Anyone remember a group of dedicated reporters — for a little paper called the New Orleans Times-Picayune — day after relentless day slogging through the stench of muck and death to file to a Web site that not only informed the world of the horrors they had seen, but also enabled thousands of survivors to find one another? Or the scores of brave journalists risking their lives in war zones across the world, not the least of which are those who survived some harrowing situations in Iraq to report the most important story of our time? Or Nick Kristoff of the New York Times, who has been reporting tirelessly from Darfur, refusing with admirable stubbornness to let an indifferent world forget about the massive human tragedy unfolding there?
But you don’t need to risk your life to do the right thing as a journalist. There is great journalism happening every day, from the recent New York Times scoop about your government monitoring your overseas phone calls and emails, to the Washington Post’s exclusive on secret CIA prisons overseas, to the Wall Street Journal’s series on poverty in America last May. All were superb pieces of investigative journalism — and all were left off the lists of the above-noted critics. There were many other individual examples of great journalism worthy of note: the reporting of Time magazine’s Michael Ware on the insurgency in Iraq, and the Washington Post’s Anthony Shadid’s intimate portraits of the lives of average Iraqis caught in the maelstrom of war, to name just a few.
To us, the grimmest news of all — and we must note that it is missing from all those lists — was this: According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 47 journalists worldwide were killed in the line of duty this year — nearly one a week.
Here’s hoping that 2006 will be better.
Correction: This post has been changed to exclude the number of journalists killed in 2004, which was originally reported incorrectly.
- 1
- 2




I am replying to Paul's comment on my year-end list on the MarketWatch site. "
Get a grip, Jon," he wrote, apparently delighting in criticizing what I wrote.
I might use the same line on this esteemed writer. Paul! Paul! Switch to decaf. Smell the roses. My list of 2005 lowlights was meant to be entertaining -- it wasn't at all intended to be a literal list of job cuts, failed mergers, depressing ad and circulation figures and the like. I'm sure you can do a fine job on reporting on facts. As for my column, the next time I attempt to be humorous, I'll raise a flag.
Happy new year,
Jon Friedman
MarketWatch
Posted by JonFriedman on Thu 29 Dec 2005 at 06:39 PM
. . . and for news about journalists of color and the quest for newsroom diversity in 2005, see:
Posted by Richard Prince on Thu 29 Dec 2005 at 07:45 PM
URL went missing:
http://www.maynardije.org/columns/dickprince/051221_prince
Posted by Richard Prince on Thu 29 Dec 2005 at 07:47 PM
Funny, when I read the "Get a grip, Jon" line in the post, I thought "Huh, if I were Jon Friedman I'd sure want to respond to that." Whaddya' know.
Also, Paul, I know you guys aren't big on balance for balance's sake -- but isn't there a conservative media site you could pull from to balance Alternet's presence in your roundup?
Posted by freejoe76 on Thu 29 Dec 2005 at 11:22 PM
I think journalism gradually is displaced in the Internet. Probably, newspapers became less interesting, and can simply read in the Internet articles more conveniently. In the Internet it is possible to count huge plus of articles that any interested person can leave the comment to article, express the opinion and other people of it will read.
Work of the journalist is frequently connected to risk for a life, unfortunately many perish, someone grasped in hostages by insurgents. The trade, but journalism - noble business that can be more interesting than allow to people a trustworthy information is those.
Posted by Bob on Wed 18 Jan 2006 at 04:11 PM