Eric Alterman, Center for American Progress
06/17/2005
A huge hole in American news coverage has long been international
affairs. After the attacks of 9/11, there was much hand wringing
and promises of more international coverage by both the print and
broadcast press in order to make up for the fact that most Americans
had no idea "why they hate us." Newsweek editor Fareed
Zakaria even wrote a long primer called "Why do they hate us?"
for the magazine on October 15, 2001, to try and lay it out, but
since then the media has apparently gone back to sleep.
Now, almost four years after the attacks that were supposed to "change
everything," most Americans are still largely unaware of anything
that happens internationally – save for regular body count
reports from Iraq and Afghanistan.
With Tony Blair's visit to Washington this week, one might think
that the stated goal of his mission – to get the president
to sign on to his agenda for next month's G8 conference and to press
Bush to support his agenda for the talks – might engender
some more international coverage. In a sense, it has, actually,
but as we've come to expect, the coverage has been lackluster.
Many news outlets got some of their facts wrong when writing about
the meeting. Regarding the president's pledge of money to aid the
needy in Africa (in response to Blair's plan to double international
aid to $50 billion), CNN.com explained, "The Bush administration
will announce plans to spend $674 million for 'humanitarian emergencies'
in Africa," noting that the money "will come on top of
about $1.4 billion the White House is spending on humanitarian needs
this year."
If only…. Alas, Congress had already approved the funding.
So while the president – and much of the media – treated
the statement as a new initiative, it has long been agreed upon.
The Washington Post even ran a headline Wednesday declaring that
"Bush, Blair Agree on Aid For African Famine Relief" as
if talks had actually taken place to agree on new funding.
What's worse, the Post erroneously reported that "Bush and
Blair trumpeted a new U.S. plan to spend $674 million more on famine
relief." Again, there is nothing "new" about the
plan, except for the fact that reporters felt briefly compelled
to write about it. And this in an age when the AIDS pandemic threatens
a generation of African men and women as perhaps no human plague
has ever done before.
But perhaps the most shocking omission of recent vintage is the
continuing non-coverage of the genocide in the Darfur region of
Sudan. The Bush administration has, if anything, exacerbated this
horrific human catastrophe, turning a blind eye to the horror in
exchange for Sudan's cooperation in its anti-al Qaeda efforts. It
is able to do so, politically, in part because the tragedy has been
unfolding for months with less coverage than a single day of testimony
at the Michael Jackson trial. True, it's a tough story to cover,
but it can be done, albeit with a bit of creativity.
One bright spot in this whole mess is a recent decision by the beleaguered
CNN to start ramping up its international coverage. On Monday, the
cable channel began airing domestically an hour of its international
news program "Your World Today," which airs on CNN International.
The newscast actually began with an in-depth report on the latest
developments in Sudan, noting that the International Criminal Court
announced that it would begin an investigation into possible war
crimes. After exploring the issues the ICC would have to contend
with, the anchors then interviewed Samantha Power, who recently
won a National Magazine Award for her New Yorker coverage of the
region.
It was refreshing to watch an intelligent, rational discourse on
serious issues without a "dissenting" view thrown in,
and without the requisite shouting match that so many alleged American
"news" programs have become.
Of course, examples of shoddy coverage of international issues in
the American media are easy enough to come by, and I could continue
to rattle them off. The real issue is: How can things get better?
After 9/11 the media promised to do a better job in helping Americans
to understand the world better – but it's obvious that it
has failed to live up to its promise.
Seeing just an hour of CNN devoted to these issues demonstrates
what a drought we face the other 23 hours of the day – and
how ill-prepared Americans are likely to be the next time we are
forced to ask, "Why do they hate us?"
|