4 Global Brief
10 War and Reconstruction -
ultimate test for
international
broadcasters
Alan Heil looks at how the war in Iraq
has affected international broadcasters
targeting the Middle East region
14 Handling the war’s news
Three AIB members explain how they have
tackled the war for viewers and listeners
18
Covering the war - how
safe should journalists be?
With deaths of journalists throughout
the conflict, what is the impact on
future conflict coverage?
20
Winning hearts and minds
Measuring the media’s impact on
consumers is vital to plan future
programming and delivery. Dr Haleh Vaziri
of InterMedia Survey Institute reports
23
AIB - Serving the
international
broadcasting industry
Find out what the AIB does, and how it
can help you.
24
Work with yesterday’s
show for a better tomorrow
Valerie Geller shares some of her
thoughts on compelling programming
26
New life for the AM bands
Peter Gordon looks at the impending
revolution known as DRM
29
Newsgathering -
preparation is everything
How do you get a war on the air?
Anver Anderson explains.
31
AIB interview
Kerry Stevenson talks to Ian Ritchie of
APTN
33
Technology brief
37
DaletPlus
Explaining Dalet’s new suite of products
38
BroadcastAsia preview
Editorial
Contents
Published by The Association for International Broadcasting
a non-profit making company limited by guarantee and registered in England
The Channel - ISSN 1477-8718
© The Association for International Broadcasting April 2003
Editor
Tom Walters
Managing Editor
Simon Spanswick
Advertising
Kerry Stevenson
Tel
+44 (0) 20 8992 7073
Editorial Office
PO Box 4440, Walton, CO14 8BX, UK
Tel
+44 (0) 1255 676 996
AIB Head Office
PO Box 990, London SE3 9XL, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8297 3993
Design
and typesetting in house by AIB
Print by Opasco Limited, Crawley, England
Dispatch by DeutschPost Global Mail, England
Full marks for technology: what score for content?
The coverage of the Iraq war was international broadcasting on the grand scale.
It was a huge challenge for the international broadcasting community, one that it
met with great success. Reporting equipment has become so easy to deploy that
broadcasters were able to bring us round-the-clock, high quality reporting from a
constantly shifting battle zone. It seemed that the entire world was the audience.
From President Bush and Prime Minister Blair to the humblest viewer, across the
globe we were all glued to our television screens, listening avidly to radios, and
flicking round the Internet for the latest developments.
With few glitches, the technical challenge was met and overcome. The conflict in
Afghanistan had shown what was needed, and those pioneering technological
solutions formed the basis for the coverage in Iraq. Anchor people in their own
countries and in the Gulf region, sometimes even in the battle zone, were able to
flick from one report to another with ease – from “embedded” reporter in the front
line, to observer in Baghdad watching colossal bombs dropping, to assessment
from the region, from foreign capitals and in the studio. The parade of information
and comment was endless and most impressive.
We make no apology that, in this issue, we celebrate this international broadcasting
achievement.
Unforgettable images passed across our screens. Domestic coverage in the UK
included the BBC’s John Simpson, with shrapnel wounds, back on the job just a
few moments after a bomb had dropped right next to him, in a “friendly fire”
incident that killed many of those near by; and night after night, the spectacular
Baghdad skyline of fire and smoke as massive precision bombs smashed into their
targets.
These images provoke two cautionary questions, both to do with humanity. First,
journalist safety. Is it right for editors to encourage their reporters to venture into
the direct line of fire, in their efforts to capture the most dramatic scenes? We got
our daily thrills, but should we be asking people to risk their lives like this? We
discuss the question in this issue, and pay tribute to those who gave their lives in
the course of their work.
And is there a danger of the whole panorama degenerating into a kind of huge
production, where sensation follows sensation? Editors do their best to give the
endless flow of reporting some perspective, and some coherence, but there still
lurks the feeling that it is all some kind of show. In war people are being hurt and
killed in great numbers. The anti-war protesters were telling us that before the
conflict started. In the race to a result, did we convey the human cost adequately?
Overall though, this was a broadcasting job exceedingly well done. Now we are in
good shape for any further global-scale crises.
