22 November 2008
Crusading journalism - Fairness and balance, Fisk-style
25 May 2006
Commentary by Daniel McCabe: Te Waha Nui Online
AUT’s School of Communication Studies hosted Robert Fisk in March for a talk to the international aid community and student journalists. This article profiles Fisk’s independent role as a ‘reporter who’s allowed to say what I think’.
 |
|
Osama bin Ladin once said British journalist Robert Fisk was “one of your compatriots and co-religionists and I consider him to be neutral”.
In a video released to Al Jazeera in November 2004, bin Ladin said that Robert Fisk understood the reasons behind Al Qaeda attacks against America and had Fisk been given more coverage by US media the American people would have come to understand the truth.
Osama bin Ladin may well view Robert Fisk as “neutral”, but the neutrality of his writing has often been brought under scrutiny by critics. For every journalist with something positive to say about Robert Fisk there is another with something negative.
 |
|
One of the reasons for this is because Fisk writes what he thinks.
Robert Fisk has lived in the Middle East for 30 years and is correspondent for The Independent. He has seen innocent people murdered and seen the remains of women and children slain by American troops.
Fisk is engulfed in the problems in the Middle East, his grocer is Arab, his pharmacist is Arab, his network of friends are Arab. He writes from what he experiences first hand.
The New Zealand Herald published a review by Philip Knightley of Fisk’s book The Great War for Civilisation.
 |
|
“Fisk’s critics complain that he is not objective and detached. This is right. He is subjective and engaged. What’s wrong with that? We are talking here about different views on what journalists, especially foreign correspondents, are for,” Knightley wrote.
So what do we expect of journalists? Is it okay to only tell one side of the story? Journalism schools preach the importance of telling both sides of the story and abiding by the principle of fairness and balance.
Anita McNaught questioned Robert Fisk over the issue of fairness and balance in an episode of Eating Media Lunch Fisk said he was against the Western journalism ideal that you give both sides of the story equal say and can’t show any bias or passion.
“Everything has to be told in such a way that you detach yourself from the tragic events going on and I think this is a totally useless form of journalism.”
Robert Fisk’s definition of journalism used to be that journalists should be the “first impartial witnesses to history”. Then he met Amira Hass, an Israeli journalist, who convinced him that the role of journalists is to “monitor the centres of power”.
Ethan Bronner, of The New York Times, wrote that this idea of the role of journalist goes against the doctrines of journalism. “Mr Fisk seems to have decided that even striving for objectivity is silly.”
David Cohen writes for the National Business Review, The Guardian, and is a longstanding contributor to the Jerusalem Report - the major English-language Israeli magazine.
Cohen believes that Robert Fisk shouldn’t be identified as a reporter.
“I don’t think he is a reporter, primarily he’s somebody making an argument on behalf of the constituency he covers. He’s making an argument for Arabia and against the West - primarily the United States.”
Robert Fisk would disagree with Cohen. In defining his role, Fisk told Anita McNaught: “I’m a reporter, but I’m a reporter who’s allowed to say what I think.”
Fisk feels he should be able to write in both the news and the opinion pages. He likes passionate pieces of writing and believes he should be able to include his opinion in his reports. Fisk says that in day to day conversations people don’t merely crunch the numbers of the dead in Iraq, they express opinions and Fisk feels journalists should be able to do the same.
“We can’t lie. We can’t say the Americans dropped a bomb on a building when they didn’t. We can’t make things up. But surely there must be a way in which a reporter who is honoured, privileged to absorb so much information, to express what he thinks about it.”
The journalism ethic of fairness and balance is a practice that Robert Fisk doesn’t practice through his admittance that he shouldn‘t have to cover both sides of the story equally.
However, ignoring one side of the story means readers are only getting half the story. Fisk has vehemently criticised the US media for their coverage of the war in Iraq as being one-sided. Yet it has to be asked what coverage does Fisk give to American troops? What of these young men away from their families in a foreign land, fighting a war that hasn’t achieved much and has no end in sight? Fisk says he aims to put the focus on victims.
“Reporting the liberation of a concentration camp in Nazi Germany? Do I give equal time to the SS guards? No, I talk to the victims. When I report on a suicide bombing, am I going to give 50 per cent of the space to the Hamas spokesperson? I am not! I reported on the vileness of the suicide bombing and the victims and the terrible scenes.”
Yet after the World Trade towers were attacked it didn’t take Fisk long before launching an attack on American foreign policy. On September 12, 2001, Robert Fisk wrote an article outlining reasons behind the hatred of America.
Many have also criticised Fisk for the way he reflects Arabs as passive victims. Efraim Karsh says that Robert Fisk is too sympathetic to Palestinians, harsh against Israel, and unfairly places blame for the problems in the Middle East on the shoulders of the West.
Despite Robert Fisk admitting he doesn’t believe in covering both sides of the story equally, he still has a huge legion of followers.
However even Fisk’s fans can see a problem in the type of journalism he practices.
Geoffrey Wheatcrof, of The New York Times, wrote that Robert Fisk is an “honest man”, but has concerns with the personal opinion Fisk exerts in his writing. “Fisk’s brand of reporting-with-attitude has obvious dangers. His ungovernable anger may do his heart credit, but it does not make for satisfactory history.”
Lawrence Grossman, of The New Leader, writes that Fisk doesn’t leave interpretation in the hands of the reader. “He sees the journalist as a muckraker-taking sides, exposing the lies of governments, excoriating evildoers-in the hope that an aroused public will force changes.”
When questioned by Anita McNaught, Fisk denied that he is telling his readers how to feel.
“I’m telling them how I feel. The reporter is the nerve ending of the newspaper.”
Fisk went on to say that the best way to write stories is include your own passionate feelings as if you were writing to a friend. “You want the readers to be your friend, you want to convince them.”
Fisk refuted the claim he was in the same club of journalists as John Pilger and Michael Moore.
Yet they all do the same thing - sell their opinions to the public. Fahrenheit 911 sells Moore’s personal opinion through techniques you would associate with Hollywood films. This isn’t something you would associate with journalism but in an interview with the New Zealand Herald’s books editor, Linda Herrick, the comments by Fisk could make you think otherwise.
“Giving a lecture, it's a funny thing. It's not like you are just talking to the reader. It's about 30 per cent journalism, and 30 per cent being a lawyer, trying to convince the jury that you are right. Sometimes the audience is loaded on your side, but in America it is not always - you should see it.
“They are a much tougher audience so you have to be 30 per cent showbiz, get the humour right, get the jokes in right, pause at the right moment. And the rest is 10 per cent luck, depending on your audience.”
There are merits to Fisk’s crusading journalism, he has produced remarkable work. In this age, readers have to be so careful about who to believe and need to take in a variety of new sources.
- Daniel McCabe is a student journalist in AUT’s School of Communication Studies. This article was an ethics assignment in the Public Affairs Reporting paper.
- Robert Fisk on Wikipedia
- Anita McNaught interviews Robert Fisk on Eating Media Lunch, June 1, 2004, Transcript on Scoop
- Philip Knightley review of Robert Fisk’s book, The Great War for Civilisation
- Al Qaeda background at Wikipedia
- Other Media Ethics articles
