Drones and a change in journalism?

One issue I felt really didn’t get coverage during the election, until Benghazi (and not even really then), was foreign policy…especially the usage of drones, which has increased during Obama’s presidency (perhaps this semi-ties into the fact that guns in general, weapons, were not discussed).  

This article highlights the army’s increased interest in and dependency on drone operators and equipment that comes with drones – equipment that need not be transported overseas, but can be operated from a small room in America – equipment that can plan attacks on Google Earth — not only does this raise ethical questions about warfare, but also practical questions about cyber warfare threats and America’s unseen but prevalent military presence worldwide.

Then there is this article from the Guardian, which references the NYTimes, where:

“President Barack Obama’s administration is in the process of drawing up a formal rulebook that will set out the circumstances in which targeted assassination by unmanned drones is justified, according to reports.”

Targeted assassination by the United States is not legal! Human rights groups are up in arms – and the media should be as well.

I am an Obama supporter, but these covert operations are not OK and warrant greater discussion.

Citizens can take to Twitter and Facebook to ask questions and get words trending – like drone. Video/citizen journalism is important, but, as we discussed after the election as to why people still tune into the television, there are certain subjects that seasoned journalists have more access to – hence the reason they are journalists and not mere citizens who happen to be at the right place at the right time.

Storify is important for citizens, but my cynical self still believes the change has to come from the media organizations themselves, as no amount of citizen unrest or protest will create a shift if there are unwilling moguls/ media heads/ advertisers.

I think there is such a tendency to be politically correct and to attract eyes  — to papers, web pages, and screens, that there need to be more publically funded stations (like PBS, for example). Without the push for advertising, for eyes, there can be fewer sensationalized pieces, pieces intended to draw eyes, and more straight-fact reporting on a wide range of issues. For lack of a better word, boring (i.e. more substantial) reporting can become more acceptable, as it is in Europe. 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Benjamin A Simon Election 2012 Blog

A topnotch WordPress.com site

Media in the 2016 Election

How is media informing, influencing, and/or impacting this year's election?

Media and the Presidential Election - 2012

How is media informing, influencing, and/or impacting this year's election?

%d bloggers like this: