News From You

followthemedia.com - a knowledge base for media professionals

ftm News From You

News From You

We receive dozens of news tips and press releases each week from ftm contributors. We want MORE. And we want to share the raw information as quickly as possible. NEWS FROM YOU is the forum for adding what you know to what we know. Share what you know...or what your hear. We will apply the light-touch of the editors axe for clarity. We will also accept NEWS FROM YOU in English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Dutch and Portuguese...without translation. (We do insist on being able to understand what you contribute.) You also must clearly indicate that your contribution is for publication in NEWS FROM YOU.

Please note: we cannot use PDF files, only text and .doc files.

Send us NEWS FROM YOU

Week ending August 16, 2008

REUTERS DISAPPOINTED WITH ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES FINDINGS INTO DEATH OF REUTERS CAMERAMAN IN GAZA - August 13, 2008
from Sophie.Brendel/ThomsonReuters

Reuters today said it was disappointed with and dissatisfied by the findings of a report by the Israeli military, which concluded that an Israeli tank crew who killed Fadel Shana, a Reuters cameraman, and eight young bystanders in the Gaza Strip four months ago acted properly and will not face legal action.

Israel’s senior military advocate-general told the London-based news agency in a letter sent on Tuesday that troops could not see whether Fadel Shana was operating a camera or a weapon but were nonetheless justified in firing a shell packed with darts that killed him and eight other Palestinians aged between 12 and 20.

Reuters is deeply disturbed by a conclusion that would severely curtail the freedom of the media to cover the conflict by effectively giving soldiers a free hand to kill without being sure that they were not firing on journalists.

"I'm extremely disappointed that this report condones a disproportionate use of deadly force in a situation the army itself admitted had not been analysed clearly.” said Reuters Editor-in-Chief David Schlesinger. "They would appear to take the view that any raising of a camera into position could garner a deadly response."

In Jerusalem, the Foreign Press Association said it was disappointed with a report that seemed to give soldiers licence to fire on journalists without being sure of their target.

In New York, Joel Campagna of the Committee to Protect Journalists said: "These findings mean that a journalist with a camera is at risk of coming under fire and there's not that much that can be done. That's unacceptable. It's difficult to believe ... that the IDF took the necessary precautions to avoid causing harm to civilians -- as it is obliged to do under international law."

Shana, 24, filmed two tanks positioned about 1.5 km (one mile) from where he was standing for several minutes before, in a chilling final 2 seconds of video, his camera captured one of the tanks firing a shell that burst overhead, showering the journalist and others with thousands of metal darts known as flechettes.

"The tank crew was unable to determine the nature of the object mounted on the tripod and positively identify it as an anti-tank missile, a mortar or a television camera," Brigadier General Avihai Mendelblit, the advocate general, wrote of the incident on April 16.

But Mendelblit cited an attack that killed three Israeli soldiers in another part of the enclave earlier in the day, an earlier grenade attack on a tank, the fact that Shana and his soundman, who was wounded, were wearing body armour -- "common to Palestinian terrorists" -- among reasons for suspicion.

Blue flak jackets worn by the Reuters journalists, like the car, were marked "PRESS". The army said the troops could not see those signs. Journalists in Gaza say they have rarely seen militants wear flak jackets.

In a letter issued by Reuters today to the IDF, Reuters has responded to the conclusion with a number of questions, including asking precisely why the soldiers ruled out the possibility that Shana was a cameraman, why his standing in full view of the tanks for several minutes did not suggest he had no hostile intent and why the crew, if concerned but unsure, did not simply reverse a few metres out of sight.