- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Mud Recce Man said:
It would depend on how much one reads. This is the second such case you have made for yourself today.
Media respect for the fallen & thier families
- Thread starter on guard for thee
- Start date
It would depend on how much one reads. This is the second such case you have made for yourself today.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Don't bother questioning.....Yes! We do know how to count. ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
David you conducted yourself properly, not everyone does. We get some people from the media who come on here like yourself who identify yourselves and ask questions. That is welcome. What we don't welcome are people from the media who come on and Do Not identify themselves as such. Then ask questions. Then publish the answers. We don't like being ambushed is all.
D
DavidAkin
Guest
milnewstbay said:
Hey Tony --
Anything published or broadcast under the any the imprint of any of the journalism brands I've worked for has likely been reviewed and vetted by several people -- reporters, producers, directors and editors. And I generally prefer that if it's got my name on it, it's got all the stuff in it that we all agreed should be in it.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
okay, now this is just crazy!
Keep this sort of thing up, and I may just have to change one of my favourite sayings.
- Reaction score
- 190
- Points
- 1,210
David,
Thanks for sharing your experiences here. I think the media and the CF have a long road ahead and allowing us to understand your job a little more is very helpful. I watched your piece with great interest when it originally aired (was that just yesterday?) and I'm glad to know that "no families were harmed in the making" so to speak.
I believe the more we understand each others vocation, motivation and tactics, the better off we'll all be. The friends and families of our soldiers will be better represented and less hesitant to comment, which means more accurate and "personalized" reporting.
Thanks
Mike
Thanks for sharing your experiences here. I think the media and the CF have a long road ahead and allowing us to understand your job a little more is very helpful. I watched your piece with great interest when it originally aired (was that just yesterday?) and I'm glad to know that "no families were harmed in the making" so to speak.
I believe the more we understand each others vocation, motivation and tactics, the better off we'll all be. The friends and families of our soldiers will be better represented and less hesitant to comment, which means more accurate and "personalized" reporting.
Thanks
Mike
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
David:
I respect what you did, and how you did it.
I've added you to my (admittedly short) list of journalists for whom I have respect - I don't always agree with them, or what they write, but I appreciate their respectful approach to the subjects they cover.
My opinion was swayed by your open and honest participation here - that took some cojones - we're not always a forgiving crowd.
Keep doing what you're doing, the way you've done it so far - even when I disagree with you, I'll support the need for the respectful coverage you bring.
Roy Harding
I respect what you did, and how you did it.
I've added you to my (admittedly short) list of journalists for whom I have respect - I don't always agree with them, or what they write, but I appreciate their respectful approach to the subjects they cover.
My opinion was swayed by your open and honest participation here - that took some cojones - we're not always a forgiving crowd.
Keep doing what you're doing, the way you've done it so far - even when I disagree with you, I'll support the need for the respectful coverage you bring.
Roy Harding
Bzzliteyr
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 17
- Points
- 430
David, I think you have just managed to score yourself many new 'contacts' within the CF. I too have to add my applause to your professional manner and am now eager to see what more you can 'bring to the table' here at Army.ca. It's almost as if we have made a new friend today.
D
DavidAkin
Guest
Mike Bobbitt said:
Thanks Mike -- and thanks everyone who commented -- for your generosity. Lest you get the idea I'm some kind of saint -- I do want the set the record straight and say that I'm sure I have acted badly from time to time -- I've yelled at our Prime Minister, for example, when he wouldn't answer my questions. I've covered some of the court appearances of those charged with terrorism offences and stuck microphones in front of family members of the accused as they've left the court. I shouted questions at professional athletes who didn't want to talk about the bad game they just played.
I'd just thought I'd point that out in case I'm ever captured on TV acting rudely. I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm a hypocrite.
That said -- our SOP is to almost always ask politely first, clearly explaining why we want to talk to someone. And then, depending on who it is and what the story is about, I get a little more, erm, insistent. But I think there's no upside to pressuring families who are going through the worst period in their life. As I said in the last post, if they think we can help with their grieving process -- and you'd be surprised at how many find that a media report on their loved helps share the burden of grief -- they know where to find us.
In any event, there's no substitute for trying to establish a relationship with a potential contact or source -- as I guess I'm doing here -- well in advance of having to formally ask them to stand in front of a camera.
So thanks again -- and I'll try and stay out of the way around here ...
I may be stepping out of my lane here, but I would think it would be to your advantage (and everyone elses) to utilize some of the VERY experienced personnel here to give perspective to articles you are writing. It is one thing to have an issue that is newsworthy, it is another to write about that issue in the context it belongs, rather than the issue stand alone with no rounding out/background.
my 1cent, I need the other
my 1cent, I need the other
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
+1.
D
DavidAkin
Guest
GAP said:
Doin' that already. That's why I'm here! And, since you invited me -- let me officially declare my interest in chatting offline or on, with any crews, interested parties or conspiracy theorists working on or hoping to work on C-17s, CH-101s, C-130s, Victoria Class subs, and that new boat the navy plans to buy. Those are all perennial hot topics I'm currently very interested in for reasons you can all probably guess.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I've been thinking about this and I have a question for Mr Akin.
First a preamble. I think that what we see when we see the reaction to news coverage of a comrade's death is the tip of the iceberg. It may be that members of the public and the press think that we are somehow closing ranks in some sort of military equivalent to the civilian police's "blue wall of silence". But I do no think that is correct.
What I think happens is that a rather deep down reaction occurs. Most of us know that the 'average Canadian' has no idea of what we do, most of us believe that many, if not most Canadians, do not really truly respect us for what we do: I think that most of us, based on recent history, and the way that some people shepherd their kids away from us when we show up in a bank or a Tim's in CadPat really believe that to be true.
Sure there's the 'world's peacekeeper' notion that most Canadians have, but that too is mostly shite.
But my question is this: If the average Canadian is really (and perhaps rightfully) more concerned about healthcare waiting times, or getting little Janey to dance lessons on time, what, prithee tell, is the role of the press in educating them? This is not encouraging propaganda, there is real progress being made in Afstan, why is it not reported? Bloggers routinely castigate the mission because "Afghans don't want us there"; do they not?
Most every QM that I have ever seen has the ubiquitous piece of paper posted above the RQMS's desk "We the unappreciated, have done so much with so little for so long, we are now able to to almost anything with almost nothing". It's not too hard to blame the Canadian public for that state of affairs.
Most of us know that the degree to which the CF will succeed over the next twenty years will have as much to do with what the public, disinterested at best and uninformed at worst, comes out of this war thinking about the CF and how we succeeded or failed ( or how we are perceived to have ...).
And so I propose a hypothesis. Let's tell them about our successes, when they happen. An Army (yes and a Navy and an Air Force) spends a long time sitting around for a war to happen. Well now we have one! Canadians are conscious of Vimy and Juno and Scheldt and Kapyong (if not be name at least by folk knowledge). But, it seems to me they are not conscious of Kandahar or Kabul. Why?
Simply put because we are not telling them. Why do we focus, as a society on Combat deaths? How many little girls in Afghanistan were able to go to school to day (as my little girl did?). More importantly to what degree did the deaths of our comrades contribute to that ( and a thousand other successes ) ?
Why is it that despite the massive power of Google and Yahoo I can only find one opinion poll on what Afghans think about Canada's role in ISAF and dozens about what Canadians think?
With all due respect to Canadians, and to paraphrase that nameless Franco NCO we all (seem) to have had on BMQ " You people know f**k nothing about this!"
I can understand why the Pembroke or Ottawa media was at Pet this morning. I can even be convinced why CTV or the Globe was at Pet this morning; but forgive me if a boil a little bit when I see the national media's best effort 'in country' seems to be a correspondent standing in front of a a row of mod tent reciting a PAff release or the wholesale consumption of a Reuters or AP article in total by the 'national newspaper'.
What then can be done to put the deaths of these comrades in context? Well, how about letting Canadians know that 90% of the (Afghan)country is peaceful. How about a nice little HumInt story about little <insert_typical_Afghan_female_name_here>'s first day at school. How about telling Canadians how many hectares of Afghan country were planted in alfalfa this year, who cares about poppy (work in progress). And how about a poll about what the people that this is all about think?
It's almost a sort of racism to imply that all of this is about our families and our public and our politicians, it's not about us, it's about them. WADR, their story is not being told and as a result our role is being debased.
I don't intend to demean you or your organization, your respective records speak for themselves.
It just seems to me that the military has progressed through three or four generational incarnations since 1966 (and we did it for so long with so little we are know able to fight a war on the other side of the world!) yet the press seems to still be caught in the paradigm of body counts and grieving widows.
War is a terrible ledger, why are we seeing so much of the costs paid? Why do we not see more of the earnings gained?
First a preamble. I think that what we see when we see the reaction to news coverage of a comrade's death is the tip of the iceberg. It may be that members of the public and the press think that we are somehow closing ranks in some sort of military equivalent to the civilian police's "blue wall of silence". But I do no think that is correct.
What I think happens is that a rather deep down reaction occurs. Most of us know that the 'average Canadian' has no idea of what we do, most of us believe that many, if not most Canadians, do not really truly respect us for what we do: I think that most of us, based on recent history, and the way that some people shepherd their kids away from us when we show up in a bank or a Tim's in CadPat really believe that to be true.
Sure there's the 'world's peacekeeper' notion that most Canadians have, but that too is mostly shite.
But my question is this: If the average Canadian is really (and perhaps rightfully) more concerned about healthcare waiting times, or getting little Janey to dance lessons on time, what, prithee tell, is the role of the press in educating them? This is not encouraging propaganda, there is real progress being made in Afstan, why is it not reported? Bloggers routinely castigate the mission because "Afghans don't want us there"; do they not?
Most every QM that I have ever seen has the ubiquitous piece of paper posted above the RQMS's desk "We the unappreciated, have done so much with so little for so long, we are now able to to almost anything with almost nothing". It's not too hard to blame the Canadian public for that state of affairs.
Most of us know that the degree to which the CF will succeed over the next twenty years will have as much to do with what the public, disinterested at best and uninformed at worst, comes out of this war thinking about the CF and how we succeeded or failed ( or how we are perceived to have ...).
And so I propose a hypothesis. Let's tell them about our successes, when they happen. An Army (yes and a Navy and an Air Force) spends a long time sitting around for a war to happen. Well now we have one! Canadians are conscious of Vimy and Juno and Scheldt and Kapyong (if not be name at least by folk knowledge). But, it seems to me they are not conscious of Kandahar or Kabul. Why?
Simply put because we are not telling them. Why do we focus, as a society on Combat deaths? How many little girls in Afghanistan were able to go to school to day (as my little girl did?). More importantly to what degree did the deaths of our comrades contribute to that ( and a thousand other successes ) ?
Why is it that despite the massive power of Google and Yahoo I can only find one opinion poll on what Afghans think about Canada's role in ISAF and dozens about what Canadians think?
With all due respect to Canadians, and to paraphrase that nameless Franco NCO we all (seem) to have had on BMQ " You people know f**k nothing about this!"
I can understand why the Pembroke or Ottawa media was at Pet this morning. I can even be convinced why CTV or the Globe was at Pet this morning; but forgive me if a boil a little bit when I see the national media's best effort 'in country' seems to be a correspondent standing in front of a a row of mod tent reciting a PAff release or the wholesale consumption of a Reuters or AP article in total by the 'national newspaper'.
What then can be done to put the deaths of these comrades in context? Well, how about letting Canadians know that 90% of the (Afghan)country is peaceful. How about a nice little HumInt story about little <insert_typical_Afghan_female_name_here>'s first day at school. How about telling Canadians how many hectares of Afghan country were planted in alfalfa this year, who cares about poppy (work in progress). And how about a poll about what the people that this is all about think?
It's almost a sort of racism to imply that all of this is about our families and our public and our politicians, it's not about us, it's about them. WADR, their story is not being told and as a result our role is being debased.
I don't intend to demean you or your organization, your respective records speak for themselves.
It just seems to me that the military has progressed through three or four generational incarnations since 1966 (and we did it for so long with so little we are know able to fight a war on the other side of the world!) yet the press seems to still be caught in the paradigm of body counts and grieving widows.
War is a terrible ledger, why are we seeing so much of the costs paid? Why do we not see more of the earnings gained?
I too am a member of the media and have been following this discussion with interest since the weekend.
First off, David, I greatly respect the way you went about your reporting. I'm a staff TV camera guy in Toronto and have faced that sort of situation many times, and many times have had to really push the reporter to not be too agressive and to just talk to people and ask if they want to talk on-camera. The conduct of the CBC crew in Petawawa was wrong, if I had been assigned to that story I would've had a big problem with it. But I'm sure I'm not the only one who often disagrees with the way things are done at work.
My advice to anyone in the CF and thier friends and family, is simply to realize that we in the media are not perfect but much more importantly that you all have the control in these situations. Use your judgement, don't talk to anyone who you are not sure about. A true pro like David will try to communicate with you and not just "shove a camera in your face". You all have valuable experiences and ideas to share and there are good reporters who want to tell those stories.
Dave
First off, David, I greatly respect the way you went about your reporting. I'm a staff TV camera guy in Toronto and have faced that sort of situation many times, and many times have had to really push the reporter to not be too agressive and to just talk to people and ask if they want to talk on-camera. The conduct of the CBC crew in Petawawa was wrong, if I had been assigned to that story I would've had a big problem with it. But I'm sure I'm not the only one who often disagrees with the way things are done at work.
My advice to anyone in the CF and thier friends and family, is simply to realize that we in the media are not perfect but much more importantly that you all have the control in these situations. Use your judgement, don't talk to anyone who you are not sure about. A true pro like David will try to communicate with you and not just "shove a camera in your face". You all have valuable experiences and ideas to share and there are good reporters who want to tell those stories.
Dave
- Reaction score
- 1,326
- Points
- 1,060
cplcaldwell- How fair was that? Do you really expect he can answer that?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Not entirely fair
and
No.
But was the question then not worth the asking?
and
No.
But was the question then not worth the asking?
- Reaction score
- 1,326
- Points
- 1,060
Cut the guy some slack, its not a philosophy class.
Similar threads
