Os holandeses deram um rude golpe na Constituição Europeia ao rejeitar o texto de forma rotunda. Os 61,6% dos votantes optaram pelo não, apenas três dias depois do revés francês. O primeiro ministro holandês, Jan-Peter Balkenende, declarou que respeita o resultado. O não de dois dos seis países fundadores arrasta a UE para uma profunda crise.
quarta-feira, 1 de junho de 2005
Posto por Simas Santos à(s) 1.6.05
Posto por José António Barreiros à(s) 1.6.05
«[...] Since the formal end of the war there have been numerous journalistic postmortems on both sides of the Atlantic. Editors have been fired, errant reporters have resigned or been publicly criticized. The BBC was unceremoniously decapitated. The politicians and their unelected helpers remain serenely in place.
«At some level the public recognizes the importance of decent, robust journalism, even if there is currently a drifting away from large swathes of the mainstream media. It’s probably also true that most of the public are a bit more sophisticated than we are in understanding the limits of what we do. Maybe it’s time we took Broder’s advice. Let’s advertise the fact that journalism is a partial, hasty, incomplete and flawed business. The readers know it. They might trust us more, not less, if we owned up.»
Alan Rusbridger (do Guardian) - artigo publicado na NEWSWEEK de 30-5-05 com o título «The Truth About The Truth»
[…] «In the weeks to come we will be reviewing ways to improve our news-gathering processes overall. But after consultations with the editors, we are taking the following steps now:
«We will raise the standards for the use of anonymous sources throughout the magazine. Historically, unnamed sources have helped to break or advance stories of great international importance, but overuse can lead to distrust among readers and carelessness among journalists. As always, the burden of proof should lie with the reporters and their editors to show why a promise of anonymity serves the reader. From now on, only the editor or the managing editor, or other top editors they specifically appoint, will have the authority to sign off on the use of an anonymous source.
«We will step up our commitment to help the reader understand the nature of a confidential source’s access to information often are now, the name and position of such a source will be shared upon request with a designated top editor. Our goal is to ensure that we have properly assessed, on a confidential basis, the source’s credibility and motives before publishing and to make sure that we characterize the source appropriately. The cryptic phrase “sources said” will never again be the sale attribution for a story in NEWSWEEK.
«When information provided by a source wishing to remain anonymous is essential to a sensitive story-alleging misconduct or reflecting a highly contentious point of view, for example - we pledge a renewed effort to seek a second independent source or other corroborating evidence. When the pursuit of the public interest requires the use of a single confidential source in such a story, we will attempt to provide the comment and the context to the subject of the story in advance of publication for confirmation, denial or correction. Tacit afirmatlon, by anyone, no matter how highly placed or apparently knowledgeable, will not qualify as a secondary source. […]»
Richard M. Smith - Chairman and Editor-in-Chief
(Publicado na Newsweek de 30-5-05)
Já decorreram alguns meses desde o dia em que LC me convidou a participar neste espaço, e em que a aceitação imediata do convite seguida de um silêncio prolongado revelaram o carácter imerecido do mesmo, para o acentuar vou agora tentar aparecer de vez em quando!