Damn.. I guess those Euros really are getting "teh Real NooWz"

story.news.yahoo.com/news...r_coverage (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031230/ap_on_re_eu/france_war_coverage)

the only thing neutral in this world lately is MJ's skin color.

Have press ever been neutral or objective?

Not as far as I know.

The book, "La Guerre a Outrances" (The War of Outrages)
Really bad translation, "outrance" means "excess" and not "Outrage".
criticizes the French reporting for continually predicting the war would end badly for the U.S.-led coalition.
lolz?
Anyone on Earth would have think coalition could lose this war?? I want the same drug this guy is smoking. :(

"Readers can't understand why the Americans won the war," Hertoghe said in a telephone interview. "The French press wasn't neutral."
Of course dude, of course... Not to mention probably less than 20% of the population is reading news papers daily.

I agree that you hardly have "neutral" news anywhere, but this guy... "Frenchies were thinking Iraq would win because Le Monde was posting more about Bush than Saddam". :lol
Definitely I want the same dope.

And once again the failure to know what a continent and country is... Gotta love it.

'Reporter Alain Hertoghe's book accused the French press of not being objective in its coverage of the U.S.-led war in Iraq'

- Well that summed it up for me.
Coming from the Yanks.

Gold.

In Germany, an independant Media watchdog group, Medien Tenor, has produced a report, to be released next month, on the Television reporting of the conflict in Germany, Britain and France. IT focuses on the Germanys two main state funded Channels, finding the US was treated in negative and unfair manner.
A draft of the report, underwritten in part by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, says of the state networks: "After assuming a position of sharp criticism of American military actions, abandoned only after their increasing success, and after fixating on the Iraqis as suffering victims, they created a representation of the war in line with the position" of the German government. It continues, "Critical questions concerning the extent to which the unrelenting German position contributed to theed Roman Catholic daily newspaper.
.
The newspaper's management justified the dismissal, Hertoghe said in an interview, by contending that the book demonstrated his opposition to La Croix's editorial line, damaged the reputation of the newspaper and the authority of its chief editors and questioned the professional ethics of some of the paper's staff members.
.
Hertoghe's book covers the performance of four national newspapers and France's largest regional daily over a three-week period in March and April. It contends that the coverage was ideological, in line with the French government's position opposing the United States, and that it was desirous of portraying a great catastrophe for the Americans.
.
Largely ignored in the newspapers that it finds at fault, the book fits into an emerging series of critical analyses in Europe of the European news media's treatment of the war. In Britain, attention has focused on what has been described as the British Broadcasting Company's biased position against British participation.
.
In Germany, an independent media watchdog group, Medien Tenor, has produced a report, to be released next month, on the performance of television reporting of the conflict in Germany, Britain, the United States and other countries. It focuses notably on Germany's two main state-financed channels, finding that the United States was treated negatively.
.
A draft of the report, underwritten in part by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, says of the state networks: "After assuming a position of sharp criticism of American military actions, abandoned only after their increasing success, and after fixating on the Iraqis as suffering victims, they created a representation of the war in line with the position" of the German government. It continues, "Critical questions concerning the extent to which the unrelenting German position contributed to the escalation of the conflict were thus kept from public scrutiny."
.
Criticism by Iraqis and Americans of the war "dominated the coverage" of the ZDF state channel's main newscasts, the group said. America's decision to go to war, it said, was juxtaposed by German television, "with the supposedly unanimous opposition of the rest of the world."


controlling the situation. The difference between Le Monde and Le Figaro was that Le Figaro insisted that American tanks would operate easily on Baghdad's wide streets."
.
"Then when the Americans made their move, we read how they were massacring the Iraqis. The explanation for the collapse was that Saddam's fedayeen had so much compassion for the population that they stopped fighting."
.


A lot of Americans have the perception that the BBC is anti-American. British Conservative Party spokesman Alan Duncan says I'm wrong.

I am not wrong, and the BBC is anti-American. It's why they called Prime Minister Tony Blair "George Bush's poodle".

It's why they declared America arrogant in a worldwide survey it just completed.

You there, America... do you feel arrogant, or just put upon by a worldwide weasel coalition?

There are countless other examples, but take a quote or two from this piece by BBC Washington correspondent Justin Webb:

"Americans, remember, still go to church."

This is a common theme of British anti-Americanism, that President Bush professes a faith in God and worse, Americans also do in great numbers. For the BBC, that seals the case.

Webb goes on about President Bush…

"President Bush… flew (aboard a U.S. aircraft carrier) on a Navy jet, emerging with his flight suit on, looking for all the world like the Top Gun that he never was."

The host of the American-is-arrogant special from the BBC actually said, "Let's talk about American culture, if you can call it that."

This smarmy, dandified, condescending and dare I say "arrogant" attitude is shared by about 35% of the British people, and is rife within the BBC.

Keep bleeting little Sheep..
Mehhhhh
Mehhhhh

And once again the failure to know what a continent and country is... Gotta love it.

Heh. Sure. Becasue, you know, France, Germany, and England aren't the 3 biggest powers in Europe. And they aren't a huge part of the European population.

I love it: worldwide weasel coalition!

i checked the site of medien tenor group, there is nothing about the gulfwar written.

check yourself ;)
whoever wrote the article you pasted in , must have secret sources or taken some information out of context.


www.medien-tenor.de/index1.html (http://www.medien-tenor.de/index1.html)

Medien Tenor, has produced a report, to be released next month,

anyway

Please take a minute to visit this important post from Davids Medienkritik (German and English). It concerns a discussion session that was held at Harvard with German journalists who are stationed in the US. Excerpt (quoting a Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung article):

Five topics seem to be particularly popular: The stupid President, the American's human-rights violations, the dysfunctional American democracy, the crass materialism of the Americans and the failure of the American media, a media often described in Germany with the word "Gleichschaltung" meaning the entire US media takes one uniform line.

It's this part of the bias that really gets me. I've long accepted that the German media is pathologically obsessed with President Bush as a person -- one might say I'm "over that" and it no longer raises my ire (only my disdain). But this view of the American media as towing the line is so astonishing and so out of touch with the facts that I can only assume that those who propagate it know that they are telling an enormous lie and are doing so in order to assist the cause of a blatant and irrational anti-Americanism. It is both a lie -- in the sense that it is simply untrue -- and it is incredibly misleading in that it suggests that there is a greater variety -- a wider and more diverse spectrum -- of media and political opinion here in Europe. That is truly a laughable assertion.

One more point: it's important that you understand the severity of the use of the word "Gleichschaltung." Germans who hear and use that word do not think of it simply as we do when we say "taking a uniform line". It is being used in this case to deliberately compare the United States with Germany's National Socialist Regime. Specifically, "Gleichschaltung" is the German word used most often to characterize the first several years (beginning in 1933) after Hitler's ascendancy to the Chancellery. During this period, the National Socialist party concentrated on taking over or removing all social institutions within the country. As just one example, the Hitler Youth movement (forcibly) replaced the many previously-existing youth clubs and organizations which had been so popular since the late 19th century.

If Germans actually believe that it is rational to compare their 1933 with our 2003, then they are not only fooling themselves about the United States, but they are also allowing themselves to minimize their own history. If other European countries were alert to this fact, they would be (and should be) rather alarmed at seeing such a trend

'Becasue, you know, France, Germany, and England aren't the 3 biggest powers in Europe. And they aren't a huge part of the European population. '

- Right. And your point is?

You never seem to feel the need to have one.. why should he?

But I think yes.. some distinction should be made here.

Is it any coincidence that the most open minded and fair people on the board are all from the same area? Kiv, Hubbe, Edeina.
Id be willing to bet that at least a portion of that comes from a balanced and responsible media, not driven by ideological or political bends. As a smaller country it has influence from a more vast base of information, whereas people in the larger countries generally stick with homegrown stuff.

your statement is false

you mentioned -hubbe-

As i read through these articles i find myself trying very hard to pick up flaws and doubt the pro-american stance, and skim over the anti-american stance, and it astounds me. The fuck?
I try to live firmly on the belief that all people are basically the same, you get your extremits, and your conservatives, but each country, or society, has the same build-up if you like. Speaking purely objectively now, we are all guilty of the exact same thing, being highly critical on points that are against what we believe in, relentlessly, and extremely supportive of what agrees with what we're saying. As opposed to looking for the truth. The absolute truth, not the truth that happens to agree with what you believe, the truth.

I was surprised when i came to this conclusion, but i recognise now that i was subconsciously doing it, and it seems a tad wrong to me. Shrug, another opinion no doubt wasted.

The countries you mention never claim to be fair, hell or even accurate.

They simply have an agenda, the same as the American media. The sheep are lambasted daily with reports that further the agenda of the reporting media.

Read both sides and develop your own opinion.

Is it any coincidence that the most open minded and fair people on the board are all from the same area?


Do not give away our secret American mole state in Europe..

Denmark and Sweden revealed!

*gasp*

--Cen

Shush Cen, don't give it away to the geographically challenged!