June 03, 2005

CNN then and CNN now.

At CJR Daily, Thomas Lang compares CNN's coverage of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda with its current coverage of the genocide in Sudan. Guess which one wins?

While it might not have been perfect, CNN's performance in 1994, in particular the use of images, far exceeds its skimpy coverage of the current conflict in Sudan. Simply put, if you watched CNN in the summer of 1994, you were made aware of a genocide taking place on a nationwide scale — and you were given a working understanding of what triggered it.

The same cannot be said for the network's coverage of Sudan this year. These days there's a lot of talk from anchors and guests about the pictures they see, but the network doesn't actually have any footage. By CJR Daily's count, the last time CNN showed pictures from Sudan was March 15. At the time, Wolf Blitzer told viewers, "The images in the piece we're about to show you may be disturbing to some viewers." Disturbing? Yes, but necessary to get across the fact that brutal slaughter occurs on a daily basis in Sudan.

There's lots more to Lang's analysis. Read it all here.

Posted by Magpie at June 3, 2005 03:58 PM | Media | Technorati links |
Comments