Thursday 29 May 2008

IHT Four Star Edition and AP, or is NYT?

These previous posts bring us to the issue of how reliant the 4 star European edition is (the one I receive) on AP, because it closes before some NYT journalists have filed. What's often not clear is whether the smaller pieces come from AP, or from the NYT's journalist.

And you can see for yourself the differences between IHT edited AP or NYT stories, and their take on it, and the original source material the IHT editors work from (in this case, clearly a NYT piece, but the example is interesting nonetheless);

Here is the original and first piece (AP always first) filed by AP on the issue of the 3 presidential candidates making a declaration on Darfur.

All 3 US presidential candidates pledge to seek an end to violence in Darfur if elected
The Associated Press
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
WASHINGTON: In a rare show of bipartisan unity, the three presidential candidates lent their names to a statement and newspaper ad Wednesday accusing the Sudanese government of genocide in the Darfur region and urging an end to the violence.
Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton joined with Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain in signing the ad in The New York Times headlined "GENOCIDE."
"We stand united and demand that the genocide and violence in Darfur be brought to an end," says the ad. It was paid for by the SaveDarfur Coalition, which describes itself on its Web site as an alliance of over 180 faith-based, advocacy and humanitarian organizations.
The coalition has posted videos on its Web site of the candidates discussing Darfur and a joint statement from the candidates condemning the Sudanese government as chiefly responsible for the violence and for failing to adhere to a peace agreement.
"We wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us," the statement said in part. "Even as we campaign for the presidency, we will use our standing as senators to press for the steps needed to ensure that the United States honors, in practice and in deed, its commitment to the cause of peace and protection of Darfur's innocent citizenry ... It would be a huge mistake for the Khartoum regime to think that it will benefit by running out the clock on the Bush administration.
"If peace and security for the people of Sudan are not in place when one of us is inaugurated as president on January 20, 2009, we pledge that the next administration will pursue these goals with unstinting resolve."
Fighting has raged in Darfur since 2003, when ethnic African tribesman took up arms, complaining of decades of neglect and discrimination by the Sudanese Arab-dominated government. The Sudanese government is accused of unleashing janjaweed militia forces to commit atrocities against ethnic African communities in the fight with rebel groups. The government denies the accusations.
More than 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been displaced in Darfur. President Bush has also labeled the situation there genocide.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/28/america/NA-POL-US-Presidential-Candidates-Darfur.php


NOW, THIS IS HOW THE STORY WAS EDITED INTO A 'BRIEFLY' FOR THE FOUR STAR EDITION OF THE IHT - THE PIECE WAS NOT CREDITED TO AP, NOR THE FAMOUS 'FROM NEWS REPORTS'. IN FACT IT WAS WRITTEN BY, WELL, NO ONE APPARENTLY. BUT AS WE WILL FIND OUT LATER, IT IS IN FACT EDITED FROM A NYT JOURNALIST'S STORY.

BRIEFLY, AMERICAS, PAGE 4, 4 STAR EDITION, THURSDAY MAY 29TH.
3 WHO SEEK PRESIDENCY JOIN IN WARNING SUDAN

WASHINGTON: The three senators who would be president have agreed to a rare joint statement accusing the Sudanese government of atrocities against civilians in Darfur and warning it not to try and run out the clock on the Bush administration, which has called the killings in Darfur genocide.
"Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us," declared a joint statement released Wednesday by the Save Darfur Coalition on behalf of Senators Hilary Rodham Clinton, JOhn McCain and Barack Obama. [NB: NO MENTION OF ADVERT IN IHT OWNED NYT] "If peace and security for the people of Sudan are not in place when one of us is inaugurated as president on January 20, 2009, we pledge that the next administration will pursue these goals with unstinting resolve."
The statement is largely symbolic [NB: WOULD THAT BE NEWS OR NEWS ANALYSIS OR OPINION?] because the three are not proposing any specific congressional action against Sudan. But it is meant to send a message [NB: IS SENDING A MESSAGE BY THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE USA LARGELY SYMBOLIC? I'D SAY NOT] to the government of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan that the next American president will continue to sound an [SYMBOLIC?] alarm on Darfur.

NOW WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE PIECE ON IHT.COM BY NYT'S JOURNALIST
HELEN COOPER

In rare move, 3 candidates in U.S. join in pledge on Darfur
WASHINGTON: The three senators who would be president have agreed to a rare joint statement accusing the Sudanese government of atrocities against civilians in Darfur and warning it not to try to run out the clock on the Bush administration, which has called the killings in Darfur genocide. [NB: NO MENTION OF ADVERT IN IHT OWNED NYT]
"Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us," declared a joint statement to be released on Wednesday by the Save Darfur Coalition on behalf of Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton, John McCain and Barack Obama. "If peace and security for the people of Sudan are not in place when one of us is inaugurated as president on Jan. 20, 2009, we pledge that the next administration will pursue these goals with unstinting resolve."
The statement is largely symbolic because the three are not proposing any specific congressional action against Sudan. Nor are they calling for tangible steps by the United States to put pressure on the Sudanese government. For instance, the statement is silent about whether the Bush administration should use its turn as president of the United Nations Security Council in June to seek further ways to press Sudan.
But the statement is meant to send a message to the government of President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan that the next American president will continue to sound an alarm on Darfur. Under the Bush administration, the United States has sought to harness international pressure, particularly at the United Nations, to get Sudan to accept a contingent of international peacekeeping forces in Darfur.
The administration has also entered into talks with Sudan and is holding out the prospect of normalizing its diplomatic ties with the United States and removing it from a list of state supporters of terrorism if Sudan agrees to allow Thai and Nepalese peacekeepers into Darfur.
At least 200,000 people have been killed there since the Arab-dominated government of Sudan unleashed tribal militias known as the janjaweed on non-Arab rebel groups and civilians. The Sudanese government says that the death toll in Darfur has been exaggerated and denies that the killing there amounts to genocide, as President George W. Bush has said.
[CF THIS NYT FACTUAL BACKGROUND WITH THAT OF AP: Fighting has raged in Darfur since 2003, when ethnic African tribesman took up arms, complaining of decades of neglect and discrimination by the Sudanese Arab-dominated government. The Sudanese government is accused of unleashing janjaweed militia forces to commit atrocities against ethnic African communities in the fight with rebel groups. The government denies the accusations.More than 200,000 people have died and 2.5 million have been displaced in Darfur. President Bush has also labeled the situation there genocide. NOT MUCH IN IT IS THERE?]
The president of the Save Darfur Coalition, Jerry Fowler, said the joint statement from the presidential candidates should serve as a warning to Bashir's government. "The tangible piece will be on Jan. 20, 2009," Fowler said, "when whichever one of these candidates wins the presidency and makes Darfur a Day 1 issue."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/28/america/28pledge.php

OUT OF CURIOSITY, TO SEE HOW WELL ROUNDED THESE PIECES ARE, I THOUGHT I'D CHECK IN WITH THE SAVE DARFUR COALITION AND SEE WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY.

HERE'S THEIR PRESS RELEASE

CLINTON, McCAIN, OBAMA JOINT STATEMENT: ‘WE STAND UNITED ON SUDAN’
Candidates pledge ‘unstinting resolve’ in ending Darfur genocide, Save Darfur Coalition hails historic joint statement on ending Sudan crisis

WASHINGTON – The Save Darfur Coalition today hailed the historic joint statement by the three remaining U.S. presidential candidates stating their united resolve to end the Darfur genocide and bring peace and security to all Sudan.
“As we campaign for President of the United States over the next several months, we expect there to be significant focus on the many differences between us,” reads the statement, which is also featured today in a New York Times advertisement. “It is with this awareness that we are taking the uncommon step of issuing a joint statement about an issue. After more than five years of genocide, the Sudanese government and its proxies continue to commit atrocities against civilians in Darfur. This is unacceptable to the American people and to the world community.”
A copy of the advertisement can be viewed here: www.savedarfur.org/darfurunited.
“With this unequivocal joint statement, these candidates have elected to transcend their differences in party and policies and unite for the peace and protection of the people in Sudan,” said Save Darfur Coalition board chair Rev. Gloria White-Hammond, M.D. “Candidates should bear in mind, though, that the work of Darfur advocates is not done. The constituency of conscience that has come together around Darfur is determined to make clear to the candidates that a plan for peace in Sudan is a prerequisite for the White House.”
“The unanimous resolve among the candidates to bring an end to the genocide is a testament to the gravity of the situation in Darfur and also the effectiveness of the advocates’ campaigns to move U.S. and world leaders to action,” said Larry Sabato, founder and director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. “In fact, this may be the first issue to generate a joint statement of this magnitude since the foreign policy advisors to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Thomas E. Dewey asserted their respective candidates’ resolve to end World War II prior to the 1944 presidential election.”
Ongoing and escalating violence in Sudan – including the recent destruction of the contested town of Abyei – reinforces the importance of this united determination from the candidates. Following the Justice and Equality Movement attack on the capital May 10, reports from the ground indicate that the Sudanese government’s response has been heavy-handed and rife with human rights abuses. The reports indicate widespread detentions and disappearances, summary executions, crackdowns on Darfuri journalists and lawyers, and the looting of Darfuri homes and businesses in and around Khartoum. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir virtually promised a new round of brutal attacks in Darfur on May 20, leaving millions of civilians in the villages, cities and IDP camps in fear for their lives.
Throughout the presidential campaign, activists across the country have engaged the candidates on Darfur through initiatives like Ask the Candidates (www.askthecandidates.org) and Save Darfur’s Voter Education Project. The coalition launched its voter education project (www.savedarfur.org/candidates) last November – which features two-minute YouTube op-eds from the candidates. In Iowa and New Hampshire, hundreds of caucus and primary-goers signed full-page advertisements pressing Republican and Democratic presidential candidates to outline a clear policy to end the suffering in Darfur and to make the prevention of future atrocities a priority in their campaigns. The coalition will continue its efforts to ensure the Darfur genocide remains a central topic in the race for the White House.
“Today, we wish to make clear to the Sudanese government that on this moral issue of tremendous importance, there is no divide between us,” the statement adds. “If peace and security for the people of Sudan are not in place when one of us is inaugurated as President on January 20, 2009, we pledge that the next Administration will pursue these goals with unstinting resolve.”
http://www.savedarfur.org/newsroom/releases/clinton_mccain_obama_joint_statement_we_stand_united_on_sudan/


The good news here is that neither AP nor the NYT got their Darfur data from this press release, and nor did Helene Cooper get her quote from president of the Save Darfur Coalition, Jerry Fowler, from the press release either.

Personally, I think the running of the advert in the NYT, given the IHT is now that paper's global edition (WE ARE YET TO SEE THE ADVERT, AT LEAST IN MY EDITION OF THEIR GLOBAL EDITION SO SOME WAY TO GO FOR THE NYT'S ADVERTISING SALES TEAM TO WORK OUT THEY DO NOW HAVE A GLOBAL EDITION. HOWEVER THERE WAS A VERY NICE, AS EVER UNREAD, ADVERTISING SUPPLEMENT FROM A NIGERIAN OIL STATE) is relevant and should have been mentioned in both Cooper's piece and the IHT's briefly.

So, that's high marks for the IHT/NYT and AP on fleshing out background without relying on the Coalition's press release.

A tap on the hand for not mentioning that this statement was infact an advert run in the NYT.

Poor marks, very, for the NYT advertising sale's team because I would have liked to have read that advertisement yesterday here in Europe, and no doubt SDJ could have done with the bread.

Bread (that's English slang for MONEY) from the victims of Darfur - or was the advert a gift from the NYT to the Coalition, in which case we need to be told: either the NYT is taking money from people trying to save, according to their own journalist, 2.5 million displaced people - that's a nice of the NYT - or they gave the advert to the Coalition - in which case, we also need to be told because it's highly relevant to the integrity and independence of the journalism surrounding the advert.

And what I'd like to be made clear is correct and clear sourcing of the Brieflys that appear in the IHT - wire, or NYT?

This is the type of thing I'd like to be keeping a closer eye on, but it's all about time.

Is there another IHT fan out there who wants to come and help me with this blog?

No comments: