Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

A Powerful Media Can Stop a War

By Jane Fonda, Women's Media Center. Posted January 18, 2007.


What would the world look like if the female half of the population had an equal share in the media?
Advertisement

I want to share a story. I wonder how many know the name, Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. How many know who she was?

Abeer was a 14-old-girl, living with her family about 50 miles south of Baghdad, trying to grow up as best she could in a country ravaged by violence and war.

Until March 12, 2006, when her life was cruelly cut short. On that night, five American soldiers, dressed all in black, allegedly burst into the home where Abeer lived with her family.

After spending the evening drinking whiskey mixed with energy drinks and playing cards, the soldiers must have decided to execute the crime they allegedly had been planning for weeks. According to the charges, the men took turns raping 14-year-old Abeer before shooting her. In the next room, her mother, her father, and her five-year-old sister were executed. When the men were done, they drenched the bodies in kerosene and set them on fire.

Then, the prosecutors say, they went back to base and grilled up some chicken wings for dinner. It was months before this crime came to light.

The cold-blooded murder of Abeer and her family is a tragedy. But it's almost as great a tragedy when her story, and all the other stories that are difficult to hear and difficult to accept, are buried in the back of the news pages -- quickly shuffled off the nightly news by politicians and their handlers desperate to change the subject. Or never told at all.

Like so many Americans, I have felt frustrated and betrayed by the state of the mainstream media in this country -- media whose priorities seem out of step with their responsibilities.

Media must be the defenders of democracy.

We need a media that strengthens democracy, not a media that strengthens the government. We need a media that enriches public discourse, not one that enriches corporations. There's a big difference.

When we talk about reforming the media, what we're really talking about is creating a media that is powerful, not a media that serves the interests of the powerful; a media that is so powerful that it can speak for the powerless, bear witness for those who are invisible in our world, and memorialize those who would be forgotten.

A truly powerful media is one that can stop a war, not start one.

As Bill Moyers said at this very conference last year, "the quality of democracy and the quality of journalism are deeply entwined." But when the media does not reflect the vibrant diversity of the people on this planet, both the quality of journalism and the quality of our democracy suffer.

At this National Conference on Media Reform, our shared goal of creating a truly progressive, democratic media -- vital, fair, investigative, and truth-telling -- is ultimately unreachable if we do not address the persistent, pervasive inequalities that exist in media. These inequalities exist even outside of mainstream media, even in the alternative and independent press.

The existence of independent media has been severely threatened. We've seen a new concentration of media ownership in conservative hands, and the erosion and elimination of federal regulations that promoted a diversity of viewpoints. This has weakened our country -- morally, physically, and spiritually.

The Free Press has done a great deal to show how people of color have increasingly been marginalized as media monopolies grow. It's shown how ownership of television and radio stations by people of color is at its lowest levels since the government began keeping track; how a scant 13 percent of newspapers in this nation employ people of color in the same percentage as their readership; and how issues affecting diverse communities have been underreported and ignored.

But the media environment that is overwhelmingly white is also overwhelmingly male. And a media that leaves women out is fundamentally, crucially flawed.

Why? Simply because you can't tell the whole story when you leave out half the population.

Health care. Social Security. Bankruptcy laws. Education. Minimum Wage. The War. All these things, and many more, affect women differently than they do men. All issues are "women's issues." Yet the absence of women in the media is glaring.

From the reporter's desk to the executive suite, women are missing. Just one-third of news items -- this includes print, broadcast, and Internet news -- cite a female source. During the coverage of the 2004 election, journalists were more than twice as likely to turn to a male source than to a woman. When you switch on the political talk shows on Sunday morning, only one in nine guests is a woman -- and women are more likely to be relegated to the back half of shows, when fewer people are watching.

Women's viewpoints are regarded as supplemental, not essential, to the story.

The op-ed pages are notoriously barren of female voices. Too often, there is an unspoken quota of one. If there is one woman op-ed writer, one Maureen Dowd or one Anne Applebaum, or if there is one person of color on staff reporting on issues important to minority communities, then the quota is filled.

One reason for this is that women usually aren't the ones calling the shots. Women news directors manage only a quarter of TV newsrooms and account for fewer than 10 percent of board members of the major media and communications companies. And, astonishingly, women only hold 3 percent of so-called "clout" titles -- positions with the power to determine budgets and make decisions.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: women, media

Jane Fonda is a board member and co-founder of the Women's Media Center. This commentary is adapted from a speech she delivered January 14 at the annual conference sponsored in Memphis by the Free Press, a national, nonpartisan organization that works to reform the media.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Jane: I can't let you get away with this one
Posted by: Bobsays on Jan 18, 2007 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the past fifteen years all newsrooms have become either half women or majority women. We have also seen no difference in how the media reacts to wars. Women in the newsroom make no difference. There is no gender difference.

The women journalists I know are too frightened to create a stir at work to do anything other than turn up and be bright eyed and perky. Because that is how they ousted the fat bearded guy who used to do the job. And a person whose unique selling point is that they are a nimble office worker and more office-disciplined will not rebel against the mainstream.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Goose/Gander Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Goose/Gander Posted by: Bobsays
And where is the money?
Posted by: anothername on Jan 18, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Women's media = progressive media.
Women's media = anti-war, anti-rape.
Women's media = East Coast perspectives.
Women's media = marginalism.

Those equations are what I took away from the speech, and from other observations of the organizations mentioned in recent months. I also cannot help but think about the essay by Gloria Steinem that AlterNet posted yesterday. In that essay, the theme was feminists did not have to support right-wing women. In today's essay, the theme is that we need to support women by having more progressive media. This doesn't make me care about the issue.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune sold for $160 million recently to a group of investors. Why didn't a group of women buy the paper instead? The Boston Globe and other major papers have been mentioned by mainstream media as being possible purchases for other men looking to keep local papers in existence. Where are the women trying to put together funding for these papers? Where are the women funding small, local start-up newspapers throughout the nation?

I want to report on the problems of women losing housing when their grandchildren bring drugs into the apartment. I want to report on the demands upon women who must shuttle older children around sprawling communities because there is no viable public transit option. I want to report on incentive programs for women's businesses that are based on models that will create Googles and YouTube, not a local bakery or Avon distributor network. I am planning an article on my women-owned newsletter on how the state senate's committee on economic growth has only one woman on the committee, and that woman was just elected to the senate last November. The House side has no women in the top positions of the committee. How can the state represent women's economic interests in jobs and in businesses if women's voices are not being heard? These are the issues I need to hear about.

I appreciate hearing about the status of women in other countries and on the big-scale issues, such as war, sexual abuse, and domestic violence. However, there is so much more than that. Unfortunately, Jane Fonda and her colleagues do not seem to understand that reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MY MEMORY ISN'T SHORT ENOUGH FOR JANE FONDA
Posted by: robshome on Jan 18, 2007 4:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ALTHOUGH I HAVE TRIED AND TRIED TO SHORTEN MY MEMORY SO I CAN BE LIKE EVERY OTHER AMERICAN, I CANNOT FORGET JANE FONDA'S TRIP TO NORTH VIETNAM IN WARTIME, HER BETRAYAL OF AN IMPRISIONED AMERICAN WARRIOR, AND HER FERVENT PROPAGANDA AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES - SORRY - I WON'T LISTEN TO A DAMN THING SHE HAS TO SAY AND WONDER WHY WE HAVEN'T LONG AGO DEPORTED HER

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MY MEMORY ISN'T SHORT ENOUGH FOR JANE FONDA Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» What War? Posted by: NoPCZone
» Beautifully Said Posted by: Steele
» Beautifully Said Posted by: Steele
» RE: What War? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: What War? Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: What War? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Pretty talking heads
Posted by: funnyfarm12 on Jan 18, 2007 4:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It has been my observation that women in the mainstream media are nothing more than pretty talking heads. When we, as a society, begin to realize that women are not all 5'7", 125lb, and blond we might be on the way to getting some balanced news from/to women. Meantime you're spinning your wheels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dear Jane
Posted by: wawa on Jan 18, 2007 5:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Female muckrakers are alive and well on the borderless www,

My first book "KEEP HOPE ALIVE" is selling very well in the UK,
because on Thanksgiving evening, in
The House of Commons,
my video interview with the
Whistleblower of Israel's WMD Program:

"30 Minutes with Vanunu"
was shown.

Vanunu's FREEDOM of SPEECH trial in a Mid East 'democracy' is ignored by USA media, but feminist muckrakers are reporting on this historic case -and we are
FREELY STREAMING


"30 Minutes with Vanunu"
on
http://www.wearewideawake.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gloria Steinem, Robin Morgan, + Jane Fonda ARE the status quo
Posted by: MartianBachelor on Jan 18, 2007 5:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
> A media scrambling to tell "both" sides of a story often leaves out the women's side.

Yea, like the front page story in the NYT two days ago on marriage: men are barely mentioned.

Almost by definition, the mainstream media is nothing but women's side of the story. Hasn't she ever watched Good Morning America or the Today show? It's all weight-loss, fashion, celebrity, etc. - not even any sports, much less "guy stuff" like science. Same goes with the evening "newsmagazine" shows. Ever heard of Barbara Walters?

Don't me get me started on the feminacentric media...

Mars to Jane: observe, think, then write. Please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you Jane! I'll be listening, reading and watching!
Posted by: greentime on Jan 18, 2007 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having heard you speak at Omega Institute two summers ago, I know that the critical comments here on Alternet about status quo, and being tall and blonde (and white), and the old venomous Vietnam reaction are not a true reflection of who you are or on what you are doing. I know you are expansive and inclusive in your efforts. How could people know that by how you are presented in the corporate media?

As you move forward with Greenstone and other women's media projects, know that women everywhere and hopefully many men too will hear you and have much to consider and respond to!

Thanks for being out there, you are in good and growing company.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

minority/majority
Posted by: Audri on Jan 18, 2007 6:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is very hard to see any 'minority's' point of view when you are in the so called majority: the party of power. And, if you are in the 'minority,' trying to tell someone in the power spot that they don't 'get' the 'minority' point is usually futile and frustrating. So it's disappointing, but not suprising, to me that this article got such condeming comments.
I tried to read Jane's article with an open mind... apparently unlike the majority of people who have posted a comment so far.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

JANE'S PAST WON'T GO AWAY
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jan 18, 2007 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
She makes many good points but brings old baggage. Too bad. Jane's setbacks, marriages and career changes are not typical of average women. It's unaffordable for most of us. This makes it hard for us to identify with her as 'one of us'. She's not. Her life has been a series of newsworthy events. She may be 100% sincere but it's hard for me to believe that she can understand our typical day. And we don't get to write books about ourselves. Sorry Jane. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Would The World Look Like If Palestinians Had An Equal Share In The Media?
Posted by: Douglas on Jan 18, 2007 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jane does not ask that question because she has long been an uncritical supporter of Israel's brutal occupation and illegal settlement of the West Bank and Gaza. When she was filming the movie "Julia" in the late 1970s she had so many arguments with her co-star Vanessa Redgrave about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that the film's director Fred Zinneman (himself a political liberal) banned political discussion on the set. In the 1980s, when she was married to Tom Hayden, she accompanied Hayden to Israel and the two of them stood at the Israel-Lebanese border and cheered the Israeli army as it invaded Lebanon. Hayden had plans at the time to run for the US Senate from California and he needed the support of AIPAC. Hayden has since recanted his mindless and uncritical support of Israel and his deal with AIPAC (see his piece last summer published in CounterPunch) but so far as I know, Jane has never renounced her uncritical and reflexive Zionism. She correctly complains that the media treats women's viewpoints as "supplemental, but not as essential." That also seems to be the way that Jane, along with the media, regards Palestinian viewpoints. What rights, one wonders, do Palestinian women have in Jane Fonda's view of the world?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Question for Posters
Posted by: anothername on Jan 18, 2007 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Note that this speech about women and media started with a story of rape and war. Why?

The speech could just as easily have asked where the female generals are in Iraq. That's part of the missing story, too, that women in the U.S. military still are not combat generals. What about women in other nations' militaries?

I would like to ask posters to imagine they are writing for their daily local newspaper. What story that was not covered would you include? Would you cover this differently as a woman than as a man?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No Female Commanders Posted by: NoPCZone
Divide and conquer
Posted by: ScottP on Jan 18, 2007 9:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even Jane Fonda falls prey to the effective strategy of dividing people in groups of male/female, race, etc. That makes the populace much more easily manipulated, so that the robber barons can continue their power trips and money stealing.

How about Judith Miller, one of the most effective neo-con war boosters? How about Pelosi, Clinton, and Feinstein, who voted for every single supplemental appropriation for the war? How about Lynn Cheney? Blaming the war on men doesn't hold water, blaming it on people who are willing to build their mansions on blood does.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What?
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jan 18, 2007 11:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What if women had an equal role in the media?

What if gender didn't even matter in the media???????????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What? Posted by: Ian MacLeod
it wouldn't make much difference
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jan 18, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think that gender makes much difference as far as viewing war. For those like Ms. Fonda there are also plenty of Ann Coulters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Agree 100%
Posted by: 15delta on Jan 18, 2007 1:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As much as I felt about Jane during my time in Vietnam, and after, I think she has paid the price many times over.
And she stood the heat which a lot of people won't do.
I "a combat vet forgave her and others should do the same"
If you still want to condemn Jane about Vietnam, then please answer why we are trading with Communist Vietnam now, which is never written about in the news? Next time look at the clothes you are wearing and where they are made and 50,000+ paid with their lives for us to trade with them. There's a real complaint.
As for 50% woman in media, I think it is great. Go for it Jane. 100% would be better.
I'm really sick with all these brown noses doing the news.
I’m behind Jane’s idea the way.

Delta

www.silversurf@thegrid.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You can't tell the whole story when you leave out half the population
Posted by: suprmark on Jan 18, 2007 1:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe it would be good to have more female representation in the media. Women see things differently from men, and are often useful for pointing out where men are behaving like asses. Getting more women into decision making positions is vital to increase the voice of women in the media. However, I sincerely doubt that directing these women's voices only at other women will improve the situation. A media company with a majority of female staff that reports the news and has other programming created by a majority of women would be interesting and potentially very successful both financially and in reaching a diverse audience. I'm sure you all know how diverse the audience for Oxygen is.

I'm a little confused about the whole 'opposite of a male led and dominated society is not a female led and dominated society, but an asexual rule by the people society' concept. I understand that the opposite of 'patriarchy' is 'not patriarchy' (therefore not necessarily matriarchy) but could someone please explain to me how it therefore means 'democracy'?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bah
Posted by: Ambrose Pare on Jan 18, 2007 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Women are too goddamn concerned about progressing there careers and getting ahead to risk covering a story that might piss off there bosses.

Women today are the ultimate tool. They'll do anything for money and status.

They'll even kill there unborn children to get ahead.

As long as us evil men exist, we'll exploit women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jane Fonda is another major reason Kerry LOST in 2004.
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 18, 2007 6:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jane Fonda is nothing but than the typical Hollywood elitist who predictably rubbed off voters in red America the other way. And as Douglas interestingly points out, Fonda is happy that Palestenian women are rendered nearly lifeless. I'd like to add that Fonda is the typical femi-NAZI who gives lower and middle class women in America the middle finger.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MSM CARNY PARROT
Posted by: Hal on Jan 18, 2007 7:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rattlebrained as she was for her “Hanoi Jane”, days I don’t think it’s fair to blame Fonda for past indiscretions at a Viet Nam war waged over a false incident (Tonkin Gulf) for the usual criminal blood money war motives.

However, for Jane Fonda to promote the red herring that lack of females at the MSM or elsewhere is anything like the reason for a cooked 4th estate is laughable.

The reasons given for complete MSM failure to do its job in the ramp-up to an utterly bogus “war on terror” and its bloody poster child at Iraq War Incorporated are all cesspool garbage. Specifically: there was no real laziness, incompetence or lack of solid intelligence that the MSM could point to as an alibi for misleading the public yet again.

Anyone with a PC and a mind had access to a glut of evidence available from UNSCOM’s Scott Ritter etc, to verify there were no reasons for an illegal invasion of the Mid East from well before 2003.

MSM companies may be publicly traded but are not driven by stockholders. The MSM is owned lock, stock and barrel by the same corporate crime club that runs Washington and its sellout circus actors.

Human beings of either sex are not immune to an oligarch bloc that can literally print whatever private fiat money it needs in order to get its way. And all while human life is raped and gutted across the globe in the process.

No, this western MSM carny parrot sings for the usual suspects as it has since the nation was hijacked by and for robber barons.

Jane and her myopic cheerleaders need to awake before they can be taken seriously on this or any other issue.

Freedom to Fascism

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

she did what she was complaining about others doing.
Posted by: jamiebarker on Jan 19, 2007 7:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The story started out about abeer. i thought it would be another article about that incident. by the way i still see a new article about it everyday. she said that the media is shoving important stories to the side and burying them in the back of the news. well, she just did that. this story had nothing to do with abeer. it had to do with the reporter wanting to whine about something. the world is not fair. and whether men or women report the news doesnt bother me at all. i wouldnt have opened that had it had a different title. it was called a powerful media can stop a war. when in fact it shouldve been called " i feel like crying because im not as important as bill o'reilly"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well said, Jane!
Posted by: tlees2 on Jan 20, 2007 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well said, Jane! Time to get gender-balance in all areas of life. We've had enough of male idiots (Bush, Cheney, Hannity, Limbaugh) and a few female idiots (Anne Coulter). Time to get more brilliant female voices (Molly Ivins) to join brilliant male voices (Colbert, Olberman).

Tom

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dr. Moosa Yameen
Posted by: Moosa Yameen on Jan 21, 2007 11:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent Article; though may I ask Jane Fonda to write some think about was “Siachen war” being fought between Pakistan and India since last twenty three years. Briefly Siachen glacier is located in the disputed region of Kashmir in the Indian subcontinent. Unfortunately, the glacier is also the highest battleground on earth, where India and Pakistan have fought intermittently since April 13, 1984. The volume of the glacier has been reduced by 35 percent over the last twenty years and melted water raised the sea level.
Yes, Dear Jane Fonda, Rising of sea level is the fundamental cause of Hurricanes and tsunami [post tsunami-2004 and Katrina report can be consulted in this regard.
Now, from conception to realty, Siachen war can be the best model for Jane Fonda if she writes over this issue.
Dr Moosa Yameen
dr-moosa@hotmail.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Democracy and News : Lecture with Lisa Finnegan at Fordham University NYC
Posted by: farhada on Jan 22, 2007 2:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Veteran journalist Lisa Finnegan, returns to Fordham to analyze American news coverage since 9/11, the subject of her new book, No Questions Asked : News Coverage since 9/11 (Praeger Publishers, 2006), on Tuesday, Jan. 23 at 7:30 p.m. in Room 521 at the Lowenstein Center, Lincoln Center campus.

No Questions Asked compares the U.S. media reporting on post-9/11 events, such as the Iraq war and the 2004 presidential elections, with international media coverage of the same events. The book analyzes how patriotism, fear, obedience, indifference and propaganda influenced news reporting during that timeline.

Finnegan, an award-winning journalist, has written for major newspapers and news services, and was the editor of Occupational Hazards Magazine. While a student at Fordham, she collaborated with Harold Takooshian, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology at Fordham and president of the American Psychological Association Society for General Psychology, on a study about attitudes toward terrorism. Results of the study were published in the Fordham Law Journal as “The USA Patriot Act: Civil Liberties, The Media, and Public Opinion,” in May 2003.

The event is hosted by the Fordham Psychology Association and Psi Chi.

Here are the topics:
* What is the role of the media in a democratic society?
* How has media coverage changed since 9/11?
* How do media images influence our perception?

For more information about the time and location follow the link to Fordham University or Her blog at: http://www.noquestionsasked.org/blog

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]