zairacat:

RIP Marie #Colvin
guardiancomment:

• Today it was confirmed that the war correspondent Marie Colvin has died in the Syrian city of Homs. In November 2010 Colvin gave the following speech on the importance of war reporting. This is the text of a speech Marie Colvin gave at St Brides Church, Fleet Street, London


Your Royal Highness, ladies and gentlemen, I am honoured and  humbled to be speaking to you at this service tonight to remember the  journalists and their support staff who gave their lives to report from  the war zones of the 21st century. I have been a war correspondent for  most of my professional life. It has always been a hard calling. But the  need for frontline, objective reporting has never been more compelling.
Covering  a war means going to places torn by chaos, destruction and death, and  trying to bear witness. It means trying to find the truth in a sandstorm  of propaganda when armies, tribes or terrorists clash. And yes, it  means taking risks, not just for yourself but often for the people who  work closely with you.
Despite all the videos you see from the  Ministry of Defence or the Pentagon, and all the sanitised language  describing smart bombs and pinpoint strikes, the scene on the ground has  remained remarkably the same for hundreds of years. Craters. Burned  houses. Mutilated bodies. Women weeping for children and husbands. Men  for their wives, mothers children.
Our mission is to report these  horrors of war with accuracy and without prejudice. We always have to  ask ourselves whether the level of risk is worth the story. What is  bravery, and what is bravado?
Journalists covering combat shoulder  great responsibilities and face difficult choices. Sometimes they pay  the ultimate price. Tonight we honour the 49 journalists and support  staff who were killed bringing the news to our shores. We also remember  journalists around the world who have been wounded, maimed or kidnapped  and held hostage for months. It has never been more dangerous to be a  war correspondent, because the journalist in the combat zone has become a  prime target.
I lost my eye in an ambush in the Sri Lankan civil  war. I had gone to the northern Tamil area from which journalists were  banned and found an unreported humanitarian disaster. As I was smuggled  back across the internal border, a soldier launched a grenade at me and  the shrapnel sliced into my face and chest. He knew what he was doing.
Just last week, I had a coffee in Afghanistan with a photographer friend, Joao Silva.  We talked about the terror one feels and must contain when patrolling  on an embed with the armed forces through fields and villages in  Afghanistan … putting one foot in front of the other, steeling yourself  each step for the blast. The expectation of that blast is the stuff of  nightmares. Two days after our meeting, Joao stepped on a mine and lost  both legs at the knee.
Many of you here must have asked  yourselves, or be asking yourselves now, is it worth the cost in lives,  heartbreak, loss? Can we really make a difference?
I faced that  question when I was injured. In fact one paper ran a headline saying,  has Marie Colvin gone too far this time? My answer then, and now, was  that it is worth it.
Today in this church are friends, colleagues  and families who know exactly what I am talking about, and bear the cost  of those experiences, as do their families and loved ones.
Today  we must also remember how important it is that news organisations  continue to invest in sending us out at great cost, both financial and  emotional, to cover stories.
We go to remote war zones to report  what is happening. The public have a right to know what our government,  and our armed forces, are doing in our name. Our mission is to speak the  truth to power. We send home that first rough draft of history. We can  and do make a difference in exposing the horrors of war and especially  the atrocities that befall civilians.
The history of our profession is one to be proud of. The first war correspondent in the modern era was William Howard Russell of the Times, who was sent to cover the Crimean conflict when a British-led coalition fought an invading Russian army.
Billy  Russell, as the troops called him, created a firestorm of public  indignation back home by revealing inadequate equipment, scandalous  treatment of the wounded, especially when they were repatriated – does  this sound familiar? – and an incompetent high command that led to the  folly of the Charge of the Light Brigade. It was a breakthrough in war  reporting. Until then, wars were reported by junior officers who sent  back dispatches to newspapers. Billy Russell went to war with an open  mind, a telescope, a notebook and a bottle of brandy. I first went to  war with a typewriter, and learned to tap out a telex tape. It could  take days to get from the front to a telephone or telex machine.
War  reporting has changed greatly in just the last few years. Now we go to  war with a satellite phone, laptop, video camera and a flak jacket. I  point my satellite phone to south southwest in Afghanistan, press a  button and I have filed.
In an age of 24/7 rolling news, blogs and  Twitters, we are on constant call wherever we are. But war reporting is  still essentially the same – someone has to go there and see what is  happening. You can’t get that information without going to places where  people are being shot at, and others are shooting at you. The real  difficulty is having enough faith in humanity to believe that enough  people be they government, military or the man on the street, will care  when your file reaches the printed page, the website or the TV screen.
We do have that faith because we believe we do make a difference.
And  we could not make that difference – or begin to do our job – without  the fixers, drivers and translators, who face the same risks and die in  appalling numbers. Today we honour them as much as the front line  journalists who have died in pursuit of the truth. They have kept the  faith as we who remain must continue to do.

Photograph: Arthur Edwards/WPA Pool/Getty Image

zairacat:

RIP Marie #Colvin

guardiancomment:

• Today it was confirmed that the war correspondent Marie Colvin has died in the Syrian city of Homs. In November 2010 Colvin gave the following speech on the importance of war reporting. This is the text of a speech Marie Colvin gave at St Brides Church, Fleet Street, London

Your Royal Highness, ladies and gentlemen, I am honoured and humbled to be speaking to you at this service tonight to remember the journalists and their support staff who gave their lives to report from the war zones of the 21st century. I have been a war correspondent for most of my professional life. It has always been a hard calling. But the need for frontline, objective reporting has never been more compelling.

Covering a war means going to places torn by chaos, destruction and death, and trying to bear witness. It means trying to find the truth in a sandstorm of propaganda when armies, tribes or terrorists clash. And yes, it means taking risks, not just for yourself but often for the people who work closely with you.

Despite all the videos you see from the Ministry of Defence or the Pentagon, and all the sanitised language describing smart bombs and pinpoint strikes, the scene on the ground has remained remarkably the same for hundreds of years. Craters. Burned houses. Mutilated bodies. Women weeping for children and husbands. Men for their wives, mothers children.

Our mission is to report these horrors of war with accuracy and without prejudice. We always have to ask ourselves whether the level of risk is worth the story. What is bravery, and what is bravado?

Journalists covering combat shoulder great responsibilities and face difficult choices. Sometimes they pay the ultimate price. Tonight we honour the 49 journalists and support staff who were killed bringing the news to our shores. We also remember journalists around the world who have been wounded, maimed or kidnapped and held hostage for months. It has never been more dangerous to be a war correspondent, because the journalist in the combat zone has become a prime target.

I lost my eye in an ambush in the Sri Lankan civil war. I had gone to the northern Tamil area from which journalists were banned and found an unreported humanitarian disaster. As I was smuggled back across the internal border, a soldier launched a grenade at me and the shrapnel sliced into my face and chest. He knew what he was doing.

Just last week, I had a coffee in Afghanistan with a photographer friend, Joao Silva. We talked about the terror one feels and must contain when patrolling on an embed with the armed forces through fields and villages in Afghanistan … putting one foot in front of the other, steeling yourself each step for the blast. The expectation of that blast is the stuff of nightmares. Two days after our meeting, Joao stepped on a mine and lost both legs at the knee.

Many of you here must have asked yourselves, or be asking yourselves now, is it worth the cost in lives, heartbreak, loss? Can we really make a difference?

I faced that question when I was injured. In fact one paper ran a headline saying, has Marie Colvin gone too far this time? My answer then, and now, was that it is worth it.

Today in this church are friends, colleagues and families who know exactly what I am talking about, and bear the cost of those experiences, as do their families and loved ones.

Today we must also remember how important it is that news organisations continue to invest in sending us out at great cost, both financial and emotional, to cover stories.

We go to remote war zones to report what is happening. The public have a right to know what our government, and our armed forces, are doing in our name. Our mission is to speak the truth to power. We send home that first rough draft of history. We can and do make a difference in exposing the horrors of war and especially the atrocities that befall civilians.

The history of our profession is one to be proud of. The first war correspondent in the modern era was William Howard Russell of the Times, who was sent to cover the Crimean conflict when a British-led coalition fought an invading Russian army.

Billy Russell, as the troops called him, created a firestorm of public indignation back home by revealing inadequate equipment, scandalous treatment of the wounded, especially when they were repatriated – does this sound familiar? – and an incompetent high command that led to the folly of the Charge of the Light Brigade. It was a breakthrough in war reporting. Until then, wars were reported by junior officers who sent back dispatches to newspapers. Billy Russell went to war with an open mind, a telescope, a notebook and a bottle of brandy. I first went to war with a typewriter, and learned to tap out a telex tape. It could take days to get from the front to a telephone or telex machine.

War reporting has changed greatly in just the last few years. Now we go to war with a satellite phone, laptop, video camera and a flak jacket. I point my satellite phone to south southwest in Afghanistan, press a button and I have filed.

In an age of 24/7 rolling news, blogs and Twitters, we are on constant call wherever we are. But war reporting is still essentially the same – someone has to go there and see what is happening. You can’t get that information without going to places where people are being shot at, and others are shooting at you. The real difficulty is having enough faith in humanity to believe that enough people be they government, military or the man on the street, will care when your file reaches the printed page, the website or the TV screen.

We do have that faith because we believe we do make a difference.

And we could not make that difference – or begin to do our job – without the fixers, drivers and translators, who face the same risks and die in appalling numbers. Today we honour them as much as the front line journalists who have died in pursuit of the truth. They have kept the faith as we who remain must continue to do.

Photograph: Arthur Edwards/WPA Pool/Getty Image

Remi Ochlik, photojournalist, was killed earlier today in Homs, Syria, alongside Sunday Times journalist Marie Colvin. They were reporting on the desperate situation in the city, where the civilian population is coming under sustained attack from government forces and pro-Assad militias.
Early reports suggest the house the journalists were using as a base was deliberately targeted by rocket attacks.
A number of other journalists remain unaccounted for.
This photograph, part of a series he took in Libya last year, recently won a WPP award.

Remi Ochlik, photojournalist, was killed earlier today in Homs, Syria, alongside Sunday Times journalist Marie Colvin. They were reporting on the desperate situation in the city, where the civilian population is coming under sustained attack from government forces and pro-Assad militias.

Early reports suggest the house the journalists were using as a base was deliberately targeted by rocket attacks.

A number of other journalists remain unaccounted for.

This photograph, part of a series he took in Libya last year, recently won a WPP award.

XKit Extension for Tumblr!