BATTLE AGAINST TERRORISM IN DAILY PRESS IN CROATIA:

SUPPORT TO 'ENDURING FREEDOM'

by Stojan Obradović  

US anti-terrorist attacks on Afghanistan received special treatment in all Croatian media, the press in particular. The two highest circulation dailies in Croatia and the subject of our monitoring, Vecernji List and Jutarnji List, dedicated separate pages to coverage of the US military campaign, especially at its beginning. Vecernji List gave these pages the name of the US and allies’ operation ‘Enduring Freedom,’ while Jutarnji List announced reports on attacks against Afghanistan on the front page under the campaign’s official name and on inside pages under the name ‘America strikes back.’

Both papers approached the beginning of US attacks on Afghanistan in almost the same way, dedicating entire front pages to the story; Vecernji List under the headline ‘America attacks Afghanistan’ and Jutarnji List under the headline ‘War starts.’ They presented the main ‘actors’ of the war on the front page – on one side US President George W. Bush and on the other Osama bin Laden – and they carried their ‘messages’ to the world public.

In addition, in the sub-headline Vecernji List suggested the ‘other pole’ of the war that will later dominate coverage of the issue – ‘fear of retaliation’ – while Jutarnji List announced that it has its own correspondents at the scene, actually close to it (in Pakistan and Tajikistan, and later also in Afghanistan itself), thus suggesting its exclusivity and authenticity.

• Articles based on agency items prevail

Vecernji List published 277 articles related to US strikes against Afghanistan and terrorism in the monitored period, while Jutarnji List published 347 articles. Of course, both figures should be taken with some reservation and a slight deviation of 5-10 percent because some borderline articles may or may not be included in the terrorism issue.

In both papers the war dominated the front pages during the first four or five days, after which it became only one of the issues on the front page while new terrorist threats broke into the foreground, such as the fear of the spreading of Anthrax and bioterrorism, especially as these threats could be ‘felt’ in the country (false alarms created by letters with white powder).

During the first days the war was covered on prime pages after which, still under a special heading, it moved to pages normally reserved for world news. Their number fell after the first five days of the monitoring period from six pages (plus front page) to three, and in the end to only two pages.

Jutarnji List gave the war a little more space and attention, as can be seen from the number of items and pages. This is partly due to the fact that it had its own reporters in Tajikistan and Pakistan, and in the end in Afghanistan itself as well.

In the structure of articles on war and terrorism published in this 15-day period, articles based on agency items prevailed. From a formal point of view, almost 60 percent of articles in Vecernji List and almost 70 percent in Jutarnji List were signed by agencies. In effect the number of articles based on agency reports is even higher because it is apparent that a big part of articles signed by journalists is also written on the basis of different agency reports, other media, etc. From a formal point of view, Vecernji List uses the local agency HINA much more frequently (almost 80 percent of agency items in Vecernji List are signed by HINA, while in Jutarnji List their number of close to 40 percent). However, a large number of HINA items results from the agency’s exchange and cooperation with other world agencies.

In any case, the majority of items covering the war in Afghanistan features solely facts, while the share of analysis, commentary, reportage and other similar forms is very little. In Jutarnji List this share is only around 13.5 percent of all published items, and in Vecernji List a little less than 10 percent. This difference is understandable if we take into account that Jutarnji List had its own reporters in the war arena.

• Serious and sensible commentaries

Only the start of the war was covered by commentaries and we might say that commentaries in both papers warned very critically and seriously about the other side of the war and its consequences. A Jutarnji List commentator wrote that this is the start of a war such as had never been seen before, but categorically rejected even the idea that this is a conflict of two civilizations. The commentator said it is only a conflict of two concepts, a ‘legal’ and a ‘mafia’ concept, which are present and in conflict in any civilization. A Vecernji List commentator also warned that this war, different from any other, brings a danger of lasting insecurity in the countries that started it and says that fear (of revenge and retaliation) may become their long-term characteristic. Commentators are not euphoric and they sensibly warn of current manipulations and potential dangers.

However, we cannot say that this ‘tone’ and approach was followed by the subsequent structure of war reports published in these two papers.

It seems evident that the ‘American’ view of the war prevailed. There is a lot of information on war operations and direct or indirect consequences of the war for the western world (from various potential terrorist threats to economic and other consequences), while the plight of the Afghans is in great disproportion and in the background. For example, Vecernji List showed destruction of Afghanistan twice on the front page in the 15 monitored days and mentioned casualties in a sub-headline only once. In Jutarnji List a photograph of destruction is published on the front page only once showing destruction of one of bin Laden’s terrorist camps. In any case, disproportion in the coverage of the Afghan plight caused by the US bombing and the cold, hunger and life in refuge was a little more apparent in Vecernji List. Jutarnji List tended to give the current and potential plight in Afghanistan a more appropriate and balanced treatment.

• Correspondents used for advertising purposes

With regard to focus in the coverage structure, it moved from the war itself to potential terrorism threats. After the first few days of the war, in Vecernji List potential threats and current fears started to dominate pages set aside for the ‘Enduring Freedom’ campaign and anthrax became an almost dominant topic. This trend is less noticeable in Jutarnji List, which has a more favorable balance in covering war operations and potential threats of terrorist attacks.

But the fact that Jutarnji List, for example, had its own reporters in the war arena did not contribute enough to better quality of reporting from the scene. Some reports sent by Jutarnji List’s Pakistan reporter were below any journalistic level and appeared to be the journalist’s self-advertising more than a source of serious information and analysis from the scene. Journalists from some other papers not included in this monitoring (Novi List from Rijeka), who also reported from the war arena (first Pakistan, and then also Tajikistan and Azerbaijan), showed more ability in covering some issues and problems on which there is lack of information.

Although the structure of the war reporting is so to say quite “americanized”, we can not allege that it stimulates antiislamic nor antimuslim atmosphere or preconditions. In any case the coverage of war events is characterized by lack of more analytical items shedding light on all aspects of this major war and civilizational crisis with global consequences. A precise analysis might show some unnecessary and even wrong emphasis of certain attributes or events which, for example, suggest connections between the (Muslim) Bosnia and terrorism, but these are sporadic deviations aiming to be ‘attractive’ more than to incite systematic prejudice. This is all the more important because, according to some estimates, Croatian media have not remained immune to the anti-Islamic hysteria that followed terrorist attacks on US cities. However, this tone was now not noticed.

Monitoring showed that these two papers differ slightly in essential characteristics of covering the war and terrorism. There are differences in form, presentation and emphasis of certain items or issues. One may say that Jutarnji List is more focused on war operations and that its coverage balances certain aspects of war-related events more successfully.

But there are also some essential similarities in shortcomings related to coverage of the issue – lack of more frequent and better quality analytical items covering all the complexities of the current events, war, its causes and consequences.

What the two papers announced by their commentaries at the beginning of the conflict was missing in the subsequent coverage of the conflict and its implications.

Stojan Obradovic is the Editor in Chief of the independent news agency STINA, Split (Croatia). Translation by K.H. ©Media Online 2001. All rights reserved.

source: MHxJU
published by: Roland Brunner rbr@medienhilfe.ch date of release on this site: 27-11-2001

go to top

P.O. Box, CH-8031 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone +41-1-272 46 37,  Fax +41-1-272 46 82, email: info@MEDIENHILFE.ch