On the 2nd of August 2005, American journalist Steven Vincent was abducted by terrorists in Iraq. He was the first journalist to fall prey to the parties of the war. His friends had fallen earlier; but in accidents, none so brutally executed as he was. The incident sent shockwaves down the spine of most western journalists working in Iraq But is it the war that killed dear Steven or was it something else Was he killed because he was an American or a man of the pen What killed him the answer lies between the lines that bring out the news of the war in both Britain and the US.
Steven was a victim of terror - no doubts about it. But his being American was just half the story. His murder is only an attempt by a pagan enemy to a nation of soldiers and newsmongers called the US, an attempt by the people to tell the world that these men did not report the brewing of the soup as much as they cry about the murderous soup called the war on terror being served on the platters of international diplomatic circles.
It was not what the press said that lead to the murder of Steven, but what the press did not say that led to his killing. Or rather does the silence of the press intend to say more than they said in words. Do the gloomy looking news readers on channels in the UK say more than they could express in words Should that really have been the scenario Did that silence warrant the murder of a promising journalist Where do we go from hereThe press plays an important role in every democracy.
In terms of its potential to influence public policy, it is known as the fourth estate of the state and is one of the most powerful bodies in any country that has promoted a free press. The freedom of the press in itself has done more damage than good in the west. They are perceived as independent commentators by the people and in many cases - such as the Iraq war, their independence has turned out to be a spook rather than truth.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples