After watching the 60 minutes segment I thought the reporter did fairly well upholding the "Murrow Standard." Most voice over dialogue in this piece were simple facts or statements, and in my opinion, did not show much bias. When the reporter did say something opinionated or controversial, he attributed it to the individual that said it. I also think he asked fair, and straight forward questions, with maybe one or two exceptions in the Texaco attorney interview. The only place where the report strayed from the high standards of traditional journalism is when it omited crucial facts. The second report shows evidence of sewage dumps and the striking similarities between the plaintiff's and court-ordered damage reports. Both of these points should be included in any report on this subject.
While the second report did make some good points, it was hard to ignore the obvious bias in favor of Texaco. The journalist used some phrases that demean the plaintiff and the citizens of Ecuador. But one major spot I had a problem with is when he mentions the photos of the damage report.
"Then there are photos to consider. The man in the red shirt is Donald Muncaillo, apparently assisting Cabrerra's so-called independent search for evidence. Muncaillo is a leading activist with the Amazon Defence Coalition, the designated recipient of any court awarded damages in Ecuador. In this shot, Muncaillo is wearing a yellow shirt, Cabrerra is seen leaning against a tree."
These photos do not provide significant evidence of anything, and the reporter should not have implied that corruption seems obvious. Even if they did prove something, it is not a reporter's job to make assumptions.
No comments:
Post a Comment