TERRORISM THROUGH DAILY PRESS IN SLOVENIA:

CRITICAL DISTANCE TOWARDS ATTACKS ON AFGANISTAN

by Alenka Kotnik

Slovene dailies showed no attempts to justify war, if anything they condemned it. The first day of war they already reported on refugees and speculated about civil causalities. Photos of demonstrations against war followed the second day. They also pointed out the poverty and underdevelopment of Afghanistan. Both dailies also doubted success in fighting terrorism, e.g. "September 11th was the peak of unsuccessful American fight against the terrorism." (Dnevnik, 9. 10.)

• Statistics

Analyzed dailies Delo and Dnevnik have the highest circulation of Slovene dailies (Delo varied from 80.110 copies to 108.980 copies and Dnevnik from 64.100 to 66.200 copies in  analyzed  time span from 8th October to 22nd October). The majority of texts on terrorism were published at the beginning of attack, later on the number faded down, e.g. there were 8 articles in Dnevnik and 12 in Delo on 8th October. On 9th October there were 13 articles on terrorism in Dnevnik and 16 in Delo. The number of articles altogether was almost twice as high in Delo as it was in Dnevnik (93 texts in Delo compared to 51 in Dnevnik). The editorial policy of both dailies was rather similar, however the professional attitude differed. Delo had correspondents from USA, Asia and also a special reporter in Afghanistan, whereas Dnevnik relied more on agency reports and journalist in Slovenia. Dnevnik had almost 20 % (10 articles) of agency texts, which were longer summaries of various agency reports and were also central articles on external politics page, whereas Delo had 16 % (15 articles) of texts of foreign source, mostly short agency reports.

• Understanding war

The front pages of both newspapers were reserved for "War against the talibans" (as the headline put it in Delo, 8. 10.) for two days exactly. In Delo the front page was occupied with war reports throughout the analysis, whereas in Dnevnik articles on war and terrorism moved to the inner pages on the third day already. There were 29 articles published on the front page in Delo and only 7 in Dnevnik. The number of reports published on external politics side also varies, 51 in Delo and 38 in Dnevnik.

Both dailies tried to balance information using several sources: agency reports, correspondents, Afghanistan vs. American television, etc. Both also used Slovene defense experts and professors in explaining the details on war strategy and weapons used, e.g. an analysis of attacks with a member of Slovene army (Dnevnik, 9. 10.), interview with Slovene professor of defense (Dnevnik, 17.10.). Dnevnik used many local experts, whereas Delo, having correspondents, also published several interviews with foreign experts, e.g. with a German professor of political sciences (Delo, 11. 10.), with a Russian major that fought in Afghanistan (Delo, 12. 10.), with Afghanistan ambassador in UN (Delo, 17. 10.), with a sister of Afghanistan’s former president (Delo, 20. 10.).

The first reports were mostly on technical details on the weapon used, war strategy, maps of the targets and terrorism spreading through out the world (e.g. Delo showed a map of the world with colored zones where "Cells from Hell" were operating, Delo, 8. 10.). The technical descriptions might have helped the readers to better understand the scope of the war. But photos of airplanes carrying bombs, firing rockets from aircraft-carriers, tanks and headlines, e.g. "American war machine", "Arrows that don't miss", (Delo, 8. 10.), "Talibans proclaim the holly war" (Dnevnik, 9. 10.) certainly created a sense of danger as well. The feeling of helplessness and fear accelerated even more when anthrax panic burst out, e.g. photo on the front page of Dnevnik with people in masks (Dnevnik, 16. 10.) and Delo's commentary under the same photo asking rhetorically "A coincidence or bin Laden?" (Delo, 16. 10.).

Journalists often quoted George W. Bush vs. Osama bin Laden, with opposing interpretations of the new or holy war. Apart from the holy war interpretation there was no space for Afghanistan situation on the front page, Delo put it on the third page. The first two being reserved for American side of the truth. Dnevnik balanced the statements from Washington and Kabul on the second page. The second day Dnevnik also introduced religious elements by publishing commentaries of Roman Catholic Church and Islamic community in Slovenia, which both condemned violence.

• Identifying terrorism

The definition of terrorism was perhaps most effective in Dnevnik's interview with a professor of defense sciences, where he said: "Terrorism is a systematic use of intimidation to achieve  religious, ideological, political or other goals." (Dnevnik, 17. 10.) Both dailies seemed to follow this definition and reminded the readers there were several other terrorist groups, besides the talibans. Palestinian question was also present all the time. There were local connections drawn, e.g. the opium from Afghanistan was traveling through Kosovo. The prevailing opinion was, Americans allowed it and they were paying the price for past mistakes (Delo, 9. 10.). One could say that Osama bin Laden functioned as a symbol of Islamic terrorism, but both dailies strongly pointed out that Muslims are not terrorists. An article in Dnevnik warned the readers from attacking the Muslim communities (Dnevnik, 11. 10.). Dnevnik also gave much space to a guest from Sarajevo, Melika Salihbeg Bosnawi, who tried to explain Islamic concepts, but according to the reporter put too much blame for Muslim problems on the western intervention (Dnevnik, 18. 10.).

Commentaries (there were 23 % of all texts in Dnevnik and 28 % in Delo) were usually a combination of hard facts, common sense and speculations, e.g. Delo warned there was no real evidence against Osama bin Laden (Delo, 9. 10.), commentator predicted Americans will fail in Afghanistan like the Russian and the English did (Delo, 10. 10.), some commentators said "Arabic world will explode" and thought giving Americans support wasn't politically wise. Some commentators used hate speech in commenting on Islam, which "violates human rights", but only in one particular case (Dnevnik, 11. 10.). There was only one commentary published on opinion's page saying Americans should attack Afghanistan sooner, since "it is a catastrophe that fundamentalism is the only civil society in Islamic world" (Delo, 17. 10.). Delo's comparison on Irish and Islamic terrorism was based on ideology, since it criticized Americans supporting the first and attacking the last (Delo, 11. 10). There was also a prevailing opinion that Americans wanted to rule Central Asia and were using terrorism as an excuse in gaining economic interests, e.g. "The war is a direct consequence of the cold war ending." (Delo, 16. 10.)

If we draw the line, did dailies report balanced or tended to support one side of the conflict? According to our politicians they reported in an anti-American way.

• Independent journalism vs. politics

Journalists in commentaries and caricaturists expressed doubts on American way of solving the terrorism problem. Delo's correspondent wrote the first day with irony, e.g. "The war is beautiful once again. Military results are obvious and there are no reports on civil casualties." (Delo, 8. 10.) American humanitarian actions were also treated with irony, e.g. headline "Charity war?" (Delo, 9. 10), "Bread and bombs", (Delo, 11. 10.), "Cake bombs" (Delo, 15. 10.), etc.

On October 9th Slovene politicians expressed support for American actions, Dnevnik gave them a whole page with photos and Delo just a short briefing of their statements. Attack on media followed shortly, the politicians thought media should act as alliance in the war against terrorism and shouldn't afford criticism and irony. Media were accused of being unprofessional, some were accused of being spokesmen of the taliban regime, e.g. "Radio Slovenia is Radio Kabul" (Dnevnik, 13. 10.). Media responded sharply to accusations, e.g. "Politicians think that Central Asia war could be a shortcut to NATO, therefore we should censor human rights" (Dnevnik, 13. 10.).      

• New world order?

There was a sense of gloomy uncertainty present, since the world would never be the same after September 11th. Journalists were being critical of American actions, e.g. USA was accused of having double standards, they attacked immediately without solid proofs against bin Laden, where on the other hand they waited (too long) in Bosnia and Kosovo. The "silk globalization with USA as response to terrorism" was presented as a doubtful option (Delo, 22. 10.). Silk here was used ironically actually meaning just the opposite, that is harsh globalization, because presidents were dressed in traditional Chinese silk.

• Reporting facts

Did the dailies do their job in informing the readers? Yes, in general they did. Dnevnik, due to the lack of correspondents, less than Delo. They did a thorough job in reporting facts on how the war was evolving. They avoided the use of hate speech and other problematic speech figures, except for irony and cynism. The publicity and space intended for terrorism was as seen a matter of editorial policy and available resources. If we said the reporting was emotional or ideological, it was anti-American rather than anti-Islamic. But it is safe to say only politicians who were eager to join NATO noticed anti-Americanism. Otherwise I believe critical distance is normal and necessary in any democratic journalism.

Alenka Kotnik works as a journalist at TV Slovenia, and contributes regularly to Medijska preza, slovene media journal. ©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