 |
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
|
IntroductionFormer 'New York Times' columnist Leslie Gelb wrote in 1991 that "Croatia is known more for its fascists than for its democrats". Ironically, 'The New York Times' may be contributing more to the promotion of the idea of Croats as fascists than any other Western medium. Its narrow focus on Croatia's history, repeated emphasis on the negative elements and exclusion of the positive, has become an issue of serious concern to the Croatian Anti- Calumny Project. 'The New York Times' has consistently reported on Croatian history in a simplistic manner, portraying Croatia within the framework of its World War II Nazi puppet regime, exactly in the way that Belgrade's war propagandists would have it portrayed. 'The New York Times' consistently refers to the traditional Croatian checkered coat of arms as a fascist symbol, just as Belgrade propagandists do, knowing very well that the letter "U", and not the checkered shield, was the unique symbol of the Nazi puppet regime. 'The New York Times' has not written about the anti-fascist movement in Croatia, even though the Croatian people may have been the only European nation to liberate itself from the Axis occupation without direct Allied assistance. When the former Yugoslavia's anti-fascist movement is mentioned, it is usually mentioned as the domain of the Serbs. The anti-fascist movement in the former Yugoslavia, however, began in Croatia, was led by Croats, and its fighters were over-proportionately Croatian. The negative image of Croatians projected by 'The New York Times' may be affecting the quality of its reporting from the field. The number of Croatian sources quoted or referred to in 'The New York Times' comes into a distant third place after Serb and Bosnian Muslim sources, as shown in a survey of recent reporting from the region. Croatian points-of-view are, by comparison, almost excluded from public debate in 'The New York Times'. When Croats are quoted, they are typically outside the mainstream of Croatian political life. The Croatian Anti-Calumny Project believes that the problems discussed in this booklet raise serious questions about the quality and reliability of 'New York Times' reporting on Croatia and Croatians today. We believe that a major newspaper should be particularly wary of generalizations, misrepresentations and narrow historical perspectives that tend to promote prejudice against a people. The Croatian Anti-Calumny Project initially prepared this booklet as a means to inform and sensitize the editors and reporters of 'The New York Times' to issues of critical importance not only to the Croatian-American community but to the long-term credibility of 'New York Times' reporting on Croatia and about Croatians. The Croatian Anti-Calumny Project is grateful to the foreign desk of 'The New York Times' for its professional consideration and concern for the issues raised in the first edition of the booklet, prepared especially for 'The New York Times'. While this booklet focuses on 'The New York Times', the same analyses could be made of many other media in which similar generalizations and misrepresentations have appeared. The Croatian Anti-Calumny Project has printed this second edition of "Croatia and Croats in 'The New York Times'" with the aim of improving the quality of writing about Croatia and educating a larger group of readers about problems that are common in the media. Your questions and comments are welcome. Sve obavijesti o knjigama
mozete dobiti putem E-Mail adrese: |
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
