly, I find it very interesting that Saudi interest views Israel soil as Arab soil as is written in the article. I find international politics to be somewhat interesting, like a chess game naturally. “The Saudis have seen that the ball is moving into the court of the democrats, and they want to extend their hand to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.”

On the other hand, JOSHUAPUNDIT’s blog is much more informal and seemingly more direct in its approach. After reading this blog I found it to be very unwavering in its focus. It was not characteristic of traditional media per say, but more subjective and analytical. It is catered to a particular viewpoint while at the same time provides enough background information to sustain an understanding. In their blog, JOSHUAPUNDIT writes in response to several comments made my King Abdullah that “unless they need us infidel slaves to take out Saddam or something.” Here JOSHUAPUNDIT mocks and takes advantage of the stereotype of westerners in the eyes of Arabs, that we are infidels. I highly doubt that I would read that in the New York Times, in fact, I did not. So no longer does freedom of the press mean those who have a press (Gilmour, 2004), but moreso who has a computer and access to the internet which almost everyone does. So journalism is no longer exlusive to Big Media, but rather the average who has some computer skills. The wroter also refers to King Abdullah as “the poster boy for the Bush administration.” Rightfully so, if that was written in the New York Times there would be serious reprocussions. First of all, if it even made it into print, not only the person who wrote it, but the person who allowed it to be published would most likely lose their job, hypothetically speaking. It is only on the internet that there is true freedom of the press. Not to be confused though, while some blogs are subject to an editorial hierarchy, “the editorial function has been adopted not just by bloggers, but by a host of new kinds of online news operations. Some peer-reviewed news sites, such as the collaborative Kuro5hin, which describes itself as tech­nology and culture, from the trenches, are doing interesting journalism by any standard, with readers contributing the essays and deciding which stories make it to the top of the page” (Gilmour, 2004). That is a very good point, that while it is important to moderate what is written in blogs, peoples’ minds and opinions cannot be controlled.

References

Gilmour, D. (2004). We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the people, for the people.
Retrieved March 29, 2007 from http://download.nowis.com/index.cfmphile=WeTheMedia. html&tipe=text/html.

Journalism. (2007, March 28). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:31, March 29, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Journalism&oldid=118575756.

2 comments:

Freedom Fighter said...

Greetings Mr. Perenfield. I'm glad you found my article of interest.

A few points:

1) First of all, I make no claim to being a `journalist' - in other words, rather than simply regurgitate what Reuters and the AP have to say on a given matter.

I am a commentator and an analyst, who prefers to use various sources - some in the media and some not- to draw some logical conclusions.

That's what I do.

2)One teensy weensy criticism.. I would appreciate, as a common courtesy that you link to the actual piece in question, like so:
J O S H U A P U N D I T: The Saudis bash `illegitimate occupation' as Bush's Sunni pals show their true nature

- so that people can read the piece for themselves and make their own minds up as to the meaning of what I wrote. This avoids misunderstandings, like the quote in your piece about King Abdullah being a `poster boy' for the Bush Administration as an Arab ally.

Out of context, it looks like I was referring to the SAUDI monarch, when the actual reference you cite was a comment on Jim Hoagland's revealing the tasty tidbit that JORDAN'S King Abdullah had declined a White House invite ( as has SAUDI King Abdullah)

3) I source almost everything on my site, except stuff that comes from confidential sources.

4)You are fully entitled to believe that people like the Saudis don't regard us as `infidels'. An historical examination of wahabism and Islam, and the actions of much of the Muslim world towards the West(and especially, the recent alignment of the Arabs and Iran at the Riyadh Summit)might lead a logical person to a somewhat different conclusion.

Welcome to the blogosphere..and good luck with your site!

Best Regards,

FF@ JoshuaPundit

Freedom Fighter said...

Sorry..Mr. Perello!!

mea culpa