        
|
|
Four Recurring Problems in New York Times Reporting on Croatia by Zlatko Batistich Four Recurring problems in New York Times reporting on the situation in Croatian are: (1) implied acceptance of the Yugoslav government's explanation of the causes of the war; (2) unbalanced selection of quotations; (3) unbalanced reporting of recent attacks; and, (4) unbalanced presentation of relevant history. A recent New York Times article provides examples of each type of problem - "Croatia: The Once and Future Battleground?" by S. Kinzer, October 10, 1993 (referred to as the sample article). 1. Implied acceptance of the Yugoslav government's explanation of the warExamples from the sample article: a. "In 1991... Serbs in Croatia rose in rebellion
against the new Croatian government." The above quotations suggest that the writer accepts the Yugoslav government's explanation of the causes of the current war. According to this explanation, Serbs in Croatia rebelled against the new Croatian government because of fear that they would be oppressed. They sought independence in reaction to an alleged threat from the Croatian government. In the Croat view and in the view of many in the international community, the war has different causes. In this view, through popular elections Croats lawfully rejected the communist system in favor of democratic reforms. The war began when Serb leaders in Belgrade sought to keep Croatia and the other former Yugoslav republics within a Serb-dominated Yugoslavia. The attempt to hold on to Slovenia failed. In Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, however, they succeeded in taking large among of territory often by means of genocide. Under this view, the occupation of one third of Croatia is not the result of a Serb rebellion "helped" by the Yugoslav Army, but of the Yugoslav government's failed attempt to keep Croatia within Yugoslavia by means of (1) local proxies and (2) the Yugoslav Army. The sample article implicitly rejects this view. 2. Unbalanced selection of quotationsExamples from the sample article: Quotation of Slobodan Jarcevic The article quotes three Serbian leaders, two UN officials, a UN report and un-named European ambassador. While the article is about the situation in Croatia, it does not quote even one Croat. As in previous articles, the story of the situation in Croatia is thus told principally in the words of non-Croatians, often Serbs. The writer's assertions about the views and intentions of Croats or Croat leaders are not supported by any actual quotations, raising the possibility that the writer did not speak with any Croats in preparing the article, or simply decided not to quote them. 3. Unbalanced reporting of recent attacksExamples from the sample article: a. Serbs refused to give up their tanks and artillery and
have not allowed the return of a single refugee." From the above, it appears that while Serbs only failed to allow the return of refugees, Croats committed mass murder. The article makes no mention of the mass killing of Croat civilians by Serbs which led to the occupation of nearly one-third of Croatia, or of the frequent attacks by Serbs against civilian targets resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Croats since the ceasefire of January, 1992. The author makes it a point to highlight one alleged Croat attack on Serbs in a particular town, but seems to be unaware of any of the attacks against Croats in and around Serb-occupied areas of Croatia. While mentioning purported fears of the Krajina Serbs, the article gives little or no indication of the very real fears among people in the areas subject to their attacks, of the constant threat to Croatia's security, or of the resulting harm to Croatia's economy. 4. Unbalanced presentation of relevant historyExample from the sample article: "And history is not comforting. Between 1941 and 1945, the pro- Nazi Ustashe regime that ruled Croatia was responsible for killing tens of thousands of Serb civilians." The article finds atrocities committed against Serbs some fifty years ago to be relevant in explaining the present situation. Yet it does not find atrocities committed against Croats by the Serbian regime in the last two and half years to be worth mentioning. It also does not mention the fact that, during World War II, Serbian Chetniks and Serbia's pro-Nazi Nedic regime participated in the mass murder of Croats, Muslims and Jews. The article explains alleged Serbian fears of a democratically elected Croatian government partly by reference to a puppet government that existed during World War II. At the same time, the article fails to explain Croatia's desire to defend itself against the regime in Belgrade today, which has not only resurrected despicable ideas of ethnic purity, but has acted on them violently. These four types of problems occur regularly in New York Times reporting on the situation in Croatia. As in the sample article, such problems often result in a misleading or one-sided representation of current events in Croatia. Sve obavijesti oknjigama mozete dobiti putem
E-Mail adrese: |
|||
|| Povratak na vrh stranice|| Povratak
na Home Page || O HIC-u || Vijesti || Usluge || |
