As this link is updated periodically, you will have to click further to get to the February 23 version.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-chanlowe.cartoongallery?index=4

I am indeed sorry that Mr. Pearl died in such a horrible way. But I have a serious, heretical-sounding question: did he actually DO something heroic, or did he just get captured and killed? (Please forgive my ignorance--I haven't followed this very much.) Did he really give his life for truth, or was he just there on an assignment?

He wanted to interview the leaders of the Moslem extremists in Pakistan. They just grabbed him up. Not heroic - merely another journalist with no nose for danger and a really bad sense of timing.

Sad, but not really earth-shattering. Journalists are fair game in the middle east.

I heard a couple of people talking on the radio the other day about this. They also said that a huge number of journalists die or get killed around the world each year whilst on assignment - 150 I think they said. This seems to be an extraordinary claim?

stales

After September 11th, every American who dies in a foreign land is a hero. [Hypocritical emoticon]

I heard a couple of people talking on the radio the other day about this. They also said that a huge number of journalists die or get killed around the world each year whilst on assignment - 150 I think they said. This seems to be an extraordinary claim?

I didn't hear this story, stales, but I know it's true. Photojournalism is a subject close to my heart and I have followed it closely ever since I started to hear about such legends as Robert Capa and Don McCullin. Capa was killed in the early days of the Indo-China war whilst McCullin covered Vietnam, the Lebanese civil war and many other conflicts around the world.

Nobody knows why journalists are lured to the dangerous spots and conflicts but some say that it is their need to cover the truth of a subject and record it for the world to see that drives them. Unlike a CNN reporter standing at the rear or in a Holiday Inn the true reporter puts on a flak jacket and goes out with the forces to oversee behaviour on both sides. The best journalists record atrocities on both sides, as I believe there were plenty in the recent Afghan debacle.

Many young journalists are killed during quiet moments and lulls in the fighting when their guard is down and they are least expecting trouble - not in the heat of battle. Four Swedish journalists were killed by bandits whilst sleeping in a small village held by 'friendly' forces in Afghansiatan. 150 journalists killed last year seems quite a conservative figure, byt the way. During one year of the Bosnian conflict alone more than 50 journalists were killed - several by sniper fire just after arriving at Sarajevo airport - and conflicts elsewhere would easily bring this figure up to the hundreds.

I don't mind confessing that, despite the dangers involved, I almost gave up my job to take a freelance assignment to Afghanistan last year. The conflict didn't last long enough for me to finish my organisation, however. Had I been wounded or killed during that conflict I would hate to have been referred to as a hero. What I would have seen and recorded would be my testament to frivolity and horror of war and that is more important to me than fame and recognition. And, so I believe, to all journalists.

Daniel Pearl was unlucky. He knew the risk he was taking and he paid dearly for it. But his being used as a political pass-the-parcel and being referred to as a hero is unwarrented. The fact he was American was coincidental to the task he was performing. He was a journalist - not a freedom fighter and, to label him a hero implies the latter which is just sickening.

The political implications of such labelling is to give carte blanche to the Draconian anti-terrorist policies of a fundamentally arrogant US government by justifying pressure on the Pakistani government and even, in the not-too-distant future, allowing a military occupation of that country.

to label him a hero ... is just sickening.

I do not appreciate my posts being called "sickening".

You are entitled to your opinion. If you are a socialized creature, you should use ordinary decency in expressing it.

Rubrick : I agree with your observation that some say that it is their need to cover the truth of a subject and record it for the world to see that drives them.

journalists are lured to the dangerous spots and conflicts is perhaps true of freelancers but in many cases the reporter is assigned by an editor and goes where sent.
Then of course you have the "Bigfoots" - nationally known figures - who rush in, report and leave. My personal experience is that most Bigfoots are from TV.
Generally, it is the regular reporter, the guy-on-the-ground who gets the real stories.
Many events would never have been noticed internationally but for the persistence and courage of some guys on the ground. The famine in Ethiopia of years ago leaps to mind.

Then, of course there are cases where combatants who have things to hide will kill a reporter for the chilling effect on the media.
When troops are sent they have had training and are armed. Reporters go with a pencil and paper. Hero? Perhaps not. But courageous, I think so.
My sympathy goes out to the family Dan Pearl left behind.

I don' think Rubrick actually disagrees... what he said was
Daniel Pearl was unlucky. He knew the risk he was taking and he paid dearly for it. But his being used as a political pass-the-parcel and being referred to as a hero is unwarrented. The fact he was American was coincidental to the task he was performing. He was a journalist - not a freedom fighter and, to label him a hero implies the latter which is just sickening.E.A.

He didn't say the post was sickening.. or that it no big deal that David Pearl was killed.

But labeling him a hero for doing a job, and getting killed is a bit much.

Yes, we who live with the luxury of free press, are always shocked when reported are killed for doing their job. Our free press is joy. Reporters who leave for foriegn parts know, every word they right or report can be a death sentence. they are brave to chose such a career. They act with courage. but are they heros?

War correspondents are essentially isolated egoists, or at least that's the way they seem to me.

The Vietnam War seemed to bring them out of the woodwork in droves, and they were lauded by their sponsoring organisations because their reports from just behind the front lines were spectacular after the stultifying ennui of "official" reporting carried out safely from miles away. There were two types of journos during Vietnam, the sitters and the goers. The goers crawled around wearing flak vests and cammo gear, either with the front line troops or only just half a step behind them. They got spectacular footage/shots/stories, and it because almost a competitive sport to see how far you could go.

The sitters stayed in Saigon and reported the fighting crumbs from the combat tables, often gleaned or even made up from the scanty contents of American army press reports. They never ventured any further than "pacified" villages within easy reach by cab of their hotel bars.

A number of the goers were killed (and a number of the sitters, when the war came to Saigon), but the game seemed to be worth the candle - to them, anyway. I was working in the newspaper industry at the time of the collapse, and there were some Zild reporters doing stupid things in Indochina which even our troops in Vietname wouldn't have countenanced getting involved in. The goer war correspondents were regarded with bemused astonishment by most real reporters.

But were they heros? Not a chance. They were in it for number 1. They weren't out to make the world better. They weren't out to address burning issues. They weren't out to save the oppressed from their oppressors. They weren't out to stop wars. They weren't out to expose misgovernment or state terrorism. They were just out to prove to themselves and their friends how gutsy they were, and the kudos they craved were from their colleagues, not from you or me. Getting paid for doing it was just the icing on the cake.

Anyone who's seen "Under Fire" - in spite of the Hollywood razzmatazz - would get the idea!

I'm sorry for Pearl's family. But the man was a fool.

Keiva's post: "Memorium to a hero - Daniel Pearl"
Rubrick's post: "to label him a hero ... is just sickening."
Helen's post: "He didn't say the post was sickening."

Helen, I must respectfully disagree with you.
As I said, "I do not appreciate my posts being called 'sickening'."

I'm inclined to agree with you, CK.
Front-line reporters often try to make news, rather than report it.

Rubrick, I wondered if you'd put Veronica Guerin in the same category - I thought she was a bit of a local hero?
http://www.freemedia.at/IPIReport2.00/20Guerin.htm

Also, I was wondering if she was related to Olga Gerin http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/from_our_own_correspondent/newsid_201000/201473.stm who seems to be the BBC's new Kate Adie?

I'll be interested to see Cate Blanchett in the film "Chasing the Dragon" currently in production. http://www.upcomingmovies.com/chasingthedragon.html

War correspondents are essentially isolated egoists
Really? Such as Winston Churchill? Whatever he was, I find it admirable.

It seems to me that the blue sentence should be qualified a bit, as b-youth did.

How about Batavia, NY native, Terry Anderson, a journalist who was captured in Beirut and held hostage for seven years? How do we feel about what he went through? Was he just a journalist trying to make news? Or is he a hero?

Terry Anderson was just another newshound who became news. He had no choice about his captivity. He was unlucky to get grabbed and lucky to survive, but he was hardly heroic!

Terry Waite, on the other hand could possibly be regarded as heroic. He wasn't merely trying to cash in on pre-existing events, he was trying to change things, to make things better. He misjudged the situation and wound up being taken prisoner and held for five years.

I suggest that the difference between the two is quite clear! Here's something worth a read:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,637821,00.html

Veronica Guerin was the crime correspondent for the Irish Independent for five years up until her murder in June 1996. Although a well-respected and highly radical journalist (The Independent is the Grauniad of Ireland so this is high praise for one of their journalists) she did little in the name of heroism. Her radical style of investigating the highly dangerous Dublin underworld scene (not including the provisionals) was brave and, for a while, gained her the confidence of many of the infamous gang leaders incuding the General who was the subject of two recent films and who was also a nasty piece of work.

This bravery and over-confidence resulted in a midnight visit and a bullet in the thigh as a warning from an unknown gunman. She became increasingly pushy and, six months after being shot in the leg, she was shot twice in the head whilst driving back from a minor court case just outside Dublin.

Her death was a shock to the country because she was a journalist doing her job and the power she wielded in her investigative practices made her a real threat to the criminal gangs and drug lords. But no journalist had ever been murdered in this country for any reason. The public outcry resulted in a determined crackdown on organised crime and several draconian laws being passed including the Criminal Assets Bill which allowed the state confiscation of assets attained through criminal activity. This applied to relatives of the criminal as well as to the individual himself.

No one has ever been convicted of her murder but many of the top criminals who were suspected have suffered greatly as a result of the new legislation. Many are now doing long overdue sentences. Veronica was not a hero in my opinion but her persistence in the face of danger brought to light a number of issues which many were afraid to address. Now that there was unanimity the government could act with impunity against a common threat to society. She has a strong legacy and her family can be proud of that achivement but her death was a tragedy not borne of heroism.

Orla Guerin was the RTE (Irish television) East European correspondent since the late '80s. Her meteoric rise in the journalistic ranks was due to a few lucky breaks. She was at the Berlin wall when it came down and was in Hungary for the first Warsaw Pact country's revolution the same year. Another well-respected journalist she did herself no favours by running in the General election of 1993 by standing for the Labour party (at the personal request of the leader) against another long-standing and popular Labour TD (Irish MP) in the same constituency. The press jumped on the high profile mud-slinging match with gusto and rumours abounded that she and the leader were having an affair (amongst other ugly rumours). Needless to say, public opinion was on the side of the other candidate (she won easily) and Orla left Ireland later in the year never to return. She worked for a while for the London Examiner before getting the plum job in the Beeb.

Guerin isn't a common name here. It's derived from the French and probably came here via the Normans or the Switzers but two female journalists sharing the same surname is purely coincidental.

Cate Blanchett struck me as an unusual choice to play Veronica Guerin. But the story is based loosely on Ms.Guerin's life and concentrates more on her methods. Ms. Blanchett's serious demeanour should make her a very convincing crime correspondent.

Thanks for your post, Rubrick, I was keen to hear about the story from someone who lives in Ireland. It is hard to tell the accuracy of the reports we had.

As you point out, Olga is in fact Orla - I wonder if the link that I included is yet another Guerin or just a typo? I suspect the latter. Orla is clearly a very accomplished journalist.

De mortius nil nisi bonum.

(For those who may be unfamiliar, http://www.bartleby.com/81/4724.html)

.......was the motto of my first high school!! Thanks for the blast back to 1971.

"Nothing if not good/the best" as I recall.click the link stales old mate.....

stales