A BBC article writes of four Nigerian journalists arrested for contributing a faux report regarding the health of the country's leader. The source of the report was the News Agency of Nigeria, which emailed the story to serveral media outlets. One of these outlets was Channels TV, who aired the report before it was discredited by the news agency.In response to the report, the Nigerian security service shut down Channels TV. Several news agencies came to the aid of the station, including the Commitee to Protect Journalists (link to the report is below). The suspension was lifted after three days and the detainees were freeed, but the were the journalists at fault for telling the truth? Why or why not? In terms of government reporting, what crosses the line between reportable and unreportable? The Commitee to Protect Journalists offers one opinion, what would the Nigerian government say in repsonse to the CPJ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7620729.stm
http://www.cpj.org/news/2008/africa/nigeria18sep08na.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Something like this would never happen in the United States. Like Dr. Pitts said, journalists in African have to be liscensed, which is just crazy to me. I cannot believe that they were also detained! Africans take journalism so seriously becasue it is such a valued commodity. At the same time it is kind of sad that in the United States, media have skewed so far away from the idea of being something valued and cherished and are now mostly important to us for entertainment purposes.
Post a Comment