Response to Fighting Evil (Chpt. 4)

Beckett puts it bluntly in the first few sentences of the chapter: "There is no greater challenge to the ability of journalism than terrorism" (127). He is aware of the fact that terrorism plays a very negative role in the media, but he believes that with extra effort, journalists can overcome these challenges. Beckett uses the September 11th attacks as an example of how terror can affect the media negatively. He states, "It was a gesture of power, an image of defiance, and a token of threat that was intended to frighten, humiliate, and provoke" (128). Although he acknowledges that terrorists have clear motives behind their actions, he thinks Networked Journalists need to understand these people and their backgrounds before they react. I mostly agree with him, but this is sometimes easier said than done. For journalists, getting information that is unbiased but critical is challenging when their sources are famed terrorists. Beckett thinks "Islamaphobic" journalists are all too common these days. Instead, he believes the media needs to be open-minded to this different world if they ever want to understand terrorism and the motives behind it.


Questions
1. I thought Beckett's comment on how it's difficult to form views on people that are inaccessible was very interesting. Do you think journalists are looking for information from the wrong sources? If so, what could be done to fix this?
2. What do you think about the idea of Aljazeera English? Do you think it should be offered to viewers anywhere in the US?
3. Do you think Networked Journalism is the only way to turn terror in the media around? Can you think of other strategies journalists could use to better understand and navigate terrorism?

Here's an interview with Dave Marash, former Aljazeera English anchor, on why he quit.

Also, an interview with Aljazeera English's Josh Rushing, published in The Denver Post