        
|
|
The misrepresentation of the writings of
the historian Franjo Tudjman in light Published by DOMOVINA TT, Zagreb 1992 The "balanced" approach of World Press-ReviewAnother example of a "balanced" approach is an article from the American monthly magazine World Press Review on freedom of the press in twenty-four countries throughout the world in the year, 1991. The commentary on freedom of the press under the sub title "Yugoslavia" amounts to a total of eight sentences: Without doubt, the blackest of black spots for the press in 1991 was Yugoslavia.
Both sides in the Serbo-Croatian war appear to have deliberately singled out journalists
for attack. As many as 2O journalists were killed or wounded. On July 26, Egon Scotland, a
reporter for the Munich daily Suddeutsche Zeitung, was shot dead near Glina in Croatia -
allegedly by Serbian insurgents. Stjepan Penic, a radio-producer and correspondent for the
Croatian newspaper Glas Slavonije, was reportedly murdered by Serbian nationalists. Pierre
Blanchet, 47, a correspondent for the French newsmagazine Le Nouvel Observateur, and
Damien Rudin, a Swiss radio reporter, were killed by a land mine. Peter Brysky, a
freelance Canadian photographer, was killed by a mortar shell south of Zagreb. Serbian
rebels in the field, whose only information comes from Belgrade's state-run press, believe
that non Serbian journalists are either Croatian or German agents. World Press Review emphasizes its "balanced" approach by asserting that "both sides" attack journalists. However, World Press Review does not list a single case in which the Croatian side even reportedly killed journalists. Cases are mentioned in which the Serbian side reportedly killed journalists and the reason why the Serbian side considers journalists to be enemies is also mentioned (their only information comes from Belgrade's state-run press and therefore they "believe that non-Serbian journalists are either Croatian or German agents"). Where then is it shown that "both sides" have attacked journalists? Is the Croatian side to blame because journalists are perishing in Croatia? But the Croats did not choose to carry on a war in Croatia, which World Press Review itself acknowledges by speaking of "the Serbo-Croatian war," and not "the Croatian-Serbian war." Finally, how much does the case of the journalists who perished in Croatia really fit the headline about "free press?" The journalists perish not because of lack of freedom of the press, but because of a war that was forced on Croatia. It is not only journalists who are perishing. As far as freedom of the press in Croatia is concerned (World Press Review does not write about it), it is enough to glance into the Zagreb weekly magazine Danas or into Globus to see texts which express a variety (sometimes a surprising variety under the circumstances) of political perspectives. The articles very often criticize the political moves of Tudjman's government. Censorship has been introduced on reporting of military matters because this is a step which the most democratic countries take when they are at war. Thus, censorship on reporting on the Gulf War was introduced in the USA too. If one can judge from the stories sent to American newspapers from Croatia, foreign journalists there are not even forced to adopt a "pool" system like the one imposed during the Gulf War.
|
||||||
|| Povratak na vrh stranice||
Povratak na Home Page || O HIC-u || Vijesti || Usluge ||
|
