The author deals with a certain class of powerful photographs he calls "icons." Examples of these photographs include Kevin Carter's 1993 photograph of a buzzard standing, and waiting, behind a stooped over, malnourished Sudanese child, Eddie Adams' 1968 photograph of South Vietnam's national police chief Brigadier General Nguyen Ngoc Loan firing a pistol into the head of a Viet Cong suspect, and Charles Cole's 1989 photograph of a young Chinese man standing at the head of a line of Chinese army tanks at Tiananmen Square.
The author examines these and other icons and determines that they do not, as is frequently assumed, drive public opinion or political policy. In fact, Perlmutter points out that these icons may not be as pervasive in the public mind as many assume them to be. In an interesting experiment in one of his 1996 college classes, Perlmutter provided his class with examples of several of these icons and asked class members to identify them by describing the context in which the photographs were taken. For the most part, these 17- to 20-year-old students had at best only weak associations with many of the photographs. The photographs included, among others, Robert Capa's Dyin Spanish Militiaman (1936), Old Glory Goes Up on Mount Suribachi (1945), Jack Ruby Shooting Lee Harvey Oswald (1963) and Naked Little Girl and Other Children Fleeing Napalm Strike (1972). The students' inability to correctly place the photographs supported the author's belief that the icons of one generation frequently are lost on the next generation.
The author provides a detailed examination of what makes a particular photograph an "icon." In the process he examines distinguishing characteristics of "icons" that are said to provoke outrage. In three succeeding chapters Perlmutter offers case studies of three particular photographs: General Loan's execution of the Viet Cong suspect (1968), the young Chinese man standing in front of a line of tanks in Tiananmen Square (1989) and photographs from Somalia in 1992-93.
Perlmutter's examination of all of these photographs is fascinating because he provides extraordinary detail about the photographs themselves and about the circumstances under which they were taken. For most readers of Perlmutter's book, the icons themselves will remain sharp and defined, but much background information is--and perhaps always was--missing. Perlmutter points out that this is par for the course for most of what he calls "icons of outrage." For example, the exact identity of the young man who stood in front of the line of Chinese army tanks at Tiananmen Square is still unknown and debated. He has been variously described as arrested, hiding out or executed. Uncertainty remains whether he was a student or a worker. This ambiguity has been seized upon by various groups who felt that this symbol of defiance ought to be either a student or a worker, depending upon the particular political axe being ground. Arguments have been made by both sides.
Perlmutter uses the Tiananmen Square photograph as an example of what he calls the "first person effect," the assumption by political and media elites that "the whole world is watching." Though a series of quotations by politicians and media spokesmen, the author demonstrates that there is, in fact, an assumption by politicians and media elites that this photograph speaks to everyone because everyone must have seen it and must be familiar with it. This leads Perlmutter to one of his major theses in the book, that it is the politicians and media elites who push these "icons" on the public and that the public is, in general, somewhat indifferent to the elites’ outrage. Perlmutter concludes that while these icons may become a focus for discussion or coverage of political events, the icons themselves do little to alter public or political policy. Public opinion, in Perlmutter's opinion, is affected but little by these icons. Perlmutter concludes that it is more important to worry about how politicians and media elites manage and use these icons than it is to worry about the effects of the icons themselves.
Photojournalism and Foreign Policy will prove useful and valuable to any who teach or deal with photojournalism. The work also will prove useful to any who deal with the creation of news on any level above the elementary.
Reading Perlmutter's book raises some interesting questions about cross-cultural interpretation of icons, questions with which he does not attempt to deal in this work. Are the kinds of powerful photographs which are invested with "icon" status in Western culture similar to powerful photographs which might be invested with the same status in other cultures? Are some cultures less susceptible to this kind of iconography than other cultures? This volume is sure to raise other intriguing questions for scholars with an international or cross-cultural bent.
Finally, a word of praise for Perlmutter's writing: It is clear, simple and direct, a model for scholarly work. His solid writing and his clear sense of subordination demonstrate that academic work need not be stuffy or pretentious.
Bruce Renfro, Associate Professor
Department of Mass Communication, Southwest Texas State University
__________________________________________________________
W. Joseph Campbell, The Emergent Independent Press in Benin and Cote d'Ivoire: From Voices of the State to Advocate of Democracy (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1998), 137 pp., cloth.
In its Fall 1991 coverage titled "The politics of Africa: A Continent of instability," the popular consumer magazine Newsweek observed that a positive pattern was emerging within Africa's diverse political makeup: "one that signals a movement to multi-party democracy..." Since 1990 a number of African countries, including Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Kenya and Zambia, have indeed successfully made the transition from single party to multi-party rule. A residual effect of this emergent "politics of change" in these countries has been the evolution and subsequent entrenchment of the principle of press liberalism within their national psyche.
In both Africa and abroad, scholars and media practitioners have followed with great interest the apparent institutionalization of press freedom in African political environments, where the prevailing attitude erstwhile had been intolerance. However, until now, much of the attention had been directed toward Africa's larger geopolitical entities: Algeria, Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, Sudan and others. But, as W. Joseph Campbell illustrates in his descriptive and thought-provoking book, The Emergent Independent Press in Benin and Cote d'Ivoire: From Voices of the State to Advocate of Democracy, smaller African countries like Benin and Cote d'Ivoire may offer as much, if not more, lessons than their larger counterparts, on the "origin and development of the ethos of press freedom" in an antithetical political environment.
W. Joseph Campbell is currently an Assistant Professor at American University's School of Communication. During an award-winning 20-year career, he served as an Associated Press correspondent and reported from four continents: North America, Africa, Asia and Europe. While he served in Africa, he resided in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire. From there, he visited many countries and wrote newspaper stories about politics and media.
Aided by this insider's familiarity, Campbell's book offers penetrating insights that should provide readers with a deeper understanding of the conflict between inherent political ideologies and journalistic theory and practice in Africa. In the introduction, Campbell outlines the four main questions that he seeks to address: "What are the sources of the values and practices that underpin the ethos of independent journalism in countries where constrained, state controlled press has long been the model?; What are its etiologies?; What explains the resilience of the ethos of independent journalism, despite often long odds against its success or even its survival?; How is the practice of independent journalism differentiated within and between the two cases in this study?" While these questions do not directly define the titles of the six, easily readable chapters that follows, the content of the chapters provide answers, albeit sometimes superficial, to the questions. Consequently, the book's 128 pages may be perceived to be quite limited by comparison, but the author's treatment of his subject matter does not suffer and is nonetheless satisfactory.
The first chapter discusses ardently the context for the emergence of independent journalism in Sub-Saharan Africa. The author describes the recurrent nature of Africa's media problems, the origins of the practice of independent journalism on the continent as a whole, the role of the press in democratization, the measures the emergent independent press have taken to surmount the innumerable obstacles that faced them, and the effusive optimism the surround the imminent survival of a free press in African countries. This is followed by two chapters which focus exclusively on the factors the led to the development and sustenance of the free press in Benin. These chapter's exclusive focus on Benin does not compromise the comparative intentions implied in the introduction. Rather, it enhances the depth with which the various issues related to Benin are covered. This in-depth coverage makes more vivid the contrast between the origin of the ethos of press independence in Benin and in Cote d'Ivoire. In Benin, as the author fully describes, the struggle for freedom became a natural extension of the culture of dissent that took hold during the period of French colonization How this culture of dissent was developed, fomented and actualized is systematically and vividly described.
The next two chapters describe the case of Cote d'Ivoire. In contrast, these chapters reveal that the ethos of independent journalism in Cote d'Ivoire originated from two, interrelated factors. One was the sustained, vociferous opposition to the "policies of the post colonial regime that sought to channel and constrain dissent and dissident opinion within state structures." The second was the "demonstration effects of freely circulated French language titles" in the country.
The concluding chapter discusses the factors enabling the author's projected resilience of the ethos of independent journalism in Benin and Cote d'Ivoire. The author notes the similarity of outcomes in both countries despite their distinct historical and political legacies and the ubiquity of "overstated pessimism" among scholars and critics. He calls aptly for comparative analyses of independent media in Anglophone and Francophone African states, further enrich the literature on African media.
Scholars and researchers of African media, media planners and practitioners, students of African politics and sociologists will find this book an indispensable addition to their collection. Among the compelling strengths of the book is the originality of its subject matter. The book covers a topic that has not been previously studied. While the volumes that describe the character of African journalism abound, there has been no attempt until now to isolate the factors the shape that character. Second, the book reveals that small political environments erstwhile considered to be insignificant to our understanding of journalism practice in Africa may be more valuable to African media studies than previously thought. Third, the book derived from recent interviews by the author, which suggests that the views expressed reflect the current thinking. By so doing, the book can be said to portend the direction of the rest of Africa's media in the coming millennium. However, the author's prediction that independent journalism will "endure and evolve in both countries" needs better foundation. While the structural and systemic factors are indeed significant explanators of the origin of the ethos of independent journalism, it would be to me that the ethos can only be sustained in the long run if it is found to be deeply rooted in the culture and nature of the Ivorian and Benin peoples. The predictive power of the book would be greatly enhanced, then, if normative factors, such as the contribution of the culture and values of the Benin and Ivorian people, are explored in future revisions of the book. But even with this limitation, the book has my full endorsement.
Osabuohien P. Amienyi, Associate Professor
Department of Radio-Television, Arkansas State University
__________________________________________________________
Emmanuel E. Paraschos, Media Law and Regulation in the European Union: National, Transnational and U.S. Perspectives (Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1998), hardback, 274 pp.
Freedom of the press is an international aspiration, according to U.S. media attorney Bruce W. Sanford. At present, the First Amendment's guarantee of press freedom is more widely copied as a rule for self-government than ever. Sanford noted that even regimes that have little inclination to adopt American democracy as a model in practice try to follow it in theory.
Why is the American free-expression law becoming a model for many nations abroad? First Amendment scholar Rodney Smolla explained: "The American experience with freedom of speech is important to the rest of the world NOT because our current First Amendment policies are necessarily wise--it is not that Americans have all the perplexing issues of free speech 'right.' American thinking on freedom of speech is relevant to the rest of the world because our experience in wrestling with free speech conflicts and communications policy is unusually rich. American society may not have the best answers, but it has thought about the problems more. Under the American First Amendment, the Untied States has experimented more often than any other culture in the world with the radical presumption that it is better to err on the side of openness than repression, even when the policy arguments for repression are alluring."
Regardless, it is no easy task to verify Sanford and Smolla's assertions that the U.S. law and policy on freedom of expression are setting the proper boundaries on how society can balance freedom of the press against its other social and individual interests. As Sandra Coliver, law program director of ARTICLE 19, the International Centre Against Censorship in London, pointed out in 1993, different cultural, historical and market influences interact with each other in such a way as to make it impossible for any one particular press law system to serve as a model for other countries in the abstract.
In his new book, Media Law and Regulation in the European Union, Emmanuel E. Paraschos, professor of mass communication at Emerson College in Boston, offers a thoughtful case study of Coliver's convincing proposition regarding the inherent limitation on a country's adoption of another's press law as its own. The book aims at a comprehensive analysis of the media laws of 15 democracies in the European Union. The book also examines the supranational regulatory structure of the European Union, which protects and/or limits the mass media in the E.U. member nations. And finally, the book compares the European Union and its member nations with the United States in their media law and regulations.
Paraschos, who served as dean of the European Institute for International Communication in Maastricht, The Netherlands, and taught as a Fulbright scholar in Scandinavia, notes: [A]s the pages unfold, the reader will have an unusual view of the various peoples of the European Union--from the perspective of what they consider important enough to legally protect and control and how that differs from what is practiced in the United States. This comparison of values and principles from each side of the Atlantic should yield interesting and valuable results. Undoubtedly, lessons can be learned by either side, and perhaps, the true value of this work ultimately may lie in its allowing the reader to discover the often subtle but fascinating differences that exist between these two worlds, even among legal provisions that are seemingly similar.
The book starts with an overview of the European Union's history, function and structure as well as its approach to media issues as a contextual framework of the E.U.'s role in the European nations. In Chapter 2, Paraschos takes a look at various international covenants on freedom of expression, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. He then turns to the constitutional provisions of the E.U. member states on press freedom. Paraschos's discussion of the constitutions tends to be a textual analysis. The "Media and the European Court of Human Rights" section of Chapter 2 is informative in that it provides an excellent background on the European Court of Humans Rights (ECHR) in defining press freedom under the European Convention on Human Rights. The author notes more than 20 major ECHR decisions including The Sunday Times (1979), Lingens (1986) and Goodwin (1996).
The book devotes five chapters (Chapters 3-7) to discussing specific media law topics. Chapter 3, for example, covers defamation, privacy, right of reply, free press vs. fair trial, confidentiality of news sources. Paraschos pays attention to American law on relevant topics in the chapter in placing his discussion in a comparative perspective. His comment on Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1974) on right of reply in U.S. libel law vis-a-vis the European countries' extensive recognition of right of reply is a case in point.
Other topics discussed in Chapter 4 through Chapter 7 include national security, obscenity, access to information, broadcasting regulation and advertising law. Chapters 8 and 9 concentrate on the media competition and concentration issues confronting the European Union and its member states and on media ethics and self-regulation, respectively. For those who are interested in the texts of the journalistic codes of ethics in the E.U. member countries, Chapter 9 contains a collection of the translated ethical codes adopted by various professional press organizations in 14 E.U. countries. In the "Postscript" chapter of the book, Paraschos concludes: "[D]espite changing media and societies over time, and despite different historical, social, economic and political origins and circumstances, the media regulatory environments in the E.U. countries and the Untied States possess more similarities than differences."
Paraschos often relies upon leading U.S. Supreme Court cases for his analysis of American media law. By contrast, he confines his discussion of the European media law to the pertinent statutory provisions of the E.U. member nations at issue. Some readers may wonder how the media statutes have been interpreted by courts over the years. Indeed, "the press law of a particular country is not so much determined by the existence of a particular type of constitutional commitment, or by the presence of a special press statute, as by the particular political philosophy which animates it."
There is no doubt that the book is full of fresh information and careful research. It is a judiciously documented very readable book. The book is a valuable addition to the growing literature on international and comparative study of media law. And it will be especially useful to those who teach and do research in international communication, media law, journalism ethics, and other related subjects.
Kyu Ho Youm , Professor
Cronkite School of Journalism and Telecommunication
Arizona State University
_________________________________________________________
Nick Braithwaite (ed.), The International Libel Handbook (Oxford: Butterworth-Heineman, 1995), paper, 249 pp.
Global communication is being accelerated by the cyberspace revolution. The geographical barriers in global communication are no longer as formidable as they were in the past. The increasingly widespread operation and impact of the transnational media on global communication has become an everyday reality since the end of Word War II. The undisputed dominance by Anglo-American news media of the world communication systems in recent decades is a good illustration.
On the other hand, one of the disturbing newfound "occupational hazards" for the transnational media is libel litigation. As a 1994 Hastings COMM/ENT Law Journal study noted: "The ever-expanding transnational operations of the American media have resulted in a growing number of libel suits filed against the media in foreign courts." The litigational experience of the American media abroad indicates that libel law is not necessarily a country-specific issue. Rather, it often involves more than one country's law. Needless to say, the U.S. media's experience with offshore libel suits is not unique. Ian Hargreaves, editor of The Independent in London, placed the issue in proper perspective, when he wrote in his foreword to The International Libel Handbook: "[A]s journalism becomes irreversibly more international, journalists are doomed to confront the laws of countries other than their own. A book, magazine or article may be safely sold in one country, but published only at great risk in another. Not only the laws of taste and decency also erect legal fences across the international superhighway."
The International Libel Handbook, according to attorney Nick Braithwaite of CLIFFORD CHANCE in London, who has edited the book, aims to draw "a rough libel benchmark" for the international press, to provide information on the libel law restrictions in eight selected countries, and to offer "practical guidelines" on how to manage libel risks. The 249-page book is especially noteworthy for its succinct analysis of the "highly technical" libel laws in the United States, Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, India, and Japan. The book also pays attention to other related topics. Among the non-libel law issues analyzed in the book are shield law, breach of contract, invasion of privacy, and injunctions. The International Libel Handbook examines nearly all the emerging rules and the major principles in the libel laws of the eight countries. The U.S. chapter, for example, includes a concise discussion of the still evolving "neutral reportage" doctrine, which protects accurate republication of defamatory newsworthy statements against public figures made by responsible and prominent sources. The country chapters have been contributed by leading authorities from each of the individual countries selected for the book.
Given that "[j]ournalists writing for global circulation face a daunting task in charting disparate legal hazards around the world," several chapters take note of the international and comparative elements of various libel laws. A case in point is the timely discussion in the book of the obvious "actual malice" impact of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, a 1964 landmark case of the U.S. Supreme Court, on the 1994 libel decisions of the Australian High Court and the Indian Supreme Court. Indeed, Braithwaite, who wrote the English chapter, argues cogently: "The Neil Working Group [on libel reforms] expressly rejected the introduction of a Sullivan-style defence into English law, but this view preceded the judicial development of similar defenses in Australia and India which have now somewhat isolated the United Kingdom." While the country chapters offer an informed overview of the current statutory and case law on libel in each country covered in the book, the last two chapters, "Libel Laws Compared: Towards a Benchmark?" and "Risk Management," showcase the truly significant contribution of the book to the relevant literature. The "Libel Laws Compared" chapter, an excellent road map to various similar as well as disparate libel laws of the countries discussed in the book, highlights the universal baseline requirement for libel suits against the global media, ending with a comparative table of the countries' libel law.
Proceeding from the premise that "safety in libel rests at least as much upon writing to avoid risk as upon technical defenses," the "Risk Management" chapter suggests several practical ways of minimizing the risks of being sued for libel, regardless of where the defamatory story has its "centre of gravity in legal terms." First, the chapter focuses on writing as an effective way to reduce risks. It elaborates on a four-prong approach--get the meanings right, get the evidence right, get the comment or denial from the subject, and minimize exposure to sanctions. Secondly, the "Risk Management" chapter identifies "danger spots" by examining what kind of people are "risky plaintiffs" in libel law, and what kind of situations are most likely to result in libel litigation. The libel law "fallacies" often associated with the press are skillfully illustrated and worth being well taken by journalists. And finally, four hypothetical cases are used to illustrate how risk management is interwoven with legal analysis to avoid libel suits. The hypothetical examples seem to be based on everyday real-life situations facing the international media. The risk-management analyses of the examples are thorough and realistic.
The International Libel Handbook is a first-class source book for journalists, lawyers, and media scholars who are eager to expand their horizon in libel and related issues. Its up-to-date analysis of the substantive law of the United States, England, and other countries is authoritative and detailed. The book's practical suggestions on how to avoid libel suits will be extremely helpful to those who need a readable guidebook on international media and libel law.
The International Libel Handbook is also highly recommended to international communications scholars. It is a readable text on the complex interface between libel law and the transnational media. other related subjects.
Kyu Ho Youm , Professor
Cronkite School of Journalism and Telecommunication
Arizona State University
_________________________________________________________
Yahya R. Kamalipour (ed.), Images of the U.S. around the World: A Multicultural Perspective (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999) paper, 359 pp.
This is an impressive collection of works (some quantitative, others qualitative; some prescriptive, others theoretical; some purely descriptive, others highly critical) that, taken together, can approximate a sort of "world opinion" about the United States. Images of the U.S. around the World is a follow-up to Professor Kamalipour’s earlier edited work titled The U.S. Media and the Middle East: Image and Perception.
The editor’s stated purposes in putting together this anthology are "to present a multifaceted analysis of the U.S. image [around the world] ... to present examples of the U.S. images as portrayed by other nations’ mass media ... to discuss the influence of exported media products" (p. xxvii). The critical travelogue of international opinion he has assembled does a good job of fulfilling those purposes.
After the editor’s introduction, the book is organized in three parts. Part I, "Introductory Perspectives," has three chapters: Richard Harris & Joseph Karafa use a cultivation theory perspective to discuss college students’ impressions of the United States in eleven countries (Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Canada Germany, France, Denmark, Hong Kong, Morocco, Nigeria, Switzerland). In "Latent Destiny: Perverse Readings of the Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere," McKenzie Wark offers an Australian perspective of the post-Cold-War relationship between the United States and Japan. And Herbert Schiller identifies cultural domination as the "basis for perception" of the United States.
In Part II, "Political Perspectives," Kuldip Rampal, investigates Indian perceptions of U.S. foreign policy; Jae-Kyung Lee explains how the United States came to be seen as less of a savior and more of a villain be some South Koreans; Dina Iordanova finds a duality in U.S. representation in Bulgarian media; Ayseli Usluata discusses how Turkish newspaper cartoonists have depicted the United States; and Laid Zaghlami offers an Algeria perspective.
In Part III, "U.S. Image and the Cultural Factor," Robert McKenzie looks at images of the United States among U.S. students studying in France; Allen Palmer & Thomas Hafen look at American TV through the eyes of German teenagers; Jane Stokes identifies three levels of "Americanicity" in British television advertising; Alex Fernando Texeira Primo identifies paradoxes in Brazilian views about U.S. media products; Sherry Ferguson et al. list and discuss frequencies of references to American values in Canadian newspapers. While some of these findings offer no surprises (dominant, individualistic, materialistic, competitive), others (uncaring, not peaceful, not egalitarian) would come as a surprise to most Americans.
Further, Peggy Bieber-Roberts & Pauline Abela conduct a focus group in Malta to obtain a rare glimpse into Maltese perceptions of the United States. The six persons in the focus group think individual Americans are, among other things, efficient, optimistic and confident, but also arrogant, egoistic and domineering. Their thoughts on the American national character are similarly split: charismatic, inventive, supportive freedom; but also superficial, lacking social justice and pursuing a self-serving foreign policy (but doesn’t every nation?).
Udita Das reports on a survey of educated young Indians who (among other findings) state their perceptions of America’s greatest contributions to the world (positive: scientific progress; negative: nuclear weapons); Ersu Ding discusses the image of the United States on Chinese television.
In Part IV, "Image and the Entertainment Factor," Shinich Saito presents findings from a Japanese survey; Daradirek Ekachai et al. discuss the impact of U.S. media on Thais’ perceptions of Americans; similarly, Thimios Zaharopoulos discusses television viewing and the perception of the United States by Greek teenagers. Dafna Lemish looks at how viewing wrestling on television shapes Israeli children’s perception of the United States; Rania Hegazi & Beverly Jensen describe how Arabic literature and media have depicted the New World in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries; Hussein Amin looks at American programs on Egyptian television; and Joanne Lisoski looks at how one American children’s television program, Mighty Morphin Power RangersTM has spread around the world.
The overall picture that emerges from reading these works is both critical and complimentary of the United States. It appears that the world’s long-standing love-hate relationship with the "One Remaining Global Superpower" is alive and well. Interestingly, part of the image the U.S. enjoys among citizens the world’s many nations is shaped by the international consumption of U.S. cultural products; often that image is not in synch with political events; sometimes this leads to cognitive dissonance on a global scale.
What some may consider missing from this book is a concluding chapter by the editor (The usually obligatory "what does it all mean"section where the editor attempts to tell us what it was that we just read). I am glad Kamalipour omitted this part, thus permitting the reader to sit back, think for himself or herself, and make up his or her own mind about the collective contribution of the many chapters.
Americans contemplating educational, political, business or social dealings overseas should benefit from browsing through this book. It would make a good supplementary textbook for courses in international communication, international business, international relations and comparative studies. Finally, scholars in both the humanities and the social sciences will find reason to cite one or more of the works in this volume.
Yorgo Pasadeos
ICB editor
