|
From
The Media Guardian
http://media.guardian.co.uk
We got it wrong on
hotel attack, admits Sky
Ciar Byrne
June 25, 2003
Media coverage of the
attack on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad that killed two television cameramen
was "overblown" because journalists were at the centre of the story, BBC and Sky
correspondents in the Iraqi capital have claimed.
The head of Sky News,
Nick Pollard, today told the MediaGuardian forum on war coverage that on the day
of the attack on the hotel - the main centre for western journalists reporting
the war - he decided after a few hours to stop running it as the main story.
"It was overblown, but
for a very good reason, because that was the centre for the media," said Sky reporter
David Chater.
"Throughout the day I
kept it halfway through my reports, but eventually the story took over. It was
very dramatic and it was awful to see journalists being carried out of the hotel.
Everybody thought another tank shell would come," he added.
Reuters cameraman Taras
Protsyuk and Spanish cameraman Jose Couso were killed when the hotel was hit by
US tank fire on April 8.
"Understandably when the
incident happened we focused on it very heavily. The story of the attack on the
Palestine Hotel led the bulletin," said Pollard, adding that Sky News ran graphic
pictures of the casualties live from Baghdad.
However, he added: "I
remember very clearly after a couple of hours getting the sense we were getting
it wrong. I supported David's view that we should be there but not focusing on
it." Andrew Gilligan, the defence and diplomatic correspondent for BBC Radio 4's
Today programme, agreed.
"I thought the incident
was pretty overplayed. There really were an awful lot of other people being killed
in Baghdad and they didn't have any choice in being there," he said.
"I don't think the Americans
really minded that journalists were attacked, because they didn't want us there
in the first place. But my feeling is journalists were not really the story."
Barry Moody, Reuters'
Middle East and Africa editor, said the US military had still not provided the
news organisation with its version of what happened on the day of the attack.
"We're very frustrated
we still have no information from the Pentagon. We hope the pressure will eventually
force the Pentagon to come up with their own version of events," he said.
"I think it's essential
journalists in other wars do stay in places like Baghdad and that they are kept
out of the line of fire."
The news organisation
and the committee for the protection of journalists have worked to provide a detailed
account of what happened.
However, although US military
commanders accepted responsibility, they have not been forthcoming about why tanks
opened fire on a hotel that the Pentagon knew to be the main base for western
reporters.
"One of the things I
was worried about in the way the Americans reacted was this line, 'We told you
it was dangerous - if you're there, you're there at your own risk and what happens
to you is your own responsibility'. It's unrealistic to expect journalists to
leave a major story like Baghdad," Moody said.
The Guardian's Baghdad
correspondent during the war, Suzanne Goldenberg, said the attack on journalists
was "indicative of the fact that [the US military] showed little regard over what
happened to civilians in that city".
"What happened to the
journalists is part of a broader picture of disregard for human life in the way
wars are fought," she said.
Gilligan, who on the day
of the attack cast doubts on whether the blast that killed the cameramen had come
from a American tank, maintained his view that damage to the balcony of the Reuters'
base at the hotel was more consistent with the marks that would have been made
by a rocket-propelled grenade.
He added that Saddam Hussein's
Fedayeen militia were in the square behind the hotel on that day carrying RPGs
and behaving in an "unruly" fashion.
However, Gilligan conceded
that American tanks did fire at the hotel, and said that as the military has admitted
responsibility, a US tank probably was to blame.
ENDS
|