Hi Mediawatch
Here's an email I sent to the producer of Radio 5 Live's Drive
programme. I sent it in via the email on the website and I'm not
confident it will get read – if anyone has a better way of contacting
the producer, please let me know!
Regards
John
Dear Five Live Drive
In your programme of Wednesday September 14 Jane Garvey interviewed
Nial Gardner of the Heritage Foundation on a wide range of topics
including the war in Iraq, terrorism and the UN.
Jane introduced the Heritage Foundation as a 'conservative think
tank' but did not mention its history of supporting terrorist
movements in Nicaragua (and elsewhere), nor its murky financial
relationship with South Korea, nor indeed its lightweight
intellectual reputation. Instead, Gardner was allowed to play very
effectively the role of 'expert' while making a whole succession of
highly debatable and extremely right wing points of view which went
largely unchallenged.
For example, Gardner described the occupation of Iraq as a 'battle we
are raging between good and evil'. Jane made no attempt to challenge
this point of view – she could easily have pointed out that at that
very time the US assault on Tal Afar would be costing the lives of
innocent civilians, as similar assaults on Falluja, Tikrit and other
areas have done. Or indeed she could have made the broader point that
far more civilians have been killed as a result of attacks by US
forces than have died from insurgent bombings, and that the
relatives, neighbours and friends of these victims will have a very
different experience of good and evil than Gardner's. Gardner went on
to make similar assertions about Blair's post July 7 proposals for
reducing civil liberties and the role of the United Nations, again
largely unchallenged.
You also made no attempt to balance this point of view with an
alternative viewpoint and indeed it is extremely rare to hear
spokespeople from equally radical left-wing organisations on Radio
Five Live. On the rare occasions that I have heard alternate points
of view these have been challenged much more rigorously than was the
case with Gardner.
The interview raised some important issues of balance. I would urge
you to reconsider your use of the Heritage Foundation as a source for
comment, if you are not able to provide alternative viewpoints and to
select interviewers who are prepared to take issue with their
contentious ideas.
Yours
John Meed
|