A Concise History of the Fauxtography Blogstorm in the 2006 Lebanon War
A Concise History of the Fauxtography Blogstorm in the 2006 Lebanon War
复制标题
2006 年黎巴嫩战争中的仿造博客风暴简史
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. D. Cooper
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. D. Cooper
无论2006年夏天以色列和真主党之间的激烈战争的其他后果是什么，它都在博客圈中产生了一个新词。在博客词汇中，fauxtography指的是视觉图像，尤其是新闻照片，它们传达出一种可疑的（或完全错误的）事件感觉。除了这个词中明显的聪明的文字游戏外，它是对新闻摄影产品（包括图像和相关文本）的严肃批评的简称。由于准确是新闻职业道德的一项基本原则，在职业记者协会和其他职业记者协会的道德准则中有明确规定，因此指控新闻产品传达了对新闻事件的虚假或扭曲印象是强有力的。关于新闻报道的事实准确性的关键问题早在这次博客风暴之前就存在了。关于中东热点地区新闻摄影可信度的具体问题也是如此。这很可能是一个简洁而有力的术语的出现，促进了博客风暴的发展，除了动力战争本身的强度是一个促成因素。虽然假新闻博客风暴的一些参与者确实指责了媒体的偏见——这一指责在一位著名新闻学教授的专栏和哈佛大学肖伦斯坦中心的一位研究员的论文中得到了隐含的回应——但我们需要在这里区分一下关于媒体偏见的长期争论，以及更具体和具体的博客风暴批评，即战争期间产生的特定新闻产品是假新闻，而不是值得信赖的新闻摄影。本章描述的博客风暴集中在2006年黎巴嫩战争期间的新闻摄影；然而，与其他博客风暴不同的是，它潜藏的基本问题早在这场战争之前就存在，而其中争论的中心问题在引发博客风暴的事件结束后仍然存在。这场假写真博客风暴可能是迄今为止发生的最复杂的博客风暴之一。区分两个层面的争论可能有助于澄清这场博客风暴中的争论：关于战争中特定事件的报道的争论，以及关于报道战争的新闻实践的争论。这两者是交织在一起的，因为随着时间的推移，关于报道具体事件的争论往往会导致对主流新闻媒体做法的更广泛、更普遍的批评。同样有趣的是，在这场博客风暴中，许多博客和读者提出的批评出现在哈佛大学Shorenstein中心分发的论文中，当时战争已经结束好几个月了。
Whatever the other consequences of the kinetic war between Israel and Hezbollah in the summer of 2006, it gave rise to a neologism now commonplace in the blogosphere. In the blog lexicon, fauxtography refers to visual images, especially news photographs, which convey a questionable (or outright false) sense of the events they seem to depict. Apart from the clever word play evident in the term, it is shorthand for a serious criticism of photojournalism products, both the images and the associated text. Since accuracy is a cardinal tenet of journalistic ethics, clearly stated in the ethics code of the Society of Professional Journalists and other professional associations of journalists, the accusation that news products convey a false or distorted impression of news events is potent. Critical questions about the factual accuracy of news reports predated this blogstorm. So, too, did specific questions about the trustworthiness of photojournalism from hotspots in the Middle East. It may well be that the emergence of a concise but powerful term for the central issue in it fostered the development of the blogstorm, apart from the intensity of the kinetic war itself as a contributing factor. While some participants in the fauxtography blogstorm did, indeed, make accusations of media bias—an accusation implicitly echoed in a column by a prominent journalism professor and a paper by a fellow at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center—we will need here to distinguish between the long-running debate about media bias, in general, and the more concrete and specific blogstorm criticism that particular news products generated during the war were fauxtography rather than trustworthy photojournalism. The blogstorm this chapter describes centered on photojournalism during the 2006 Lebanon War; unlike some other blogstorms, however, the foundational issue underlying it predated this war and the central issue argued in it persisted after the event which initiated the blogstorm had concluded. The fauxtography blogstorm is perhaps one of the most complex to have yet occurred. It may help clarify the argumentation in this blogstorm to distinguish two levels: arguments about the reporting of a particular incident in the war, and arguments about journalistic practices in covering the war. The two are intertwined, in that arguments about reporting of specific incidents often led over time to broader, more general criticism of the mainstream news media practices. It is also interesting to note how a number of criticisms raised by bloggers and their readers during the course of the blogstorm appeared in the paper distributed by Harvard’s Shorenstein Center, many months after the war had ended.