« When the Hostilities Stop... | Main | The Fiasco of "Budding" Democracies in the Middle East »



I'm wondering about the implications of the IFJ's stance. On some level it may be part of the question as to what the outer borders of journalism really are. The European tradition of editorializing in "hard news" stories and other more experimental forms of journalism may translate to a greater acceptance of even edgier, or, in their words, "controversial" forms of journalism. It would be a shame if the slope is so slippery that propoganda masked as news becomes news in the eyes of journalistic associations. (I shudder to think of comparisons to Ruwandan radio stations, and those in Nazi controlled Europe. Should those also have come under protection, according to IFJ?). Edgier forms of journalism are important, and this decision sadly cheapens that necessary form.

The comments to this entry are closed.