The word terrorism is a significant word. One which has captured the fear in people’s hearts in the way it connotes destruction, war, killing and violence. After the pivotal event of 9/11, this was made more apparent and the term was generally used in a pejorative way. This article attempts to examine the ideologies and the historical approach to reporting terrorism in the TV news media with particular attention to the British TV news media. Analysis will be made of TV news reports and the implications these reports can have for the audience. Terrorist related events will be examined looking at the ideologies behind them. A survey will be done to show the public perception of terrorism in the news. The article will argue that the mainstream media distort the reality of events in order to achieve their news value, helping the terrorists in their aims and consequently changing society’s perception of terrorists.
There is no universal definition of terrorism, since there are so many different types of terrorist acts. Attempts by the UN and other international bodies to define term, was made into a book which runs to three volumes and 1,866 pages without reaching any real conclusion. The word terrorism was first coined by Edmund Burke, describing his dislike for the ‘state terror’ which was prevalent in the French Revolution in 1793-1794. (Gerwehr, Hubbard, 2007:90). Interestingly one of the influential figures of the French Revolution Maximilien Robespierre says: “Terror is nothing than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible: it is therefore an emanation of virtue.” (Gerwehr, Hubbard, 2007:90). Maximilien undoubtedly believed sincerely in what he said, and this also goes for the modern day terrorist. They sincerely believe in what they fight for since they have an ideology which motivates them.
One definition can be seen from the Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Anan, as he presented in his address to the International Summit on “Democracy, Terrorism and Security” on March 10, 2005 in Madrid. He said: “Any action constitutes terrorism if it is intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians and non-combatants, with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from any act.”
The Oxford definition of the term is: “The unofficial use of violence and intimidation in an attempt to achieve political aims.” (Oxford Dictionary, 2007: 575). The Cambridge dictionary defines it as: “(threats of) violent action for political purposes.” You’ll notice the word ‘political’ being mentioned and this is what the majority of people believe terrorism to be – a politically motivated attack.
This has led some to argue that terrorism is a political ideology, with the main aim being to frighten or create a psychological impact on its targets, and provoking a reaction which will consequently or most definitely involve the media. The mass media is responsible for so much of the information the world receives and usually has a big role to play in fulfilling the terrorist’s goals. As Papacharissi and Oliveira tell us: “...terrorist acts are reified in the presence of media who cover, and thus publicize, the terrorist act.” (Papacharissi, Oliveira, 2008: 55).
Terrorist acts unfortunately possess news value elements such as drama, visuals, sound bites, relevance, and “general newsworthiness” and it is this “newsworthiness” in today’s time, which terrorist groups frequently use and exploit in order to further their agendas. (Papacharissi, Oliveira, 2008: 55). The news value that terrorism has is immense since it is something which not only captures the audience’s attention especially in the west (due to terrorist incidents of 9/11 and the 7/7 tube bombings in London) but also because of the mixture of fear and hatred that the general public have for these ‘terrorists’. The media is responsible for making people more fearful of terrorist acts because of the amount it actually reports. An example can be seen, as John Lewis points out that international terrorism has been the main topic of interest in this generation with many more news stories being produced since 2001 than they were in 1981, when in fact more terrorist activities were prevalent back then. (Harcup, 2007:55). Lewis argues that this kind of coverage “...distorts our perception of risk” and thus leading the audience to be less fearful of other big dangers like global warming for example since the media changes our perception of the world and also reflects it. (Harcup, 2007:55).
The TV news media in particular is a medium which is very powerful. Dr. Ronald Meinardus argues that whenever the “terrorists” make their move and provoke a reaction, the media play a central role: “There are those who argue that terrorism is basically a communications strategy. While that may be too one sided, I believe that terrorism as we know it today, would be inconceivable without the power of the global media, and particularly the global television networks.”
TV along with the internet, radio, newspapers, magazines, and books, has become an ‘Information highway’ and is quite a valuable source of information as Nicholas Abercrombie tells us: “Our everyday lives are so interwoven with the media that we are scarcely aware of them.” (Abercrombie, 1996: 2). Many people use TV as their essential news source and it is this news source which people use as their ‘window to the rest of the world’. Nick Lacey tells us: “In Britain, television news has greater credibility than printed news, and the BBC more so than ITN. This is probably because of the combination of a press that is too obviously partisan and the strength of the myth that ‘seeing is believing’. (Lacey, 2009:267). Seeing images, especially video footage adds an element of realism which helps the news organization to further represent their ideological values.
However, although TV adds to the strength of ‘seeing is believing’, Philip Taylor argues that once war breaks out there are two types, the “Real War” and the “Media War”. He states: “Real war is about sounds, sight, smell, touch and taste of the nasty, brutal business of killing people...Media war, however, is literally a mediated event which draws on that reality but which in, and of itself, is confined to merely an audio-visual – and therefore inherently desensitizing – representation of it.” (Dodds, 2007: 222). So in actual fact whatever we see in front on our TV screens can never be the actual representation of the event, but only a mere representation of what the TV news network wants us, the audience to see and as Jonathan Bignell tells us: “Newspapers and other news media shape what can be thought of as news, by reporting some events and excluding others. So news discourse is an ideological representation of the world because it selects what will be reported, and sets the terms of what is significant.” (Bignell, 2002:80).
But when reporting terrorism there seems to be a dilemma for journalists which raises ethical and ideological questions. Shurkin explains the dilemma quite well as he says: “The media find themselves in a dysfunctional position relative to terrorism. On one hand they must report terrorist attacks as they happen. On the other, they are part of the reason these incidents occur in the first place...In its most cynical form, the image is of terrorists using the media as a conduit for their message and the media using the terrorists for dramatic stories. ” (Shurkin, 2007: 81,82).
This is particularly true in the way Islamic terrorists have actually gained a platform to voice their opinion on TV in the form of video interviews. Terrorist groups can go to great lengths to gain control over the way in which their message is transmitted and received. For example they tend to provide journalists with “firsthand” videotapes of attacks in order to make sure that their version of events controls the airwaves and not the governments. (Gerwehr, Hubbard, 2007: 92).
Although in the case of Kenneth Bigley, this is not so apparent. The terrorists gave the Arab television network Abu Dhabi, the video tape of Bigley’s execution in which afterwards they posted it on the internet . This wasn’t to dominate the airwaves but to hit their intended audience with a psychological impact. This is the main purpose of terrorist related attacks; they create fear in the people hearts, and an execution as unfortunate as Bigley’s would have surely put a scar on the audience’s heart. It could be argued the British media inflamed this fear, in the amount of coverage the story had received, consequently resulting in the media’s criticism. The effects of this kind of reporting created the fear that more British people in the future would be kidnapped by terrorists – just exactly what the terrorist wanted.
The independent news network of the Middle East, Al-Jazeera is known for its daring attitude with its controversial coverage into reporting terrorism. It became famous worldwide for showing exclusive interviews with Osama Bin Laden after the 9/11 attacks earning it the nickname as the “Bin Laden Channel”. The news network is criticized for having a biased attitude towards ‘the west’ with its lack of objectivity and giving a voice to terrorists.
However the Deputy Executive Director of Al-Jazeera's London bureau, Yosri Fouda says: "We always try to provide as comprehensive a picture as possible. We don't only reflect one angle and this is why some governments are unhappy with what we do. Al-Jazeera is a cultural, political and social phenomenon - it’s teaching people about things like civil society, human rights and voting - many governments in our part of the world are not happy with such things." He argues that no news organization would not have aired the Bin Laden tape. While it is probably true that any news network with the Bin Laden tape would have aired it on their channel, one thing does come to mind though – is it ethically correct? Showcasing a terrorist on national television can be severe and have dire consequences. The people watching, particularly those with strong feelings against the US would just get even more inflamed and their hatred for the ‘west’ would just increase.
According to Dr Naomi Sakr, it’s not the channel which has an anti-US agenda, but the fact that it is reflecting the “anti-American feeling”: “What we are seeing is the pent-up frustration of people in a part of the world where there is no free media. Al-Jazeera focuses on the issues that they are pre-occupied with - the Palestinian situation, Iraq and levels of poverty and social exclusion in Arab countries. People find it hard not to blame the US for the problems in the Middle East." Al-Jazeera could be compared to likes of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News, in the way both channels have nationalistic ideals. In the eyes of an Arab, Al-Jazeera is much more credible than any of the other international news sources, mainly because most of the journalists there are Arabs themselves and also because in the way it’s hailed as a ‘revolutionary force’, and the only channel telling the “story straight.”
The reporting of terrorism or terrorist acts, may lead one to think about why are these ‘so called’ terrorists, actually terrorists? How do we know which news source is conveying the correct information about these terrorists? One thing that nearly all terrorists portray themselves as is freedom fighters, who are fighting for a ‘righteous cause’. The most famous terrorist attack in British history was known as the Gun Powder plot of 1605. Robert Catesby – a staunch catholic, led the plot, which was an assassination attempt to kill King James I along with the protestant aristocracy by blowing up the Houses of Parliament. Other conspirators also joined Catesby in an attempt to kill off the King in a bid to make protestant England a more ‘catholic’ country, including the infamous Guy Fawkes who was the explosives expert in the plot and responsible for setting off the bombs.
Catesby felt he had to do something in order to change the countries religious beliefs and he is reported to have said: "The nature of the disease required so sharp a remedy", meaning to say that he thought the plot was a “morally justifiable act of self-defense against the oppressive rule of a tyrant” . He saw the plot as an act of last resort, and was determined to try and solve the “ills by peaceful means and without bloodshed” . So were these people freedom fighters, fighting for a good cause? Catesby wanted to try another means but felt he was led to compulsion to carry out the plot. But whatever the situation, how can one call themselves ‘freedom fighters’ by trying to kill or blow up people, thus taking freedom from others by consequently taking away their lives?
This assassination attempt or terrorist attack was a religiously fuelled attack and is still remembered and venerated to this day as Guy Fawkes Night or Bonfire Night. Families and children alike come together and set off fireworks enjoying the colourful delights of what is essentially commemorating a deadly terrorist attack; which if successful, would have probably killed several people along with many casualties. A recent BBC news report about the City of York not having fireworks this year because of costs, started off showing a reconstruction of the event of the Gun Powder plot where by a barrel is seen being lit by presumably Guy Fawkes himself .
The non-diagetic background music used here is some classical music with violins. Nick Lacey tells us that: “Music not only adds meanings generated by the image; it also creates meanings. (Lacey, 2009: 62). This suggests that the Gun Powder plot in the BBC news report is being ‘desensitized’ through the use of calm and tranquil violins being played and thus the “meaning” which Lacey talks about being conveyed here, is that ‘there is no real danger’. The commentary over this scene says: “He is easily Yorks most infamous son, Guy Fawkes, one of the world’s first terrorists and the explosives expert of the gun powder plot.” It’s as if Guy Fawkes is being praised in the way he is being referred to as “one of the world’s first terrorists,” since the noun “worlds” is being used as an adjective to describe Fawkes’s position when compared to the ‘whole world’.
Consequently as the media desensitize the incident of the gun powder plot the more people think of it as a cause of celebration. This is another way the media can change society’s perception. Why should something like this especially in this day and age be celebrated? Why are we all remembering a terrorist? Should we all then venerate the event of 9/11? – What’s the difference? Both had the intent to kill and destroy with 9/11 only being successful in its intent. Both had a sense of injustice felt towards their nations or people – with the Catholics being subject to persecution in Britain in the period of Kings James I and the Muslims being persecuted in their own lands by America whether directly in Afghanistan or indirectly through regime support.
Bin Laden seemed to believe he was striking back in retribution for injustices carried out against Islam and Muslims as he explains on a video tape shown on Al Jazeera on October 29, 2004: And I tell you, God only knows, that we never had the intentions to destroy the towers. But after the injustice was so much and we saw transgressions and the coalition between Americans and the Israelis against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it occurred to my mind that we deal with the towers.
It can be seen here that Bin Laden felt a strong need to fight back against the “transgressors” and seemingly did so through the 9/11 attacks. Some of the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon along with some Lebanese were celebrating the attacks by giving out sweets to everybody out on the streets. One Lebanese said to a Reuters camera crew: "People are happy. America has always supported terrorism. They see how the innocent Palestinian children are killed and they back the Zionist army that does it. America has never been on the side of justice." Muhammad Rasheed, a Palestinian said: "This is the language that the United States understands and this is the way to stop America from helping the Zionist terrorists who are killing our children, men and women every day." From these responses it can be clearly seen that Osama Bin Laden was seen as a hero and a freedom fighter for all those Muslims who have been oppressed in the world by America. Just as the saying goes, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” the Palestinians and Lebanese saw America as the ‘real’ terrorist.
Both the 9/11 and the Gun powder plot, were seen as attacks against symbols of power, with a high collateral damage or the potential to do so. They were more to do with a rebellion against what was seen by the individuals as oppression which was then stained with a facade of ‘religious righteousness’. In the contemporary era this is commonly known as religious fundamentalism. An ideology which literally means to strictly adhere to the principles of the religious scriptures be it the Quran or the Bible or any other religious text. This reinforces ones perception of fighting against the ‘enemy’ since they are now fighting for the sake of God, thus making the reason for fighting even stronger. The ideology of fundamentalism nowadays, is currently only ever associated with ‘Islamic fundamentalism.’ This association has become the norm in western media in which Elizabeth Poole states: “All Muslim acts interpreted as extreme are then constituted as fundamentalism, which is then linked to terrorism.” (Poole, 2002: 46). Although the danger here is that association of violent Islamic Fundamentalism and Islam in the western media, has made the younger and more vulnerable Muslims feel that they need to become fundamentalists in order to become better Muslims, thus creating a new breed of radicalized terrorists.
Another ideology which governs the way some terrorist’s work is nationalism. The IRA in particular is known for their patriotism. Their aim to create a united Ireland away from British interference propels them on in their long standing cause. Interestingly the PIRA (Provisional Ireland Republican Army) is an offshoot of the IRA and the RIRA (Real Ireland Republican Army) are an offshoot of the PIRA. These splits were mainly because of ideological differences and the sharing of power with other political parties.
The famous Hunger Strike incident involving 10 PIRA and INLA (Irish National Liberation Army) members in Belfast’s Maze Prison, 1981, was an act of self starvation. They literally starved themselves to death for their demand to be recognized as ‘political’ prisoners rather than ‘criminals’ or terrorists. (Merari, 2007: 109). This suicidal act could be compared to that of suicidal bombers, since both acts have a political intent behind them – the only difference being that the ‘hunger strikers’ only harmed themselves in the process. Although it can be argued that these people were real freedom fighters since they harmed know one and their determination for not to be referred to as terrorists or criminals was such, that they actually sacrificed their very lives.
But what was the driving force of this incredible sacrifice? According to Areil Merari self starvation is an extremely demanding way to die more so than that of an “instantaneous self-inflicted explosion”. He says: “The suicide was part of a contract that no one could break. The group pressure in that situation was as strong as the group pressure that led hundreds of thousands of soldiers in World War 1 to charge against the enemy machine gun fire and artillery to almost sure death.”(Merari , 2007: 109). It was these nationalistic ideals which turned the IRA members into martyrs in the eyes of many Irish citizens for standing up against the British government in its criminalization of “Ireland’s long and noble fight for freedom”. As a result, this made more people political aware and thus launching the success of the IRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein and the many electoral success that followed. The media however seem to make out the situation in Ireland involving the RIRA, who many Irish regard as ruthless thugs, and Sinn Fein is getting progressively worse.
The most recent RIRA attack on two soldiers gunned down outside their Ulster Barracks was described mainly as a “chilling” terrorist attack . A TV news report of the incident by Sky News shows Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, Martin McGuiness who was a former leader of the PIRA and now an active Sinn Fein politician, in the report saying: “These people are traitors in the island of Ireland.” He is then shown in stylized black and white shot in front of photographers – the footage being in slow motion. The juxtaposition of the two shots shows McGuiness as somewhat sinister suggesting that he should not be trusted and the commentary then says: “That sort of language from a man who used to be right at the top of the IRA tree angered hard line republicans who today declared as an enemy, the man they once regarded as a leading figure in their movement.” Interestingly the news report quotes him saying, the RIRA terrorists are the traitors whereas the commentary portrays him as a traitor to the republicans.
Fear and drama is also created in the report by using footage from an actual RIRA member wearing a black mask speaking about killing the “British occupation forces, when, whenever and wherever” they decide. Lacey tells us that in news reports: “Dramatic tension is often invoked through the use of a binary opposite [...]” (Lacey, 2009: 265). It can be suggested that use of binary oppositions plays a big role here in telling the audience that it’s the RIRA terrorists versus the British soldiers or essentially Britain itself. Also the stern and masculine commentary used here is a sign of the danger these terrorists impose . This is where the news value element comes into the story since without any real ‘enemy’ there is no value to the story and as Lacey says: “This tension is the narrative disruption that needs to be resolved, and without which there is no story.” (Lacey, 2009: 265). But if the story itself gives the audience a “chilling” feeling of fear, isn’t this in reality helping the RIRA terrorists in their motives? This suggests to us again that the terrorists use the media to their advantage and the news media always fall into this trap on the premise of news value.
Since the news industry is a business with its own commercial self interest it is essentially a ‘social construction of reality’. (Fowler, 1991:2). Taking this into account we can see that journalist’s are in a sense limited by the bounds of time, money and hierarchy. According Robert Fowler: “The world of the press is not the real world, but a world skewed and judged.” (Fowler, 1991: 11) Everything that is said or written in the news is done from an ideological position, since language itself is something which is not “clear” but rather a “structuring medium”. (Fowler,1991: 10). Media ownership can play a big part in this ‘bias’ nature of news organizations as Nick Davies tells us: “Owners can and do interfere in the editorial process of their outlets.” (Davies, 2008:15). One proprietor shows this power quite well. Since September 11th, Rupert Murdoch’s media outlets all around the globe were like “propaganda arms” of the Bush Administration, shaming anybody who dares to question the President’s ‘War on Terror’. Interference of owners does raise ethical questions about how the media is regulated because surely if owners let their medium run freely, society’s perception of the world will become more distorted, especially with regards to terrorism.
Unlike the PCC, Ofcom the Broadcast regulator in the UK is backed by law which makes sure that any Broadcasting organisation which breaks the ‘Ofcom code’ can be fined or have its license revoked. (Harcup, 2007: 116). One of the codes which Ofcom has and which every broadcast news organisation in the UK endeavours to follow is the “5.1 Due Impartiality” code . In the recent Gaza crisis the BBC chose not to air the Emergency Aid appeal by DEC because of this “impartiality” code . Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC said: “It is sometimes not a comfortable place to be, but we have a duty to ensure that nothing risks undermining our impartiality. It is to protect that impartiality that we have made this difficult decision.”
Many people who saw the Gaza crisis on TV saw the Israeli army as the real terrorists, mainly because of the indifference towards the numbers killed with at least 1,300 Palestinians killed compared to the 13 Israelis killed in the war. While it is true that the BBC may have had its reputation on the line and as Thompson puts it: “[...] without running the risk of reducing public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in its wider coverage of the story” , the fact that they never aired the appeal made more people lose confidence in the BBC and actually it underlined their partiality towards Israel. In a joint letter, Jeremy Dear and Gerry Morrissey represented thousands of BBC staff and said the move risked being seen as "politically motivated" . They said: "Far from avoiding the compromise of the BBC's impartiality, this move has breached those same BBC rules by showing a bias in favour of Israel at the expense of 1.5 million Palestinian civilians suffering an acute humanitarian crisis." One BBC news source even said most of the anger is at BBC’s top management. This conflict demonstrates even news values can sometimes be taken over due to ‘political impartiality’ and interference from the ‘big boys at the top’.
So what is the public’s perception of the terrorism in the news? A survey was carried out using 20 consumers of TV news from the ages of 18-50.
Most participants agree that terrorists are bad people but there a few (15%) who believe that they can good people as well. Interestingly 60% of the participants say they don’t believe at all what the news tells them about terrorism but they seem to think that other believe do fall for the “media lies” with 90% of the participants agreeing to this. Davies tells us that many media experts, academics, students, politicians and consumers say they cannot believe everything in the media: “[...] and yet repeatedly many of them fall for explanations which are themselves infiltrated by falsehood, distortion and propaganda.”(Davies, 2008: 13). The survey also reinforces the fact that people use the TV news media as their main information portal for information on terrorist related events.
What is worrying here is that not one person refers to any books for the source of information making it even easier for news organizations to lure them in to their ideological values. Overall the myth of ‘seeing is believing’ still stands strong with TV news media and may do for a very long time. The reportage of terrorism has been always done with news value as its reward, with little disregard to the implications of how dramatising an event can affect the audience. Covering terrorism is like playing with dynamite since the journalist’s ideological values may come to help the terrorist in their motives – and further them in their goals of creating fear in the audience. The saying of “ones mans terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” is true when you look at both sides of the story-something which is lacking in TV news media. So it seems journalists have a hard job in maintaining an objective stance because the truth of the matter is journalists can never be objective. Ownership, ideologies and news value always come in the way of reporting an impartial story.
Bibliography
Abercrombie, Nicholas (1996) Television and Society, Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Bignell, Jonathan (2002), Media Semiotics: An Introduction, Manchester: University Press
Besley, Andrews and Chadwick, Ruth (1992) Ethical Issues in Journalism and the Media, London: Routledge
Bonger, B., Brown, L M., Beutler, L E., Breckenridge, J N., Zimbardo, P G., (eds) (2007) Psychology of Terrorism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Connelly, Mark, Welch, David (eds) (2007) War and the Media: Reportage and Propaganda, London: IB Tuaris
Davies, Chris (2008) Flat Earth News, London: Chatto and Windus
Fowler, Roger (1991) Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press, London: Routledge
Gerwehr,S. and Hubbard, K., (2007) What Is Terrorism: Key Elements and History, in Psychology of Terrorism, Ch 7.
Harcup, Tony (2007) The Ethical Journalist, London: Sage Publications
Lacey, Nick (1998) Image and Representation – Key Concepts in Media Studies, London: MACMILLAN PRESS LTD
Merari, Ariel (2007) Psychological Aspects of Suicide Terrorism, in Psychology of Terrorism, Ch 8.
Papacharissi, Z., and Oliveria, F. (2008) ‘News Frames Terrorism: A comparative Analysis of Frames Employed in Terrorism Coverage in U.S and U.K Newspapers’, in The International Journal of Press/Politics v13 n1.
Poole, Elizabeth (2009) Reporting Islam: Media Representations of British Muslims, London: IB Tauris
Said, Edward (1997) Covering Islam – How the Media and the Experts determine how we see the rest of the world, New York: Vintage Books.
Shurkin, Joel N. (2007) Terrorism and the Media, in Psychology of Terrorism, Ch 6.
Tumber, Howard and Webster, Frank (2006) Journalists under Fire: Information war and Journalistic Practices, London: Sage Publications
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
Monday, 2 November 2009
BBC College of Journalism
BBC Radio 4 visited my university last week and i thought to myself i have to take opportunity to get some experience! I found out there was a college of journalism workshop happening so i opted to put my name forward. Although there was a little hiccup in the beginning about the tickets, i managed to get in the end. The guy giving the lecture was Micheal Blastland- -and eloquent journalist, and author who does freelance for the BBC.
He was speaking about something which most of us journalists or just normal people, take for granted. All these facts and figures we see in the mass media are by large or most of the time, exaggerated and not even checked properly. He was talking about something to do with a journalists having this archetype in their minds which makes them automatically jump to assumptions and make links - something which is done to create more stories out of one topic.
Thursday, 22 October 2009
What is left of actuality after creative treatment?
Seeing is believing...or so they say. Reality is said to be made much clearer through art. But can something constructed and ‘made up’ such as art, be allowed to mingle with reality? Doesn’t this actually make reality less real? The father of British documentary film, John Grierson, defined documentary as the “the creative treatment of actuality”. Its “obvious contradiction” caused problems right from the outset (See Winston: 1995, 11). Does the ‘creative treatment’ of actuality leave us with no actuality at all, or does this creative treatment or ‘art process’ throw light upon the world in which we inhabit?
Bertolt Brecht once said: "Art is not a mirror held up to reality but a hammer with which to shape it." [1] Grierson also argued that the purpose of art was to represent the real world and not “the bank holiday of frenzied events” (See Aitken, 1990: 60). Documentary as an art form creates some underlying implications, if it, at the same time has a ‘claim on the real’. According to Brain Winston: “The contemporary use of ‘document’ still carries with it the connotation of evidence.” (Winston, 1995: 11). Even today some people immediately conceptualize documentaries as objective, rational, and educational. But can documentaries actually ‘document’ reality or are they just an artistic creation?
Bertolt Brecht once said: "Art is not a mirror held up to reality but a hammer with which to shape it." [1] Grierson also argued that the purpose of art was to represent the real world and not “the bank holiday of frenzied events” (See Aitken, 1990: 60). Documentary as an art form creates some underlying implications, if it, at the same time has a ‘claim on the real’. According to Brain Winston: “The contemporary use of ‘document’ still carries with it the connotation of evidence.” (Winston, 1995: 11). Even today some people immediately conceptualize documentaries as objective, rational, and educational. But can documentaries actually ‘document’ reality or are they just an artistic creation?
Leni Riefenstahl’s, Triumph of the Will (1935) could be an example of both. A controversial yet inspiring film for many fiction and non-fiction films alike, Riefenstahl creates a powerful representation of the rebirth of Germany in a 1934 party rally, along with its main ‘superstar’ Adolf Hitler. Riefenstahl’s main aim was to create emotional stories without any intention of propaganda (See Nichols, 2001: 61). As Eric Barnouw states: “She did not invent the actions captured by her cameras. She saw it as her task to bring them to the screen with maximum impact” (Barnouw, 1974: 103) However, after the end of World War 2 the film was regarded by many, to be pure propaganda film. Examples of this can be seen in the opening of the film where a plane is seen flying over Germany. Its shadow can be seen overlooking and covering the streets that it passes – A depiction of Hitler himself, as he overshadows Germany. The plane which is high above the city of Nuremburg suggests that it has dominance over the nation, watching over everything, like a ‘Big Brother’ of Germany.
Its uplifting non-diagetic orchestra in the opening sequence, make Hitler seem like some kind of ‘divine’ authority as he descends down to meet his followers. One scene sees the camera tracking backwards as it unveils a huge crowd making the Nazi salute in Mexican wave fashion; all of them, young, old, like robotic soldiers. It looks like these people were directed and as Susan Sontag points out: “The rally was planned not only as a spectacular mass meeting, but as a spectacular propaganda film.”[2]
Riefenstahl still argues her film was not a constructed and did document reality: “Everything in it is true. And it contains no tendentious commentary at all. It is history. A pure historical film... it is film-vérité. It reflects the truth that was then in 1934, history.”[3]
While it is true that the film reflects the culture and history that was back then, it made Hitler too much of a ‘godly’ figure and the films obvious propaganda connotations obscure the true reality of the Nazi fascist and racist regime, thus taking away its ‘claim on the real’. And as Sontag tells us: “In Triumph of the Will, the document (the image) is no longer simply the record of reality; "reality" has been constructed to serve the image.”[4] As an artistic creation Triumph of the Will is considered to be one of the best. Its establishing shots are always epic, with the vast crowd of soldiers and citizens in view. The cameras were clearly positioned in certain places and shots were edited along with the music. The opening again is another example of this. As Hitler comes out of the plane, the uplifting transient music climaxes into a louder, elevated rhythm going in tune with the chants of the crowd.
It seems that documentaries can never really document reality and hence can never be ‘truth’. The creative treatment process whereby the raw footage goes through is vulnerable to many subjective and opinionated transformations. In the case of the Triumph of the Will, it is no doubt that the film documents a true historical event but it borderlines more towards art because of its timely edits of the camera shots and music. So the ‘documentary film’ is something which can never be objective. But why are documentaries still seen as something ‘authentic’, when clearly everything during the production process is constructed? You might think then, what difference is there from documentary film and fiction film? – They’re both constructed. The big difference is that fiction explores another world for the audience to contemplate whereas documentary represents the world we already inhabit and share. (See Nichols, 2001: 1).
Bill Nichols explains that documentary is a difficult term to explain but says that: “...documentary is not a reproduction of reality, it is a representation of the world we already occupy. It stands for a particular view of the world, one we may never have encountered before even if the aspects of the world represented are familiar to us.” (Nichols, 2001: 20).
Errol Morris’s The Thin Blue Line (1988) is regarded as a definite example of investigative documentary.[5] In the film Morris blurs both fiction and non-fiction elements as he questions the interviewees about the death of a police officer. He uses highly cinematic reconstructed scenes to describe each interview’s own version of events. All the reconstructions are of the same event, which describes how the police officer was shot, but all of them contradict each other, because of the varied descriptions each interviewee had of the event. Even the reconstructions take place in a different place from where the actual crime took place. According to Nichols all of these choices were tactics made by Morris, to make the audience think and question “What really happened” and as he states: “They amount to bad science but they are part and parcel of documentary representation.” (Nichols, 2001: 85). Each person’s representation of the ‘truth’ is different and Morris believes that documentaries should be creative in their form to be able to search for ‘truth’: “There’s no reason why documentaries can’t be as personal as fiction filmmaking and bear the imprint of those who made them. Truth isn’t guaranteed by style or expression. It isn’t guaranteed by anything.” (Arthur: cited: Bruzzi, 2000: 5-6).
The Thin Blue Line clearly shows Morris’s imprint with its highly stylized reconstructions which make the film look much more like a non-fiction film noir[6], and the film noir element at the same gives you the feeling of a highly atmospheric fiction film. This can be seen in the opening, where the credits start rolling when the film starts; typical of fiction films. Lighting and shadows are used effectively in the film, especially in the reconstructions. For example when Randall Adams, the person accused of the murder, talks about how he was interrogated by the police officer and how he was threatened with a gun to confess the crime, the reconstruction shows a shadowy and almost dominant figure, with his face covered by the darkness. Everything in this scene is ‘dramatised’ including the sound, like the footsteps, the pen thrown onto the table and the reloading of the pistol. They are done slowly to make the audience hear every intricate detail which adds to the overall suspense. Morris’s subjectivity could be seen here as he wants to make the audience see the police officer in a bad light. The film then cuts to the police officers who seem friendly and somewhat non-threatening[7]. This juxtaposition of cuts obviously confuses things but Morris wants the audience to decide who and what to believe.
According to Stephen Rowley: “Attempts to force confessions are something we see in Hollywood films, and which we associate with villainous cops played by scary-looking actors.” Morris intentionally added a ‘fiction film’ element to reinvent the case while at the same time revisiting it[8]. By doing this Morris gives us new light to the American justice system as he portrays these goofy[9] police officers responsible for putting an innocent man into jail. So in essence he gets to the truth using what Grierson would say a “creative treatment” process and as Morris tells us: “I wanted to make a movie that had this real-world story that was very, very important to me. A terrible miscarriage of justice. But I wanted to make it in a certain way...”[10]. Note how Morris says he wanted to make it in a ‘certain way’. He didn’t just want interviews and cutaways, but wanted drama and suspense.
According to Nichols: “We judge a representation more by the nature of the pleasure it offers, the value of the insight or knowledge it provides, and the quality of the orientation or disposition, tone or perspective it instils.” (Nichols, 2001:20-21). Objective truth in any film is impossible to find and Morris shows this in The Thin Blue Line as he interviews people with different version of ‘truths’. Everyone have their own way of thinking and thus people make out ‘truths’ or representations of reality in different ways because this is at the end of the day, is affected by our own prejudices, beliefs and values.[11] In the end though Morris manages to show the ‘truth’ through a simple tape recorder – the culmination of all the tension and suspense throughout the film is brought to an end through the most simplest form of evidence.[12]
It’s now clear that documentaries all have a voice of their own, a specific perspective held by the filmmaker. They use both sound an imagery to portray their argument to the audience. They do this in a form of a narrative and as Nichols explains: “Documentaries are fictions with plots, characters, situations and events like any other.” (Nichols, 1991: 107). Robert Flaherty’s Nanook of the North (1922) is a story made to represent how an Inuit family battles against nature and tries to survive in the arctic. Since there is no dialogue or voices heard in Nanook of the North, Flaherty mainly uses music along with inter-titles to depict his point of view and the nature of each scene.
For example in the scene where Nanook is depicted trying to figure out what the gramophone is, we see him biting into the record as if to tell us that he is primitive and has never seen technology like this in his life. This scene is supposed to portray the simple side of Nanook but it seems more like a patronising scene with the inter-title beforehand telling us: “In deference to Nanook, the great hunter, the trader entertains and attempts to explain the principle of the gramophone – how the white man ‘cans’ his voice”.[13] It’s attempts to ‘respect’ “the great hunter”, suggests a much more patronising tone which ends with a somewhat stereotypical Inuit ‘slang’ with the use of “White man”. It also seems as if Flaherty who is acting as the ‘trader’ is mocking Nanook by just watching him bite into the record without showing him how to actually use it. The light hearted music adds to the overall ‘mockery’ which seems as if it were from a Warner Brother’s cartoon.
Flaherty knowingly done this since everything was staged[14]. According to Barnouw: “Characters occasionally glanced at the camera as though at a film maker. Nanook, grinning over the gramophone, testing a gramophone disc with his teeth, looks at the camera as though for agreement and approval...” (Barnouw, 1974: 39). So it seems that Flaherty’s attempts to portray a simple minded Inuit backfired, and because his representation of the ‘Inuit’ did not engage with the historical world, Nichols tells us: “The voice of the film betrays its makers form of engagement with the world in a way that even he might not have recognized.” (Nichols, 2001: 44). Flaherty’s obsession with the remote and primitive (See Barnouw, 1974: 85) meant that his own views and ideals got in the way of representing the ‘historical world’ and hence he failed to ‘add light’ or historical understanding upon the Inuit world.
Documentaries essence lies in the dramatisation of actual material and this is done in the editing process using sound and music. In Nanook of the North, music is chiefly used to set the mood of a scene and to also to dramatise certain situations. For example, in the scene where Nanook is trying to hunt a seal out of the ice, the sounds of violins, trumpets and flutes are heard playing in a repetitive and frantic manner. It shows to the audience the intensity of the hunt, as Nanook repeatedly hauls the line in only to be jerked down and dragged over the ice again[15]. The music adds to the drama and exaggerates the scene. The audience finally know in the end that Nanook has won, as they are signposted in with a different rhythm, more tranquil, with the violins slowing down, signifying somewhat, the ‘end of a battle’.
Another type of sound seen in documentaries is the voice over. Nichols terms it as “The expository mode” and he says, it: “ ...addresses the viewer directly, with titles or voices that propose a perspective, advance an argument, or recount history.” (Nichols, 2001: 105).
In Michael Moore’s Roger & Me, commentary is used in a sarcastic but humorous way which entices the audience’s attention. For example, seven minutes into the film you’ll hear Moore commenting on Roger Smith for the first time and then talking about GM’s plans and how they plan to sack many people. He uses a montage of still shots – cleverly used in juxtaposition[16] with the commentary. Moore ends this scene by saying in a sarcastic manner that: “...Roger Smith was a true genius”[17]. Moore has already set his subjective and ideological position to the audience, by cleverly placing this montage near the beginning[18], and as Nichols tells us: “We take our cue from the commentary and understand the images as evidence or demonstration for what is being said.” (Nichols, 2001: 107). As the commentary in documentaries explain the images, they are thus seen by the audience, higher than images in terms of ‘evidence’. (See Nichols, 2001: 107).
But how can a ‘voice’ which proposes a subjective outlook be seen as evidence? Stella Bruzzi points out that because voice over’s connote “individualism and instruction”, they tend to signify a distorted and fictionalised documentary. (See Bruzzi, 2000: 64). Moore did make Smith seem much more like a buffoon than even his own bumbling character, with the clever juxtaposition of image and audio, so this could be seen as the ‘creative treatment’ which takes away the ‘actuality’.
Overall, it can be seen that a documentary goes through a ‘creative treatment’ process where a filmmaker gets ‘actuality’ and constructs it to form a manufactured object (See Izod, Kilborn, 1997: 116) which only creates an imitation, not the real thing(See Niney, 1994:21). Grierson knew film interpreted reality, but believed that the average spectator should not share that recognition, and that a illusion of reality was essential in order to make the narrative as powerful (See Aitken, 1990: 70). This tells us that a documentary, by its nature, lies to the audience since it makes a truth claim right from the outset which leaves the ‘documentary’ in a particularly vulnerable position as it can be used a dangerous means of communication if the audience take the documentary as reality.
Bibliography:
Aitken, Ian (1990) Film and Reform: Routledge
Bruzzi, Stella (2000) New Documentary: A Critical Introduction, London: Routledge
Izod, J. and Kilborn, R. (1997) An Introduction to TV Documentary, Manchester: Manchester
University Press
Nichols, Bill (1991) Representing Reality, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press
Nichols, Bill (2001) Introduction to Documentary, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press
Niney, Francois (1994) The Fiction of Reality in Documentary Film Quarterly
Winston, Brian (1995) Claiming The Real: the documentary film revisited, London: British Film Insitute
Barnouw, Eric (1993) Documentary – a history of the non-fiction film, New York: Oxford University Press
Films referred to:
Triump of the Will – Leni Riefenstahl’s (1935)
The Thin Blue Line – Errol Morris (1988)
Nanook of the North – Robert Flaherty (1922)
Roger & Me – Michael Moore (1989)
Endnotes/website:
[1] http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/26853.Bertolt_Brecht
[2] http://www.nybooks.com/articles/9280
[3] http://www.kamera.co.uk/features/leniriefenstahl.html
[4] http://www.nybooks.com/articles/9280
[5] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[6] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[7] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[8] http://www.documentary.org/content/errol-morris-thin-blue-line-1988
[9] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[10] http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/16/morris.html
[11] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[12] http://www.cinephobia.com/thinblue.htm
[13] http://www.hatii.arts.gla.ac.uk/MultimediaStudentProjects/98-99/9500048s/project/html/fakena.htm
[14] http://www.hatii.arts.gla.ac.uk/MultimediaStudentProjects/98-99/9500048s/project/html/fakena.htm
[15] http://www.oneworldmagazine.org/seek/nanook/nanotext.htm
[16] http://www.angelfire.com/film/articles/moore.htm
[17] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30p71PNXEx8&feature=related
[18] http://www.angelfire.com/film/articles/moore.htm
Sunday, 13 September 2009
Ramadan - Month of Reflection
NO food and no drink from sunset until sunrise for a whole month. Can you do this? May seem crazy to some people but for Muslims this is routine. Every year millions of Muslims across the world are fasting in a special month known in the Islamic calendar as the month of Ramadan. For Muslims this month rivals every other month purely because of its psychological and mental benefits as well as the patience one attains when fasting.
Fasting isn’t just about letting your stomach groan at you by remaining hungry. It’s about fighting ones inner desires, lusts and passions and keeping them at bay, whether they be eating chocolate (or any food for that matter), watching movies, fulfilling your sexual desires or even playing too much on your Nintendo Wii. The main purpose of fasting is to direct the heart away from all the unnecessary attachments of this world and to more of a closer attachment of God. Through our thoughts and actions a person has to try attain purity and hopefully your development of character and personality in this month will show through out the rest of the year.
And fasting for a whole day isn’t necessarily easy when you think about it, especially as the days are becoming longer each year. Being a student doesn’t help either as I will always see people eating in front of me, whether it is in the cafeteria where I usually grab my lunch or just outside near the town centre. I see the food, I want to eat the food, but I won’t eat the food, solely because God commanded me not to eat the food. This also goes for the bad habits one may have such as slandering, backbiting and lying.
But why is this month so important to Muslims? Well one of the main reasons is that its believed the Holy Quran was sent down in this particular month and so muslims are obliged to spend it in worship throughout the day, maximising in every supplication and worship towards God. Ramadan for Muslims is an exciting month in which everyone is in anticipation for since the rewards are great, both spiritually and physically. Its just like the feeling you get when waiting for a new film to come out or a computer game. No words can describe how good it feels to complete a day's fast or the joy and the feeling of festivity when the day's fasting is over.
For me this holy month is the only month whereby I can really have an x-ray of myself. Its like a month of training for me. Not really the, 'going into the gym and lifting 100kg' training, but more of the body and soul. I look and reflect on all the things I take for granted, such as my food, money,education, nice warm house, nice cup of tea, nice toast, nice this and nice that - the list is endless. When everyone's around the table just about to break the fast, the fragrance of the food hits yours mouth like strawberry and chocolate swirling in your mouth. Its that good. Since you remain hungry throughout the day, just about anything you eat will make you feel good. This is when your hunger is at its peak and that’s when you know what people in the third world countries are feeling like who are literally living in starvation because they are so poor.
Aside from the religious reasons and making you feel pity for the poor the health benefits of fasting are immense. If done properly, which means without overindulgence at the time of breaking fast, meaning saying a no no to those oily samosas, kebabs, burgers, parkoras (and again the list is endless), fasting can make you lose weight, control addictions and help your natural defence system making you heal much faster.
With all these benefits of fasting I find it weird to see many people don't fast. Believe it not though everyone fasts during the night anyway since the term 'breakfast' literally means 'breaking your fast' becasue you don't eat anything for night.
I have to admit though as the fasting hours get longer every year and the surprising remarks you get from people who are not fasting get funnier every year, the month seems to pass by so quickly. It just shows that rather than counting down each day in anticipation for Eid, we should really make each day count. That's when we'll really benefit from this 'month of training'.
Fasting isn’t just about letting your stomach groan at you by remaining hungry. It’s about fighting ones inner desires, lusts and passions and keeping them at bay, whether they be eating chocolate (or any food for that matter), watching movies, fulfilling your sexual desires or even playing too much on your Nintendo Wii. The main purpose of fasting is to direct the heart away from all the unnecessary attachments of this world and to more of a closer attachment of God. Through our thoughts and actions a person has to try attain purity and hopefully your development of character and personality in this month will show through out the rest of the year.
And fasting for a whole day isn’t necessarily easy when you think about it, especially as the days are becoming longer each year. Being a student doesn’t help either as I will always see people eating in front of me, whether it is in the cafeteria where I usually grab my lunch or just outside near the town centre. I see the food, I want to eat the food, but I won’t eat the food, solely because God commanded me not to eat the food. This also goes for the bad habits one may have such as slandering, backbiting and lying.
But why is this month so important to Muslims? Well one of the main reasons is that its believed the Holy Quran was sent down in this particular month and so muslims are obliged to spend it in worship throughout the day, maximising in every supplication and worship towards God. Ramadan for Muslims is an exciting month in which everyone is in anticipation for since the rewards are great, both spiritually and physically. Its just like the feeling you get when waiting for a new film to come out or a computer game. No words can describe how good it feels to complete a day's fast or the joy and the feeling of festivity when the day's fasting is over.
For me this holy month is the only month whereby I can really have an x-ray of myself. Its like a month of training for me. Not really the, 'going into the gym and lifting 100kg' training, but more of the body and soul. I look and reflect on all the things I take for granted, such as my food, money,education, nice warm house, nice cup of tea, nice toast, nice this and nice that - the list is endless. When everyone's around the table just about to break the fast, the fragrance of the food hits yours mouth like strawberry and chocolate swirling in your mouth. Its that good. Since you remain hungry throughout the day, just about anything you eat will make you feel good. This is when your hunger is at its peak and that’s when you know what people in the third world countries are feeling like who are literally living in starvation because they are so poor.
Aside from the religious reasons and making you feel pity for the poor the health benefits of fasting are immense. If done properly, which means without overindulgence at the time of breaking fast, meaning saying a no no to those oily samosas, kebabs, burgers, parkoras (and again the list is endless), fasting can make you lose weight, control addictions and help your natural defence system making you heal much faster.
With all these benefits of fasting I find it weird to see many people don't fast. Believe it not though everyone fasts during the night anyway since the term 'breakfast' literally means 'breaking your fast' becasue you don't eat anything for night.
I have to admit though as the fasting hours get longer every year and the surprising remarks you get from people who are not fasting get funnier every year, the month seems to pass by so quickly. It just shows that rather than counting down each day in anticipation for Eid, we should really make each day count. That's when we'll really benefit from this 'month of training'.
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
40 days in the Path of Allah....in Wales!
I've been slacking off in my blog posts i know, but I was away for 40 days in the path of Allah and just came back on Monday. I have to say...it was an experience and a half. If anyone doesn't know what i mean by going out in the 'path of Allah'...don't worry it's not some kind of extremist terrorist training scheme! Far from it. Its called 'Tabligue jamaat' the group which 'conveys' and calls towards Allah.
Tabligue literally means 'to convey' and this collective effort is something like missionary work where you are out giving your time for any number of days you can do. Usually it's recommended to do 3 days a month, 40 days a year and 4 months once in a lifetime. You are in a jamaat (group) and go from mosque to mosque in the country you are sent to, or in my case England. You work and make effort in each local area with the concern as to how Islam can come into our own life, the locality and the how the whole of mankind be saved from the fire of hell.
This effort mainly works on the people who are already Muslims to make them steadfast in the Islam, before going onto non-Muslims. This is because unfortunately most Muslims these days (even myself) are Muslims by name or by our tongue, but inwardly our faith in Allah is very low. We believe things like food and money are sustaining us when in fact Allah is sustaining us. These things are just a 'means' of sustaining us. We have to have such belief that even if we were to drink sand, through the will of Allah, this can even quench our thirst. The impossible does not exist for Allah because this is no difficult task for the creator of the whole universe.
We also strive so very hard in this world to try and attain success and status, forgetting about the hereafter and forgetting that one day we will die and be judged for every single action we did in this world. The nature of human beings is such that whatever status or position we get to, we will always want more. Nothing will ever satisfy us, until one day death comes knocking on the door, and we find that the value of this temporary life is over. The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) once said, this world is like a paradise for the non-believer and a prison for the believer. He also said we must be like a traveller in this world, just stopping for a short while and getting ready to go onto our next destination, which is the real and never ending life.
So the main purpose for this effort is to mainly rectify yourself, and to build your faith in Allah. Since your in the mosque 24/7 for basically 40 days , your faith boost up like a recharged battery. You are away from all the desires and bad temptations of the world and in the environment where angels are residing and in a place where constant worship is going on. Everyday there are certain programmes which take place and certain people in the group are given certain roles to fulfill. For example, after the early morning prayers we get together in a circle and make shura (consultation/meeting). During this period we make concern for the local community, as to how everyone can be regular in the mosque for prayers and just generally bringing people closer to their faith. But we always bear in mind that we are in fact in need of guidence more than anyone else and we should never think we are better than someone in terms of faith. The more we invite people towards Allah the more my faith in Allah will grow - and this is the desired result.
During the consultation, everyone gives their opinion as to how the effort should be done in the area and who should be given which responsibilities. I was sometimes given the role of doing a short speech or lecture on the greatness of Allah. Other roles include taking care of each others well being which is called 'Khidmat' in arabic. This involves preparing breakfast, lunch, dinner for everyone, keeping the mosque clean and tidy, ironing and washing clothes, etc. This role is a very important part of Tablighi Jamaat since it is supposed to kill off the base desires of human beings and especially the pride which one has, since pride is a quality which only Allah, the creator and sustaniner of the whole universe deserves to have.
Other activities include reading from 'Hadith' books, which contain the sayings and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and just general individual worship e.g reading the Quran, rembering Allah through prayer beads, making supplications, etc. We learn though that even in our general lifestyle we can make anything worship but only if we do this act for the sake of pleasing Allah and follow the way in which prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would have done it. Everyone gets a turn in doing different activites so everyone is constantly learning.
Apart from staying in the mosque we go out and visit brothers door to door, and just generally on the streets, parks or wherever and give them dawah (invitation) towards the greatness of Allah. The greatness of Allah is really emphasised while we are out in jamaat because unless this conviction is not in the heart, all other Islamic practises will seem meaningless and 'empty'.
We first went to Dewsbury (the main headquarters of this effort in the UK) and we were sent to make effort in Wales. Wales is a wonderful place with nice scenery. The people there were generally quite friendly. We went and stayed in Bristol, Bath, Barry, Swansea, Neath, Port Talbot, Bridgend, Cardiff (which we stayed the longest), Gloucester and Cheltenham. I was surprised how very few people could actually speak Welsh, and how very similiar the neighborhoods were to that of places like Luton and London. We did face some antagonism but this was little enough to be shrugged off. There was the occasional beeps from the cars while we walked past, along with people screaming out of the cars saying God knows what but other than that it was pretty quiet.
There is a beauty in this effort where i haven't seen in anywhere else in the world. You're with brothers you don't even know, where you eat together, sleep together, worship together and give dawah together, all united with one concern, the same concern that our beloved Prophet had (pbuh) ....and this is how the whole of mankind can be saved from the fire of hell and enter into paradise.
It's pretty sad that it's ended since i wanted to do so much, and you'd be surprised at how quick the time went by. But at least i came back to the month of Ramadan where a whole new spiritual level is now being opened up.
Tabligue literally means 'to convey' and this collective effort is something like missionary work where you are out giving your time for any number of days you can do. Usually it's recommended to do 3 days a month, 40 days a year and 4 months once in a lifetime. You are in a jamaat (group) and go from mosque to mosque in the country you are sent to, or in my case England. You work and make effort in each local area with the concern as to how Islam can come into our own life, the locality and the how the whole of mankind be saved from the fire of hell.
This effort mainly works on the people who are already Muslims to make them steadfast in the Islam, before going onto non-Muslims. This is because unfortunately most Muslims these days (even myself) are Muslims by name or by our tongue, but inwardly our faith in Allah is very low. We believe things like food and money are sustaining us when in fact Allah is sustaining us. These things are just a 'means' of sustaining us. We have to have such belief that even if we were to drink sand, through the will of Allah, this can even quench our thirst. The impossible does not exist for Allah because this is no difficult task for the creator of the whole universe.
We also strive so very hard in this world to try and attain success and status, forgetting about the hereafter and forgetting that one day we will die and be judged for every single action we did in this world. The nature of human beings is such that whatever status or position we get to, we will always want more. Nothing will ever satisfy us, until one day death comes knocking on the door, and we find that the value of this temporary life is over. The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) once said, this world is like a paradise for the non-believer and a prison for the believer. He also said we must be like a traveller in this world, just stopping for a short while and getting ready to go onto our next destination, which is the real and never ending life.
So the main purpose for this effort is to mainly rectify yourself, and to build your faith in Allah. Since your in the mosque 24/7 for basically 40 days , your faith boost up like a recharged battery. You are away from all the desires and bad temptations of the world and in the environment where angels are residing and in a place where constant worship is going on. Everyday there are certain programmes which take place and certain people in the group are given certain roles to fulfill. For example, after the early morning prayers we get together in a circle and make shura (consultation/meeting). During this period we make concern for the local community, as to how everyone can be regular in the mosque for prayers and just generally bringing people closer to their faith. But we always bear in mind that we are in fact in need of guidence more than anyone else and we should never think we are better than someone in terms of faith. The more we invite people towards Allah the more my faith in Allah will grow - and this is the desired result.
During the consultation, everyone gives their opinion as to how the effort should be done in the area and who should be given which responsibilities. I was sometimes given the role of doing a short speech or lecture on the greatness of Allah. Other roles include taking care of each others well being which is called 'Khidmat' in arabic. This involves preparing breakfast, lunch, dinner for everyone, keeping the mosque clean and tidy, ironing and washing clothes, etc. This role is a very important part of Tablighi Jamaat since it is supposed to kill off the base desires of human beings and especially the pride which one has, since pride is a quality which only Allah, the creator and sustaniner of the whole universe deserves to have.
Other activities include reading from 'Hadith' books, which contain the sayings and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and just general individual worship e.g reading the Quran, rembering Allah through prayer beads, making supplications, etc. We learn though that even in our general lifestyle we can make anything worship but only if we do this act for the sake of pleasing Allah and follow the way in which prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would have done it. Everyone gets a turn in doing different activites so everyone is constantly learning.
Apart from staying in the mosque we go out and visit brothers door to door, and just generally on the streets, parks or wherever and give them dawah (invitation) towards the greatness of Allah. The greatness of Allah is really emphasised while we are out in jamaat because unless this conviction is not in the heart, all other Islamic practises will seem meaningless and 'empty'.
We first went to Dewsbury (the main headquarters of this effort in the UK) and we were sent to make effort in Wales. Wales is a wonderful place with nice scenery. The people there were generally quite friendly. We went and stayed in Bristol, Bath, Barry, Swansea, Neath, Port Talbot, Bridgend, Cardiff (which we stayed the longest), Gloucester and Cheltenham. I was surprised how very few people could actually speak Welsh, and how very similiar the neighborhoods were to that of places like Luton and London. We did face some antagonism but this was little enough to be shrugged off. There was the occasional beeps from the cars while we walked past, along with people screaming out of the cars saying God knows what but other than that it was pretty quiet.
There is a beauty in this effort where i haven't seen in anywhere else in the world. You're with brothers you don't even know, where you eat together, sleep together, worship together and give dawah together, all united with one concern, the same concern that our beloved Prophet had (pbuh) ....and this is how the whole of mankind can be saved from the fire of hell and enter into paradise.
It's pretty sad that it's ended since i wanted to do so much, and you'd be surprised at how quick the time went by. But at least i came back to the month of Ramadan where a whole new spiritual level is now being opened up.
Monday, 29 June 2009
My bike got stolen...too bad...
I feel angry ...yet contended at the same time. I'm angry because someone actually got away with taking my bike but happy at the same time thinking that it probably happened for the best.
I was in a meeting for One Nation in their offices in Curzon Road Luton, when i decided to go out and read the magrib prayers, (prayers after sunset). When i finished i decided i wanted to come back to the office since we left some boys in there to paint a One Nation emblem on the walls. Instead i joined the Mushwara in the mosque (which is basically a meeting discussing what problems that need solving for the mosque and also how Islam can come into the local peoples lives). Anyway after this finished (after about hour) i came back to Curzon road with another brother to find out my bike was missing. I had locked it up beside a large pole.
I then looked hurriedly inside my pockets to see if i still had the keys since i thought i might have left them in the lock and thus someone easily could have just taken it away. Then i find my keys and look even more puzzled. I go into the office, suspecting the boys in there had something to do with this. They immediately tell me someone apparently snapped the lock and rode away with my bike. One of the boys says he must have used some pliers to break the lock and ride away. He said to me he did try and chase him but it was useless, since the thief went really fast into the roads nearly crashing into the cars.
I looked at him in dismay, since i had a bit of a doubt in what he was saying. but then he explained to me more that another person seen the incident which made me know that he was telling the truth. What i was angry about if the fact that i couldn't do anything about it. If i see someone riding the bike i will obviously try my best to get it back. BUT as a Muslim i cannot feel remorseful over this. Everything happens by the will of Allah and so this incident probably happened for the best. I've never actually had anything stolen from me before so this is a first.I guess its experience...in the future i will take care of my things more properly.
The funny thing is i only recently started to ride the bike again. It was in my shed for about two years, then my mum started to complain saying if you you dont ride the bike i'm gona get your dad to sell it, and thats when i started to ride it again - well just to the mosque and back.
I reflect back in this incident and think of the things i could have done to avoid it. Like the lock for example. I actually got this bike lock for free, so its cheap bike lock which probably in hindsight should not have been used. But also the area i left it in was pretty quiet and open. Which is quite bad actually...but since i was coming back there i thought, "why not just leave it there...it's locked?". BUT even if all these precautions were taken the will of Allah cannot be avoided. It will always prevail. So I've decided to forget about my bike, it's gone!
...although IF i did see it on the streets with someone....lets just say....MORTAL KOMBAT!!!!!!!!
I was in a meeting for One Nation in their offices in Curzon Road Luton, when i decided to go out and read the magrib prayers, (prayers after sunset). When i finished i decided i wanted to come back to the office since we left some boys in there to paint a One Nation emblem on the walls. Instead i joined the Mushwara in the mosque (which is basically a meeting discussing what problems that need solving for the mosque and also how Islam can come into the local peoples lives). Anyway after this finished (after about hour) i came back to Curzon road with another brother to find out my bike was missing. I had locked it up beside a large pole.
I then looked hurriedly inside my pockets to see if i still had the keys since i thought i might have left them in the lock and thus someone easily could have just taken it away. Then i find my keys and look even more puzzled. I go into the office, suspecting the boys in there had something to do with this. They immediately tell me someone apparently snapped the lock and rode away with my bike. One of the boys says he must have used some pliers to break the lock and ride away. He said to me he did try and chase him but it was useless, since the thief went really fast into the roads nearly crashing into the cars.
I looked at him in dismay, since i had a bit of a doubt in what he was saying. but then he explained to me more that another person seen the incident which made me know that he was telling the truth. What i was angry about if the fact that i couldn't do anything about it. If i see someone riding the bike i will obviously try my best to get it back. BUT as a Muslim i cannot feel remorseful over this. Everything happens by the will of Allah and so this incident probably happened for the best. I've never actually had anything stolen from me before so this is a first.I guess its experience...in the future i will take care of my things more properly.
The funny thing is i only recently started to ride the bike again. It was in my shed for about two years, then my mum started to complain saying if you you dont ride the bike i'm gona get your dad to sell it, and thats when i started to ride it again - well just to the mosque and back.
I reflect back in this incident and think of the things i could have done to avoid it. Like the lock for example. I actually got this bike lock for free, so its cheap bike lock which probably in hindsight should not have been used. But also the area i left it in was pretty quiet and open. Which is quite bad actually...but since i was coming back there i thought, "why not just leave it there...it's locked?". BUT even if all these precautions were taken the will of Allah cannot be avoided. It will always prevail. So I've decided to forget about my bike, it's gone!
...although IF i did see it on the streets with someone....lets just say....MORTAL KOMBAT!!!!!!!!
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
BBC Work - Flog It!
Today was quite an experience. I done a days work as a steward for the daytime BBC programme Flog it! And yes i got paid for it which is quite nice. Normally these kind of things don't happen. I got the chance to help the production team which broaden my experience in TV production, as well as doings lots of Steward jobs, such as being all nice and smiley, greeting people, ushering people to the right places etc.etc.
The shooting was to take place in Whipsnade Zoo near Dunstable, not far from where i live so it was ok. The day was quite sunny and warm - a perfect day to go the zoo, so i was expecting many people to come and get their antiques shown and evaluated. I arrived there early in the morning by taxi (since i don't have a car yet...) and was anxiously looking for the place to meet up with the film crew. My contact was Hannah Ford, who was a runner for the program. She was the person responsible for taking care of the stewards. Surprisingly most of the students who applied for this steward placement were from the University of Bedfordshire, which was quite surprising. I would have thought every media student's eye would have lit up when seeing something like this, or was it just our University of Bedfordshire students that knew about it? Well what ever it was, it was good for me!
Hannah gathered all the students around as the film crew were setting up their their equipment and gave us a briefing. We had to were the Flog it! t-shirts to let people recognise us as 'part of the team' as well advertising for the programme. We were told if we appeared in front of the camera, it wouldn't matter since we have the Flog-it! t-shirts on. Either way, I didn't mind, since my Celebrity Cash in the Attic Experience only had me in view from a mirrors refection! so being in front of the camera this time would be nice!
But who am i kidding, i never came here to be in front of the camera, i came here for experience! Afterwards we were all assignmed different task to do, some were to greet people outside and give them directions for the valuation place( where the antiques get an estimated price), and others had to usher people to their seats, take surveys from people, make tea and coffee for the film crew and presenters as well as help lift items to the main building.
The roles were always rotated after an hour or so by Hannah, who seemed alittle under pressure as the day went by. I guess this is wht the pressure of TV production can, since one small mistake can ruin everything, so as the runner (as the name suggest) she had to make sure we (the stewards) are all ok as well as make sure everything is running smoothly.
Some famous faces we met were Paul Martin, who wa sthe main presenter of the show. Evryone of his scenes were rehearsed and constructed, which wasnt no suprise to me since i had seen this before in my experience in Celebrity Cash in the Attic. He seemed like a cheerful guy, but also seemed nakered, mabe becasue it was a very hot and sunny day. At on point i thought i was going to get sun burn since i was positioned at one spot just outside the entrance ushering people to the building and just being smiley. The sun rays were like laser beams hitting by body making my sweat come down like rain. Maybe thats a bit too detailed but thats how hot it was.
When it was my turn making the tea for the film crew, i spoke to some of them and nearly all of them said they were freelancers, just working on contracts. So nothing seemed like it was permemant and they just got by when wrok was available. This made me abit worried. How will i fare out if theses guys are just about making there money here there thorugh contracts.
Hopefully though i will build my portfolio and skills to the highest possible leel i can take it, during my stay in University and then going for job interview shouldnt be that hard...should it?
All in all this experience did show me the tough side of working in TV. But hey, atleast i can say i've worked for the BBC and got payed for it!
The shooting was to take place in Whipsnade Zoo near Dunstable, not far from where i live so it was ok. The day was quite sunny and warm - a perfect day to go the zoo, so i was expecting many people to come and get their antiques shown and evaluated. I arrived there early in the morning by taxi (since i don't have a car yet...) and was anxiously looking for the place to meet up with the film crew. My contact was Hannah Ford, who was a runner for the program. She was the person responsible for taking care of the stewards. Surprisingly most of the students who applied for this steward placement were from the University of Bedfordshire, which was quite surprising. I would have thought every media student's eye would have lit up when seeing something like this, or was it just our University of Bedfordshire students that knew about it? Well what ever it was, it was good for me!
Hannah gathered all the students around as the film crew were setting up their their equipment and gave us a briefing. We had to were the Flog it! t-shirts to let people recognise us as 'part of the team' as well advertising for the programme. We were told if we appeared in front of the camera, it wouldn't matter since we have the Flog-it! t-shirts on. Either way, I didn't mind, since my Celebrity Cash in the Attic Experience only had me in view from a mirrors refection! so being in front of the camera this time would be nice!
But who am i kidding, i never came here to be in front of the camera, i came here for experience! Afterwards we were all assignmed different task to do, some were to greet people outside and give them directions for the valuation place( where the antiques get an estimated price), and others had to usher people to their seats, take surveys from people, make tea and coffee for the film crew and presenters as well as help lift items to the main building.
The roles were always rotated after an hour or so by Hannah, who seemed alittle under pressure as the day went by. I guess this is wht the pressure of TV production can, since one small mistake can ruin everything, so as the runner (as the name suggest) she had to make sure we (the stewards) are all ok as well as make sure everything is running smoothly.
Some famous faces we met were Paul Martin, who wa sthe main presenter of the show. Evryone of his scenes were rehearsed and constructed, which wasnt no suprise to me since i had seen this before in my experience in Celebrity Cash in the Attic. He seemed like a cheerful guy, but also seemed nakered, mabe becasue it was a very hot and sunny day. At on point i thought i was going to get sun burn since i was positioned at one spot just outside the entrance ushering people to the building and just being smiley. The sun rays were like laser beams hitting by body making my sweat come down like rain. Maybe thats a bit too detailed but thats how hot it was.
When it was my turn making the tea for the film crew, i spoke to some of them and nearly all of them said they were freelancers, just working on contracts. So nothing seemed like it was permemant and they just got by when wrok was available. This made me abit worried. How will i fare out if theses guys are just about making there money here there thorugh contracts.
Hopefully though i will build my portfolio and skills to the highest possible leel i can take it, during my stay in University and then going for job interview shouldnt be that hard...should it?
All in all this experience did show me the tough side of working in TV. But hey, atleast i can say i've worked for the BBC and got payed for it!
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
The dust settles...assignments are OVER!
Thank the lord, I'm finally free...free from the burden of assignments deadlines. Well i actually i was free about a week ago but today was my last exam . It was a multiple choice based exam so it wasn't that bad - about media law and politics. Quite a combination eh? Well as a journalist I'm supposed to know my boundaries, as in what i can and cannot report. So it this whole media law module was very insightful.
As for my other assignments, well lets have the grades do the talking shall we? The magazine assignment and the documentary assignment were both group work and i think we managed to pull it off quite well, with MY persistence of course. I don't want to blabber on to much about this though just in case i jinx myself and my grades end up worse. I don't really believe in the jinx stuff of course but just in case...
Last week, the University of Bedfordshire had its student union media awards. And guess what? yup you've guessed it, i won an award! YAAAAAAY! I know you may be thinking: "What a...weirdo", but this actually meant quite a bit to me. It was held in the student union bar, so at first i was a bit reluctant to go but i knew i may have been up for an award so i went anyway. Obviously for me it was weird since, i've never really been in a 'bar', especially where people are gulping down alcohol. Luckily my journalism lecturer was there and she kept me company for most of the part. While i drank my J20 orange drink, (which i was cautious of for any spiking) and my lecturer was drinking a glass of champagne, we talked about my future and what i could do as a special project for my third year.
And then came the awards part. I was quite anxious at first since so many people were getting awards yet i wasn't getting anything. Then right near the end i heard my name: "2009 News Writer of the Year...Imran Choudhury!" My patience had paid off. I went onto the podium, hoping i wouldn't do a disastrous trip up the steps and grabbed my award. Fantastic. My grin was bigger than any clown I've seen.
As for my other assignments, well lets have the grades do the talking shall we? The magazine assignment and the documentary assignment were both group work and i think we managed to pull it off quite well, with MY persistence of course. I don't want to blabber on to much about this though just in case i jinx myself and my grades end up worse. I don't really believe in the jinx stuff of course but just in case...
Last week, the University of Bedfordshire had its student union media awards. And guess what? yup you've guessed it, i won an award! YAAAAAAY! I know you may be thinking: "What a...weirdo", but this actually meant quite a bit to me. It was held in the student union bar, so at first i was a bit reluctant to go but i knew i may have been up for an award so i went anyway. Obviously for me it was weird since, i've never really been in a 'bar', especially where people are gulping down alcohol. Luckily my journalism lecturer was there and she kept me company for most of the part. While i drank my J20 orange drink, (which i was cautious of for any spiking) and my lecturer was drinking a glass of champagne, we talked about my future and what i could do as a special project for my third year.
And then came the awards part. I was quite anxious at first since so many people were getting awards yet i wasn't getting anything. Then right near the end i heard my name: "2009 News Writer of the Year...Imran Choudhury!" My patience had paid off. I went onto the podium, hoping i wouldn't do a disastrous trip up the steps and grabbed my award. Fantastic. My grin was bigger than any clown I've seen.
Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Sunshine and Assignment deadlines...
The sun rays warm my skin at 20 degrees. Why is it all of a sudden sunny and bright now? I'm just so tempted now to go out and play footy with my mates. But this month of May is the busiest month for every University student in the UK. Its like i'm free for 2-3 months then suddenly KAPOW!! Assignments galore!
I've got a 10 minute documentary to shoot edit and write about, a 2000 word feature article and a 20 page magazine to produce which includes an extensive plan. OK its just three assignment but 2 of these are BIG. Also when your working in groups its just hard to rely on other people. I HATE relying on other people. There you go i said it. If there's one thing I've learnt in my university experience so far, its that you should never rely on someone to get something done. You have to go out and do it yourself!
But i guess working with people who you don't really like working with (not that i don't like working with my group :D ) does bring out the best in you. I've noticed this myself. I'm a lot more patient and persevering than i was last year, where i would try an get everything done myself. Trust is a key thing in teamwork and if that's not there the whole team will break apart, so i'm beginning to trust people more now.
I've got a 10 minute documentary to shoot edit and write about, a 2000 word feature article and a 20 page magazine to produce which includes an extensive plan. OK its just three assignment but 2 of these are BIG. Also when your working in groups its just hard to rely on other people. I HATE relying on other people. There you go i said it. If there's one thing I've learnt in my university experience so far, its that you should never rely on someone to get something done. You have to go out and do it yourself!
But i guess working with people who you don't really like working with (not that i don't like working with my group :D ) does bring out the best in you. I've noticed this myself. I'm a lot more patient and persevering than i was last year, where i would try an get everything done myself. Trust is a key thing in teamwork and if that's not there the whole team will break apart, so i'm beginning to trust people more now.
Tuesday, 21 April 2009
One Nation
I've recently joined this voluntary group known as 'One Nation'. It aims to help the community by getting youths off the streets via the use of sports and leisure activities.My dads friend, Swab Ali, is the chair of the organization and asked me to be apart of One Nation, as its General Secretary/Press Officer. He saw my links with the local paper and probably thought: "i could use this guy". Anyway who am i kidding? The only reason i joined was just so i can get some experience in the voluntary sector. Apparently employers like this sort of thing.
The One Nation football team won the Barry Boltons Sunday league and so the chair thought this would be a good way of promoting One Nation as a football team aswell as One Nation, the Youth and Community organization. So they asked me to write a story for the local paper. Its also on the papers website which can be seen following this link: http://www.lutontoday.co.uk/lut/Nation-on-the-rise.5170942.jp
As the general secretary i was also assigned to create posters for One Nations and also modify its logo (at the top of this post) to make it look abit more modern. I used photoshop - obviously.
Sunday, 5 April 2009
The Reality of TV
I used to think TV was real. Oh, how ignorant I was. Soon enough watching all those backbiting boardroom arguments in The Apprentice, to the misery of Luton Town losing out to Liverpool in the FA cup did start to bug me about the reality of TV. You could say I finally saw the light.
My fellow Journalism students and I at the University of Bedfordshire, had a one days work experience, shadowing the film crew in BBC's morning programme, Celebrity Cash in the Attic – a typical reality TV show. It was one of our Journalism lecturers, Kate Ironside, who gave us the opportunity of going behind the scenes and seeing how everything works in the ‘lovely’ world of television. It was Kates half-sister, Virginia Ironside who was both an author, agony aunt, and the 'celebrity' in the programme. Kate was the 'helpful friend', assisting to raid her sister’s attic for anything worth a bit of dosh.
My fellow Journalism students and I at the University of Bedfordshire, had a one days work experience, shadowing the film crew in BBC's morning programme, Celebrity Cash in the Attic – a typical reality TV show. It was one of our Journalism lecturers, Kate Ironside, who gave us the opportunity of going behind the scenes and seeing how everything works in the ‘lovely’ world of television. It was Kates half-sister, Virginia Ironside who was both an author, agony aunt, and the 'celebrity' in the programme. Kate was the 'helpful friend', assisting to raid her sister’s attic for anything worth a bit of dosh.
The day we were to film, was when the bidding of the items would take place. We arrived at Chiswick Auctions in London and found ourselves hanging about for the first half hour until the film crew slowly started to warm things up. Whilst we were hanging about though we saw some famous faces there, such as Angela Rippon, the first ever woman newsreader in Britain and the presenter of the show, along with David Emanuel, the designer who created Princess Diana's wedding dress, and Maggie Philbin, a TV presenter who might you have seen in the programme, Tomorrows World. All of them were chatty and friendly, especially Maggie Philbin, who gave us some tips to get going in the media industry. She was telling us how to always take whatever chance you get and never miss an opportunity. I guess that’s how all the big players get their jobs eh?
Surprisingly, Leopard Productions, the production team behind Cash in the Attic were actually shooting four programmes on the same day, so you can imagine how hectic it was. Apart from all the urgency, Kate believes the experience was well worth while and said: "There’s an awful lot of waiting around then sudden bursts of frantic activity. It was great for the students to see the crew in action and the amount of time it takes to film a short sequence, not to mention the importance of the presenters appearing fresh and spontaneous, even if its the third or fourth take." When it was time for Kate and Virginia to speak to the presenter Angela Rippon, me and the other students just couldn’t help laughing our socks off with the amount of dramatisation and bogus reactions we were hearing. Everything was rigged! From the reactions of the presenters to their laughter!This was the real world of television. Every opportunity needs to be made to make the final edit up to scratch.
This experience showed me that this 'lovely world' of television isn't so glamorous as one would think. It’s actually a lot bloody hard work! One shot is redone about 5-6 times, so I didn't really envy my lecturer for being on TV, I was actually put off.
But at the end of the day, anyone whose face hasn’t yet been on TV, have this urge right at the back of their minds of being in front of the camera. And unfortunately that’s what happened with us. Whenever the film crew would start shooting we’d wish the camera would point at us ( I know, it’s sad) and some of us even thought about making bogus bid’s for any of the items on sale, just so the camera might point at us.
The whole experience was an eye opener and quite frankly something which needs to be done more often in universities. Kate stresses that there is no substitute for seeing the industry in action: “The aim is to get students jobs and it’s vital that they see it as it is."
Surprisingly, Leopard Productions, the production team behind Cash in the Attic were actually shooting four programmes on the same day, so you can imagine how hectic it was. Apart from all the urgency, Kate believes the experience was well worth while and said: "There’s an awful lot of waiting around then sudden bursts of frantic activity. It was great for the students to see the crew in action and the amount of time it takes to film a short sequence, not to mention the importance of the presenters appearing fresh and spontaneous, even if its the third or fourth take." When it was time for Kate and Virginia to speak to the presenter Angela Rippon, me and the other students just couldn’t help laughing our socks off with the amount of dramatisation and bogus reactions we were hearing. Everything was rigged! From the reactions of the presenters to their laughter!This was the real world of television. Every opportunity needs to be made to make the final edit up to scratch.
This experience showed me that this 'lovely world' of television isn't so glamorous as one would think. It’s actually a lot bloody hard work! One shot is redone about 5-6 times, so I didn't really envy my lecturer for being on TV, I was actually put off.
But at the end of the day, anyone whose face hasn’t yet been on TV, have this urge right at the back of their minds of being in front of the camera. And unfortunately that’s what happened with us. Whenever the film crew would start shooting we’d wish the camera would point at us ( I know, it’s sad) and some of us even thought about making bogus bid’s for any of the items on sale, just so the camera might point at us.
The whole experience was an eye opener and quite frankly something which needs to be done more often in universities. Kate stresses that there is no substitute for seeing the industry in action: “The aim is to get students jobs and it’s vital that they see it as it is."
Thursday, 19 March 2009
Trip to Westminster
Today i went with some other journalism students on a trip to Westminster parliament. The buildings there are some of the most best looking buildings in London. What i liked about it was the history that took place here and how its all still vividly intimidating via the use of paintings, statues and architecture.
We also met an Mp called Nadine Dorris, who we all had a chat with. She's a conservative Mp for mid Beds and was very friendly and welcoming. She had a lot to say regarding the anti-war protests, so thats what i focused on when i asked her my questions. She seems to blame the police in the way they handled the situation saying they should have acted on a public order act because of the 'offensive' words they had on their placards. But she then also goes onto say they have a right to protect the human rights act of freedom of speech. Isn't she just contradicting herself?
Anyway after the interview the chair of the universities, skills and innovation select committee, Phil Willis, popped up into the room without saying hello or anything. We were also meant to interview him after Nadine but it seemed he came a little early. So Nadine thought she should head off, until our lecturer Kate decided we should take a photo alongside Nadine just so one of the journalism students could do a press release for the local press alongside the photo.
We also met an Mp called Nadine Dorris, who we all had a chat with. She's a conservative Mp for mid Beds and was very friendly and welcoming. She had a lot to say regarding the anti-war protests, so thats what i focused on when i asked her my questions. She seems to blame the police in the way they handled the situation saying they should have acted on a public order act because of the 'offensive' words they had on their placards. But she then also goes onto say they have a right to protect the human rights act of freedom of speech. Isn't she just contradicting herself?
Anyway after the interview the chair of the universities, skills and innovation select committee, Phil Willis, popped up into the room without saying hello or anything. We were also meant to interview him after Nadine but it seemed he came a little early. So Nadine thought she should head off, until our lecturer Kate decided we should take a photo alongside Nadine just so one of the journalism students could do a press release for the local press alongside the photo.
Most of my journalism class is here with Nadine in the middle wearing the red dress. As we finished taking the pictures, Willis decided to walk out the room saying: "I've got better things to do than hanging around here". Everyone in the room was gobsmacked he actually done that with our lecturer Kate just being lost for words. After he walked out Nadine was telling us about how he is one of the rudest men in parliament who "hates" students. Willis being a Lib Dem member gave Nadine the perfect opportunity to barrage the Lib Dems of how they are the: "nastiest political party in parliament."
And he looks like such a nice guy in this photo. Well they do say you shouldn't judge a book by its cover.
I'm not really sure if the guy is really that bad but still, that was not a great first impression. i mean he walked out on students, the students who he needs to talk to in order to make decision in his bloody select committee. I'm just now wondering why he is the chair of such a committee, especially the one that deals with universities and tuition fees, as he had the audacity and nerve to walk out on students like that. Doesn't he think actual student views and opinions are important?
Monday, 16 March 2009
Luton anti-war protest
The media recently has been flooding in with news about the anti-war protest which was demonstrated by a group of Muslims in Luton last Tuesday. I'm actually really appalled at the amount of news coverage this incident has received.
This so called 'Muslim' group are also known as the infamous Al-Muhajiroun, who are actually banned from the UK. Before the day of the protest you could see Muslims brothers who are part of this group giving out leaflets outside mosque, encouraging them to take part in the march.
They used a certain hadith (sayings of the prophet Muhammad) to justify their actions:
"He among you who sees a "munkar" ( something not good ) should change it with his hand ( activism, organization, movement ). If he can not do that, then with his tongue ( by speaking out against it ). If he can not do that, then within his heart ( by always disliking what is evil or harmful ) and that ( the last option ) is the weakest ( or lowest ) of faith". - (Bukhari)
They apparently spoke out against the Royal Anglican Regiment who were marching down Luton town centre to be acknowledged for their achievements in the war. Most in Britain are damn right against the war, calling it 'illegal' so i can understand why these Muslims protested. Freedom of Speech is what protected these people from getting attacked and abused from onlookers as the police blocked any attacks coming through.
I think its fair that these people have the right to protest but the way they went about protesting was in my opinion quite bad. They just seemed very angry, making Islam seem very intimidating, provocative and hateful. This is not Islam at all. They take away all the love and mercy which the prophet Muhammad had always acted upon. During the lifetime of the prophet and his companions, people from different countries converted to Islam through character, mercy and love that they saw in the Muslims.
My question is, where is the prophetic character inside of these so called 'Muslims'. They don the Islamic dress and beard but inside they're very different. Not once do they think about how the prophet Muhammad would have reacted. He would have used his wisdom in a situation like this always looking for a way where no confrontation would ever happen. Hatred was never an option in the prophets life. In disputes he would always opt for a way where people can get along with each other. I'm also dead against this "war on Iraq" which resulted in nothing but more trouble and turmoil inside the country. The only thing i'm against here is the way these Muslims protested.
They quote the above hadith without even understanding the real meaning of the prophet's saying. Before stopping any evil, one must anaylse the situation using wisdom, and seeing if it is actually plausible to do without any detrimental consequences. These protesters just created more problems for the rest of the Muslim community in Luton to deal with.
This so called 'Muslim' group are also known as the infamous Al-Muhajiroun, who are actually banned from the UK. Before the day of the protest you could see Muslims brothers who are part of this group giving out leaflets outside mosque, encouraging them to take part in the march.
They used a certain hadith (sayings of the prophet Muhammad) to justify their actions:
"He among you who sees a "munkar" ( something not good ) should change it with his hand ( activism, organization, movement ). If he can not do that, then with his tongue ( by speaking out against it ). If he can not do that, then within his heart ( by always disliking what is evil or harmful ) and that ( the last option ) is the weakest ( or lowest ) of faith". - (Bukhari)
They apparently spoke out against the Royal Anglican Regiment who were marching down Luton town centre to be acknowledged for their achievements in the war. Most in Britain are damn right against the war, calling it 'illegal' so i can understand why these Muslims protested. Freedom of Speech is what protected these people from getting attacked and abused from onlookers as the police blocked any attacks coming through.
I think its fair that these people have the right to protest but the way they went about protesting was in my opinion quite bad. They just seemed very angry, making Islam seem very intimidating, provocative and hateful. This is not Islam at all. They take away all the love and mercy which the prophet Muhammad had always acted upon. During the lifetime of the prophet and his companions, people from different countries converted to Islam through character, mercy and love that they saw in the Muslims.My question is, where is the prophetic character inside of these so called 'Muslims'. They don the Islamic dress and beard but inside they're very different. Not once do they think about how the prophet Muhammad would have reacted. He would have used his wisdom in a situation like this always looking for a way where no confrontation would ever happen. Hatred was never an option in the prophets life. In disputes he would always opt for a way where people can get along with each other. I'm also dead against this "war on Iraq" which resulted in nothing but more trouble and turmoil inside the country. The only thing i'm against here is the way these Muslims protested.
They quote the above hadith without even understanding the real meaning of the prophet's saying. Before stopping any evil, one must anaylse the situation using wisdom, and seeing if it is actually plausible to do without any detrimental consequences. These protesters just created more problems for the rest of the Muslim community in Luton to deal with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)