|
Thought-provoking
Discussion with Terry Anderson
Oct. 31, 1996
By Shan Jaykumar
A SAJA.org Special
Shan
Jaykumar is a freelance business writer. He was educated in Columbia
and Cambridge universities, and has worked for The Economic Times.
 New
York City, Oct 31, 1996: The South Asian Journalists Association (SAJA) hosted the former Associated Press Middle East
bureau chief and Hizbullah hostage, Terry Anderson, yesterday. Anderson
had returned to Beirut in August for the first time since his release
from captivity in 1991. The reason for his trip was not to revisit his
ordeal or seek out his former captors, but to film a documentary and
see where Lebanon had arrived since the end of the civil war.
His
impression of the current situation is that the Lebanese, both Christian
and Muslim, are making a conscious effort at reconciliation. The civil
war ended, Anderson maintains, because the people just got tired of
it. Seventeen years is a long time to fight; the war destroyed everything
and impoverished the whole country. Even the Hizbullah, now part of
thepolitical process, has become reconciliatory in Andersons opinion
and is no longer trying to impose its will. The Hizbullah now needs
to be helped to help its people.
With regards to his seven-year captivity, Anderson feels that the
Hizbullah have no remorse. But as a Christian, Im required to forgive,
and Im not going to poison my life with hate. Anderson adds, Islam
itself is not to blame - any religion can be changed to preach violence.
Hizbullah is more similar to the provisional IRA than to the majority
of Muslims. Any situation in which there is rule by autocrats and
hope as well as no hope can lead to violent extremism.
Still, Anderson partly blames himself for not being aware of the
changed situation in the mid-1980s when foreign journalists in Beirut
were no longer treated as mere spectators. As a result, Anderson
admits, he didnt take enough precautions.
Though optimistic about Lebanons prosects, Anderson doesnt hold
such sentiments for the rest of the Middle East. Other countries
in the region, he observes, are not moving toward open societies
but to more autocracy and increased socioeconomic disparity. With
regards to Israel, Anderson feels that Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu
and his hard-line approach are not good for regional peace.
During his talk, Mr. Anderson also asked the audience if India was
misrepresented in the American print media. The virtually unanimous
reply was yes and when asked to give a particular rating, the majority
of the audience provided the American press with a D grade. One
of the reasons for this assessment was what the audience considered
were pre-conceived notions and bias on the part of American journalists.
Foreign correspondents were also felt to be too removed from the
people they were supposed to be covering. Insulated by comfortable
houses, servants, and limited knowledge of vernacular languages,
American journalists in India, some members of the audience argued,
were out of touch with the local population and were limited to
information from the elite of Indian society. Others also apportioned
blame to editorial staff for not providing enough resources to adequately
cover the subcontinent; for neglecting Indian coverage to concentrate
on other Asian countries like China; and for emphasizing big, melodramatic
stories like plagues, floods, and famine.
In closing his talk, Anderson told the audience that he felt the
best stories were about people (and not things like military clashes).
His advice to young journalists is that the best way to learn the
craft is to cover societies in change, go to places which no one
is covering but might become important eventually, go where the
big story is, or pursue a subject which holds a great deal of personal
interest. Telling the truth is the most important thing about journalism.
|
|
