Wednesday, April 6, 2011

"It's What I Do"


I recently came across this essay by NY Times photographer Lynsey Addario, who was recently captured by Libyan forces (she was in that video I posted last week.) In this essay, she talks about the controversy over sending female correspondents to war zones, especially in the Middle East. Just read it.


Addario calls the world of conflict correspondence a "boys club", seh theorizes that this may because women have a hard time giving up completely on having a personal life. And she emphasizes that the vast majority of her experience in the Muslim world has been positive, with people being kind and hospitable to her wherever she goes.


But she was captured by Libyan forces last week, and was beaten and groped by the soldiers. Addario asks, "But why is that more horrible than what happened to Tyler or Steve or Anthony--being smashed on the back of the head with a rifle butt? Why isn't anyone saying men shouldn't cover war? Women and men should do what they believe they need to do."


Do you agree with her that a female photographer/reporter brings something unique to the story, with her access to Muslim homes and the private spaces of women? Do you think it doesn't matter--that it's sexist to prevent women from doing the same jobs as men no matter what?


Do you think horrific incidents like what happened to Lara Logan, the chief foreign correspondent for CBS News who was beaten and sexually assaulted while covering the Tahrir Square revolution two months ago, change our view on putting female reporters into areas where they may not be treated with respect? Should the reporters themselves be the ones to make that choice? Whose responsibility is it to make sure the reporter is safe--and what do they do in a situation where one reporter will be more safe than another?

3 comments:

  1. I don’t know who’s decision it is to make, most likely that of the journalist his or herself and the editor. That being said, women are at greater risk than men in Islamist or even Muslim countries. The reason is that women do not have the same status as men, and the Sharia dictates specific powers that men have over women. Moreover, I think that a woman is more likely to be raped than a man. I have no empirical study to supplement my argument, but I think it is a reasonable assumption. So a man can get bitten or killed, and a woman can be beaten, raped, or killed. If a woman is ready to take risks and go to such a place, than she should be free to do it. However, in my opinion, she should be strongly dissuaded from going for her own safety.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think if a woman journalist wants to report alongside American soldiers who are going to protect her and act civilly towards her that's one thing, but if women want to leave the safety zone and go out into the world beyond, she should at least try and blend in. Women can not walk down streets alone in many islamic countries, they have few rights and are often in grave danger. I am not sure what would make a woman want to be subject to potentially harsh and dangerous treatment. But as the saying goes... where there's a will there's a way. The way I recommend is camouflage yourself and stay safe.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think that Addario said it best- why should it even be something that we need to contemplate? It is the female reporter's (and the male reporter's!) decision whether or not to go into a place of danger.

    Additionally, the danger is there for men and for women. Perhaps women are more likely to be raped, but everyone can be tortured and beat up and it is just as horrific.

    Maybe the problem lies with the consumers. Newspapers are a business, and revealing stories and photographs in dangerous places sell more newspapers. I think that some people valued the stories more than the people who are putting themselves in danger to get the story.

    But if the reporters are willing to risk their lives, regardless of their gender, then it is up to them to do so.

    ReplyDelete