The Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation (LBCI) did not waste any time issuing an apology for its January 24 news report, broadcast from an Israeli air force base.
LBCI explained in a statement that for its news coverage from Haifa or from the West Bank, “it depends on a Palestinian production company called Med Media, which is based in Ramallah and licensed by the Palestinian Information Ministry."
“The context was an Israeli show of force,” read the statement, “in a blatant Israeli attempt to reserve a seat at the Geneva II conference ... However, LBCI admits that it fell into a trap set by the Israeli army during the preparation of the report, and it thought it could use a Lebanese channel for its purposes …”
“LBCI apologizes to its audience for this fall, which was a result of a misunderstanding, and had no intention to collude with the army that committed atrocities in Lebanon.”
LBCI explained in a statement that for its news coverage from Haifa or from the West Bank, “it depends on a Palestinian production company called Med Media, which is based in Ramallah and licensed by the Palestinian Information Ministry."
“The context was an Israeli show of force,” read the statement, “in a blatant Israeli attempt to reserve a seat at the Geneva II conference ... However, LBCI admits that it fell into a trap set by the Israeli army during the preparation of the report, and it thought it could use a Lebanese channel for its purposes …”
“LBCI apologizes to its audience for this fall, which was a result of a misunderstanding, and had no intention to collude with the army that committed atrocities in Lebanon.”
The unequivocal apology pleased many who felt distraught about the report and saw it as a violation of their dignity, before being a violation of Lebanese law. Just as social media sites filled with angry reactions, the statement of apology was shared positively.
But as soon as the fire was put out on the LBCI front, it was ignited at Lebanon’s al-Jadeed and MTV channels. On January 25, the channels announced the death of Sheikh Abbas Zogheib during the clashes between the Hajoula and Zaiter clans in Dahiyeh. It later turned out that he was alive.
As usual, this mistake was not spared from comments on social media. Yet some journalists at al-Jadeed decided to attack the viewers who criticized them. The news director told citizens to "go home" and a colleague described viewers who criticized the channel's work as "petty." Another al-Jadeed employee told them to stop "babbling" and that any criticism stems from the fact that “they are jealous of us.”
These responses tell us something about the special circumstances of these journalists’ profession. They believe nobody should criticize without knowing the surrounding circumstances. While true in principle, particularly for professional critics, it should not apply to regular viewers, especially when the results are disastrous.
Many conditions can cause journalists to make mistakes, consciously or against their will. However, the conditions the colleagues decided to point to were "pressure" and "danger.” One colleague said that as she is out there doing her job, the viewers are sitting at home, which is her "calamity."
Can someone explain how it’s a "calamity" to the media to have its audience sitting at home watching? How "shameful" of you to express your opinion. You are welcome only when you clap. Do these journalists understand that viewers are actually leaving their homes to report news and information? Have they asked themselves why?
Many bloggers have negative opinion of journalists and the media: "If they were doing their jobs, we wouldn’t exist.” Those journalists who do not wish for anyone to express an opinion unless they know a situation’s entire context – what do they know about the entirety of a certain situation? Viewers only want a journalist who makes a mistake to admit that mistake and apologize, not chastise the audience.
The audience might not know the working conditions of journalists – they do not want to know, and they are not expected to. They only wish for journalists to take responsibility for their actions. However, when this type of journalism is unavailable and the ability to admit to mistakes is lacking, one can only believe LBCI, when it describes its apology as "courage." Yes, an apology requires courage and culture.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.