Fewer Foreign Desks, More Foreign Journalism
 |
James Joyner | Friday, July 25, 2008 |
Responding to Nicholas Kristof’s concern that “Only four American newspapers now have foreign desks,” Matt Yglesias observes,
How many foreign desks was a typical American actually able to read back in 1978? For most people, I think, the answer was one or two. Today only four American papers maintain a foreign desk but it’s easy as pie to read any or all of them. And of course you can also read foreign coverage in British papers or read The Times of India’s coverage of explosions on Bangalore.
Quite. Indeed, there’s more outstanding foreign affairs coverage that I ought to be reading than I have time to read.
Matt largely poo-poos Kristoff’s suggestion that citizen journalists can substitute for the lack of foreign journalists. I agree, to the extent we’re talking about reporting. When it comes to analysis, however, our plate is overflowing now with experts and knowledgeable observers who previously who would have had only a local audience prior to the emergence of the Web and the blogosphere.
Image: Lenin Imports with a tip of the hat to Alex Knapp.
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife and infant daughter.
Follow James on FriendFeed | Twitter | Digg
- Fewer Foreign Desks, More Foreign Journalism
- NOW! Hampshire
- Dallas and Ft. Worth To Share Sports Content
- Obama Blair House Snub Redux
- Sex Scandals and Journalistic Standards
- Watching Watching America (Updated)
- Telepathy Journalism
- Obama Ties Clinton Policies to Bush’s
- Winning and Losing
- NYT and the Farrell Rescue
- House Trades Freedom for Health Coverage, Senate’s Move
- Hasan a Muslim First, American Second?
- OTB Caption JamTM
- Taking “No” As Iran’s Answer
- Update on the Fort Hood Massacre
- OTB Latenight – Soft Cell
- Caption Contest Winners
- Breaking: Shootings at Fort Hood (Updated)
- Pentagon Expected To Ask For Supplementary War Funding. As Usual.
- Marking the Anniversary of the Embassy Seizure
I am trying to think of any major place in the world that doesn't have at least one english language paper on line (quality does differ). And as you say, getting foreign events summarized and analyzed is even easier. So I guess the real question would be what would a foreign desk do for newspapers that are already hurting financially that they couldn't get cheaper via on line.
And to the extent that 'having a guy there' makes a difference, has the concept of stingers totally gone out of existence.
Both Kristof's and MY's comments show a remarkable lack of understanding of the changes that have occurred in how news is gathered both here and abroad over the last thirty or forty years. Basically, journalism has gone to a wholesale distribution model. On the one hand that means more coverage of international events in newspapers other than the ten or twenty with the largest circulations; on the other it means a lot fewer foreign correspondents on the fulltime payrolls of those big newspapers.
Increasingly even the wire services are going to stringers for overseas news gathering. As we've seen over the last couple of years there are definite hazards in this. Nobody has the time, knowledge, or, probably, the interest to vet the stringers properly. Consequently, we may be more rather than less likely to have creative writers or propagandists touted as reporters.
