tv Listening Post Al Jazeera October 20, 2013 11:30am-12:01pm EDT
thank you for watching al jazeera america. "listening post" is next t for updates check out our website, aljazeera.com. [ ♪ theme ] >> hello, i'm richard gizbert. you are at "listening post." this week when should state secrets be kept, when should they be revealed. two british papers are having the debate on the front page. glenn greenwald, the reporter who broke the edward snowden story leaves "the guardian" for a new outlet. seldom has so much been said to so many by so few. [ screams ] >> no, this is not a case of caffeine overload. it's
a tele-kennettic cafe. >> two of britain's best known newspapers have gone to war and are dragging more papers around the world into the fray. the daily telegraph' on the right versus the "the guardian" on the left. the issue is national security - what should be reported, what secrets should be kept. >> the "the guardian" is responsible for leaking the edward snowden story and the nsa leaks in the u.s., and gcaq in the u.k. "the guardian" and "daily mail" never liked each other. they have never gone at it this way before. "the guardian" tried to isolate the "mail" by having 33 editors from 15 countries writing oped pieces backing "mail." the domestic feud comes at a
critical time in the ongoing debate about the future of revelation sparked by rupert murdoch's phone-hacking obligation. they are at each other's threats. . >> anybody who knows anything about the british media knows incredibly polar iffed, it's political and always has been. >> there was definitely a split between the "mail" and "the guardian." it's been hammer and tongs for the last fortnight. >> some people think the "the guardian" may have miscalculated. maybe that they should be held to account. it is unfortunate, because it's got away from the actual issue. whether that was right or wrong in the democracy. >> that issue is government
civil arranges the nsa in america, gchq in britain and the "the guardian" was the first to get the edward snowden files on that. that is not where the story started. it begone when the right wing "daily mail" went after ed miliband after quoting from diaries that hays father wrote and concluded that milliband senior hated britain. much opprobrium ensued. "the guardian" took issue with "mail"'s media. when "daily mail" paul baker failed to show up for an interview sending his deputy it campbell. >> paul baker does not have the guts to come on the program. >> aalst stair was not in the studio. john had to carry the can for the "mail" and did an okay job. headlines...
>> it was tough or him. alistair campbell went for him in total vitriolic terms. >> i thought this was going to be a debate, not a ramble reading outlines written by paul baker. >> the moment i enjoyed was when the presenter of "news night" reminded audiences that 'the daily telegraph' had a secret in the cupboard, the only newspaper to back the nazis before the world war ii. i thought that was a lovely moment, because it brings a lit the press history into the present. i don't think anything enormous changed, but a lot of daily mail readers nor more about the daily mail than they did before. >> not one to sit back and lick his moves, "daily mail"'s baker tried to bloody the "the guardian" over its coverage over the edward snowden story, through an editorial linking "the guardian" with the enemies
of britain. baker and his paper wrapped themselves in the flag. >> as soon as they published some of what edward snowden revealed there was a split in the media as to whether that was a right thing to do. part was based on genuine safety as to the damage done to national security. part of it was the normal left-right liberal conservative split in the british media. over the last few years there has been a disagreement between brode sheet newspapers and tab lloyd newspapers, of which 'the daily telegraph' which the mail is part of. >> the complete irony of it is that the "times," the telling , "mail" and the son, that part of the media that supported conservatism are the newspapers
that are mill tant in defending press freedom. in this case what they are doing is attacking "the guardian" for using its freedom to try and hold the government to account, and that, to me is the irony of what is happening. >> then "the guardian" called in backup, sending the "daily mail" to allies, had them weigh in. the paper stacked the field. "the guardian" managed to make point. >> towards people like david cameron and politicians that said that was dangerous behaviour. they were fighting back. they filled four pages. we got the message. it seemed to go on forever.
>> it comes as no great surprise that newspapers from "new york times" et cetera would come out in favour of what "the guardian" had done. they would probably have done the same, had the material been available to them. i think they might at that point have started to feel lonely in the field with more newspapers in the u.k. attacking them for what they had done. >> "listening post" asked "the guardian" and "mail" for introduce. both declined. "the guardian" sent a written reply: conversation >> the differing approaches
comes as regulation comes to a head. "the guardian"'s reporting broke open the phone-hacking scandal of rupert murdoch's tabloids and triggered the review leading to recommendations for new regulations backed up by the law. most papers opposed the government's revelations. since the guardian's reporting started the ball rolling, the paper finds itself at the center making. >> newspapers should put aside their bickering and sort out the issue of regulation. they have not done that in the preceding 300 years. it's difficult for them to do it thou. there's an imet us for them to sort something out. there's an imperative to create something better than has gone before, that offers redress and newspapers. >> public esteem for journalists is low.
none of this helps. if we can't come up with a system to regulate ourselves in the 21st century. something is desperately wrong. >> our "global village voices" on the question of government britain. >> we have to remember that one of the fundamental roles of journalism is to hold power to account. when we have a national security system that is so secretive, that becomes difficult. "the guardian" did a good job in publishing the edward snowden leaked information. what it did do was put crucial information into the public domain. that allowed us to have informed debates. there'll always be a line crossed between journalism and national security. we have to find the balance. >> as for edward snowden and "the guardian" - however legitimate the intention, they seem to have become lost. one
might argue in fact their behaviour was counterproductive as disclosure of sensitive information through the media is unlookly to foster changes in intelligence practices. millions who need assistance now. we appreciate you spending time with us tonight. up next is the golden age of hollywood going golden but elsewhere. why l.a.'s mayor has declared a state of emergency for the entertainment industry there. next. what happens when social media uncovers unheard, fascinating news stories? >> they share it on the stream. >> social media isn't an after-thought, it drives discussion across america. >> al jazeera america's social media community, on tv and online.
al jazeera america - a new voice in american journalism - >> introduces america tonight. >> in egypt, police fired teargas at supporters of the ... >> a fresh take on the stories that connect to you. [[voiceover]] they risk never returning to the united states. >> grounded. >> real. >> unconventional. [[voiceover]] we spent time with some members of the gangster disciples. >> an escape from the expected. >> i'm a cancer survivor. not only cancer, but brain cancer. america tonight 9 eastern on al jazeera america >> time for "listening post" "newsbytes." glenn greenwald, the american journalist who broke the edward snowden-nsa is leaving "the
guardian" to start in a start-up. his new outlet would provide the same type of journalism making him one of the best journalists. it's reportedly funded by pierre omidyar. if confirmed, the fora by pierre omidyar is the second time in a few months that an online entrepreneur staked a claim in the media industry. in august amazon boss jeff bezos bought the "the washington post" for $250 million. glenn greenwald joined "the guardian." the string of stories published on nsa and global surveillance made headlines and glenn greenwald faced a backlash from many in the industry. >> why should you glenn crime? >> he leaves "the guardian" on good terms. a spokesperson saying: >> in morocco authorities are urged to release a journalist in
prison for advocating terrorism, a charge intended to silence a government critic. on october 10th more than 60 human rights organizations issued a joint statement condemning the gaol of anewsler after posting a link to a video from al qaeda's north african wing on his website. that included a threat against morocco and criticised the monarch was on the website of a spanish newspaper. >> he was charged with knowingly providing material assistance to terrorism acts. he faces 20 years in gaol. his backers argue that he is being targeted because of the issue taken on moroccan kink mohammed v 4 and he uses the site to raise issues of corruption and power. it's been condemned by press freedom and human rights groups and it is argued. .
t is argued. . >> last month the u.s. government debated military intervention in syria. american media experts hosted a number of analysts backing the idea of going to war. a new report showed that those commentators had a vested interest in the issue. a study by the public accountability initiative based in buffalo new york revealed 20 commentators that made a total of 111 media appearance, all with ties to defense or military likely to benefit from an attack in syria. a fact disclosed 13 times to readers and fuse. steven hadlee is a former national security advisor to george w. bush and appeared on various networks. he is in favour of intervention in syria.
>> not once was the viewer told that he serves an a director at an organization that makes cruise missiles. >> jack keen and general anthony are directors at general dynamics and eae systems. the report's author said: >> this is not the first time the u.s. networks have been called out for this kind of thing. in 2008 "new york times" journalist david barstow won the pulitzer prize. he revealed the department of defense employed a network of military officers with ties to defense companies, sent on television armed with pentagon talking points, calling for the invasion to go ahead.
>> news junkies will be familiar with the media pundit who seems to be everywhere, on every story. you know the types. the ones that flit from one news studio to the next lending expertise, which is often their opinion on whatever story is making news that day. producers love them. regardless of whether they are qualified to discuss the issue, they spit out sound bites quickly and often. some punned its or hire advertise themselves. the serious side of this story has to do with the demands of 24 hour news channel, pressure created by deadlines and a lack of diversity into the voices making it on air. they are called renta mouth in the u.k. in north america - the usual suspects. >> nic muirhead now on professional media punned its
and what they del us about the nature of the news business. >> he's spoken on the mumbai terrorist attacks. >> you can't have a situation where 20 people hold a nation of 1.1 billion people to ransom. >> corruption in indian politics. corruption in indian critic. >> it was uncompassionate to suspend the guy by sending an sms >> or a conspiracy that a tack was political. >> while he can comment on any subject, you may ask why a brand management consultant is doing all the talking. >> i'm not the only motor mouth or talking head in india. if i'm being called, there's a reason for me being called. if you have anything to blame, ask the guys that call me. i am not forcing my way every
day as an intruder, grabbing the microphone and saying, "guy, listen." >> here is someone that does. meet greg packer from hunting tonne new york. he has made it his mission to get into the media as many times as possible. for the last 18 years he excelled at it, talking and experiences. >> i like to be in the media. doing. >> he could have done that on facebook, it meant news consumers would have missed out on his $0.02 on the iphone. >> beautiful. >> or pope john paul ii's death. >> he knows god is calling him >> or the brooklyn bridge's 125th anniversary. or events travelled to to get tv. he wasn't going to let anyone stand in his way. >> nobody is going to stop me, not even osama bin laden. >> that
phenomenon is an example of laziness across the world, even in the best organizations, in which they need to find a voice off the street to say something completely obvious. if you stand in line to buy an iphone for 24 hours, it is obvious that you are a fan of the iphone. why do you need to then interview one person off that line to say... >> yes, i love the iphone 5. >> ..that you like the iphone. packer managed to be the guy. the one guy is not important. he's saying something obvious. it. >> greg packer is not the issue, the issue is the journalist calling the same places. after i'm on this segment someone will call me for being around. that happens. what we need is deeper reporting. what we need more than that is diversity of voices. >> we've been through the
associated press newsagency came to the conclusion. its memo in 2003 told staff not to interview packer any more saying a search to his name to more than 100 mentions, and that was a handful of the stories. it could have been seen as a speed bump in packer's career. he sees it as a milestone. >> some milestones is when the ap banned me for quoting me too many times. the world is full of all kinds of interesting people. i was one of them. i was eager to be quoted and ap said let's be eager to quote other people. >> we, too, were eager to quote someone else. barry sabitow is a political analyst said to be the most
quoted professor in theland. "listening post" contacted him. a subject that he would not lend his expertise to is the proponent of overused media proponents. he's appeared in the media appearing in 46 out of our 50 states turned us down for an interview - it's what you might call an exclusive. >> in a past pitched era of 24 hour news, what makes them so appealing, air worthy is their availability. too often in news rooms journalists who look for diverse voices end up, because of their voices. >> when you think about it, going on television - have you to know about the studio. when you find people willing to do that, they are golden. the booker's job is to get someone now, someone talking about oil, crime - get them in here. that's why we have a level
repetition. >> the indian media is short on voices and long on time. you have 24 hours to fill. there are dozens of 24-hour news channels all talking about the same thing at the same time. you have to fill the air time. people have to be able to talk about anything. they'll get one of the people who have a certain phrase or knowledge of things and put them on television night after night >> the u.s. has four 24 hour news channels. india 63. that's more than $1,,000 dollars of airtime every day. it keeps everyone busy. like any celebrity will tell you - living a life in a media spotlight has consequences. public demand doesn't end when the cameras stop rolling. >> someone comes and says, "i
saw you on the television program." what you said about obama - i would get involved. until one of india's anchors taught me the best trig of my life saying, "next time someone says i saw your opinion", he's not interested in your opinion. he saw it on television. it's his opportunity to articulate his opinion to you. all you have to say is, "yes, i did say that. forget me, what do you think?" >> perhaps there's a media pundit in all of us waiting to be heard and scene. given the right platform just about any story will do. >> more "global village voices" now on the usual suspects popping up on your screens. >> this phenomenon is frequent in italy. we have a guy who appears on all sorts of tv shows talking about politics, art, gossip.
then when somebody disagrees with his opinions he goes for the jugular and screams and insults people. it's the easiest ways for journalists and producers to get opinions and keep ratings high. >> there was a name that was everywhere in the international media. he is a spokesperson on the muslim brotherhood and was quoted in the two weeks not less than two or three times daily in newspapers. the other thing is that the family are spokes persons. the family is quoted everywhere in the media, commenting on everything to do with egyptian politics and the muslim brotherhood. [[voiceover]] every day, events sweep across our country. and with them, a storm of views. how can you fully understand the impact unless you've
>> the most important money stories of the day might affect your savings, your job or your retirement. whether its bail-outs or bond rates this stuff get complicated. but don't worry. i'm here to take the fear out of finance. every night on my show i break down confusing financial speak and make it real.
>> finally, you have seen the hidden camera shows. an american program called "candid camera" was the forerunner. unsuspect people are duped. they've gone corporate. ad agencies figured out punking people and throwing it online is a good advertisement for your product. this week's is telekinetic taking place in a cafe. the scary woman is to create a remake of "karrie". she certainly spooks the customers.