An example of emotive journalism, which has become journalism as such these days. Yes conflict is terrible, yes its victim include children, however with a proper analysis of the social/political causes of such conflict, without an analysis of the political grievances with are given violent expression through conflict, there cannot be; (a) a proper reporting of the facts and causes, and (b) a prescriptive ethic which seeks the cessation of political violence, in an attempt to broker peace. Jon Snows primary responsibility, as a journalist, is to political analysis, not to emotive suppositions that misunderstand the political root causes of a conflict situation. The reason is that such emotive journalism leads a simplistic Manichean duality of good/evil. All violence is immoral. All, not one kind or another, all. To make an emotive case for one kind being immoral, while the other is merely ineffectual (because it can only maim and not kill) is intellectual charlatanism. Of course there is no longer a place in mass media for the public intellectual, so instead of intellectual engagement we have pictorial dictions which, it is supposed, carry the force of an argument. The outcome is racism, anti-semitism, and sectarianism. That has been the outcome of all the reporting on Gaza, not a political argument and therefore not a political solution. Anti-intellectual journalism is the rot that has already set in, and Jon Snow has joined it ranks. I pity the poor Jewish residents in London who will suffer justified assaults because of this rot.
Posted on: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 08:40:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015