Category Archives: Reviews

Protecting Your Freedom to Know: An Accessible International News Directory

Models, Problem Practices, Reviews, , , , , , ,

A good hedge against narrow-minded reporting is to access foreign news outlets that provide insightful perspectives on American social and political life.

The news media in the United States are still robust, but under threat from an authoritarian president and a Supreme Court that has given him more power over agency heads, some of whom have licensing authority over network broadcast affiliates. We have also witnessed a decades-long decline of CBS News, as well as dangerous consolidations of individual media companies.  If it succeeds, the recent purchase of Paramount and, with it, CNN, will be consequential. The conservative-leaning iHeartMedia already holds a gigantic 870 radio stations. And most of the formerly great American newspapers have fallen into the hands of billionaire owners, including The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post. The heavy hand of the owner and editors at the Washington Post has been especially noticeable. Many of their best reporters have left. The old saw that you don’t want to argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel applies, even if pixels have replaced ink on paper as the most common medium.

Interestingly, Disney/ABC is pushing back against the chronic complaints of the Trump administration. But its affiliate stations are vulnerable because they must operate with licenses from the recently politicized FCC.

There are still important mainstream or somewhat progressive internet and broadcast outlets, including The Atlantic, The New York Times, Harpers, The Nation, The New Yorker, Washington Monthly, Politico, and Axios. They are still agenda setters, but their audiences represent a smaller share of the American public.  And, of course, there is some good reporting everywhere. But it is also clear that editors are steering more coverage to conservative and investor-friendly positions.

BBC

A good hedge against narrow-minded reporting is to include easily accessible foreign journalists who provide different and often insightful perspectives on American social and political life. When living in England, I found British views of American affairs a refreshing change from worn-in American habits of thinking. Even beyond the U.K., a declining United States is still too big and powerful to ignore. Print outlets from around the world are obviously available on the internet. We are also in luck that cable and YouTube access provide many chances to see many English language video segments worth viewing. Some are from state-run public broadcasters, and some are from privately owned outlets. But all are usually reliable and refreshingly different. Here is an incomplete but suggestive list:

France 24

-France 24  Fair-minded and thoughtful coverage of Europe and the United States.

-DW (Germany) Like France 24, a reliable guide covering social and political events in the United States and Europe.

-Al Jazeera (Qatar) A Non-western cable news outlet with usually reliable reporting.

-BBC (U.K.) Perhaps the most honored international broadcaster and a British mainstay.

-Channel 4 (U.K.)  The kind of news analysis that is harder to find in American media.DW

-LBC British podcast format adapted to television. Often critical but thoughtful critiques of US leaders and policies.

-Times Radio (U.K.) video podcasts featuring a range of expert opinions and commentary.

-CBC (Canada) Especially good for science news and summaries of Canadian adaptations to Donald Trump’s rages against our northern neighbors.

-Australian Broadcasting Corporation A public broadcaster with many news features packaged for YouTube.

-Reuters This British new agency has hundreds of journalists and scores of awards.  It seems less visible on YouTube, but remains a staple for reliable print and photo journalism.

AP

-Associated Press (American/international) a compilation of credible straight reporting from local journalists around the world. This makes it more like a news-cooperative than an outlet with a dominant point of view.

red and black bar

Cameras as Identity Markers

Problem Practices, Reviews, , , , , ,

“If you don’t get that photo, it’s like, what’s the point of the trip?”

We should be interested in recent news from Japan about the crowds traveling southwest from Tokyo to Fujiyoshida, a town of 42,000 that offers good views of Mt. Fuji. Millions come every year, mostly for one reason: to get a picture of the famed peak from the town itself or an adjoining park. Their presence is not so different from the scores of photos friends send us or post affirming that they visited somewhere interesting. But, increasingly, the pictures seem like a surprise visitation from relatives who make it their habit to ignore the usual courtesies that Japanese hosts have so carefully ritualized.

Smartphones have given their users cameras that need a reason to exist. What better use than to turn them into identity markers that include a selfie and, ideally, a backdrop intended to provoke some envy. I recall previous older relatives being a bit more cautious about putting themselves in the picture. But now “selfitis” can wear others down. It is a kind of narcissism that is not so different from the Evil Queen’s search for reassurance of her worth in a mirror. A modern variant in a scenic backdrop may also carry a more detailed message: “I was here and you were not: I’m in the presence of a recognized icon, which confers jealousy and maybe prestige.” Getting the picture as a photo tourist spares a person from doing anything more than moving on to the next recognizable meme.

As for Mt. Fuji, “I saw this gorgeous photo on social media,” noted Julia Morrow from Ohio. “If you don’t get that photo, it’s like, what’s the point of the trip?”

Oh my. That is a level of shallowness that in prior times might have come with some shame. Ms. Morrow should consider the implications of her view.

Reports in the New York Times and elsewhere describe the frustration of the locals in the town who take a few pictures, and then apparently leave without visiting any of the merchants along its busy commercial street. The new tourist rule seems to be to go and capture an image that is some facsimile of what is commonly seen elsewhere. Better, too, if your face is in the shot.

What a weird and shallow form of tourism.

Look at photos of the Salle des États Gallery in the Louvre, which features the iconic Mona Lisa. Too many visitors are struggling to take a second-rate picture of an object that should be taken in with one’s own eyes. To many, the first-hand experience seems expendable, leading to an obvious question:  why not buy a good postcard of the da Vinci painting? If museum employees curate their galleries, it should be equally true that the rest of us should do a better job of curating the experiences we sometimes go to great expense to create.

I marvel at how our sense of place has changed.  In a public gallery a crowd often dominates and affirms the value of the spectacle itself. That is odd, because we were never meant to see the Grand Canyon or the rugged Pacific coastline only from Seat 14a on a tourist bus. A photo may indeed represent a location we may never get to fully inhabit in person. But it is yet another case of asking too much of a small-capacity medium to represent the 360-degree experience of a place in its natural state. If it means anything, living life to the fullest should include engaging all of the senses.

Sometimes a picture is just a picture. But the self-curated photograph that suggests that “I’m here and I matter” is perhaps assuaging feelings of invisibility in a world with too many ingenious ways to ignore others. We should want more.