# Tony Shadid dies in Syria



## garza (Feb 17, 2012)

Death has caught one of the great ones.

The New York Times has announced the death of veteran foreign correspondent Anthony Shadid. The death of Shadid at 43 has an ironic side. After surviving years of work in hostile environments across the Middle East, Sadid reportedly sucumbed to an asthma attack in Syria. He was there to cover the uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. During his long career Shadid won two Pulitzer prizes. 

Shadid was noted for going behind the headline stories to report on how the lives of ordinary people were affected by the wars and rebellions that have continued to sweep across that region of the world. He was a brilliant interviewer, able to communicate with and draw out everyone from homeless street people to national leaders. Shadid was one of four New York Times reporters who were held for a time last year by the Syrian Government.

Shadid was one of the best of the younger generation of journalists, holding throughout his life to his own high personal standards. We've lost a good reporter and a good man.

-30-


----------



## patskywriter (Feb 17, 2012)

Wow. He was definitely an excellent reporter/journalist. He will be missed.

I "only" cover community news and I look up to "big boys" like Shadid.


----------



## garza (Feb 27, 2012)

And even as friends gathered to mourn the death of Shadid came word from Syria of the deaths of US/UK journalist Marie Colvin and French photographer Remi Ochlik. Reports are that Syrian armed forces deliberately shell areas where journalists are known to live or work. 

This is nothing new. The intentional killing of reporters has been going on since a correspondent for the _Peloponnesian Times_ was caught in Troy.

Those of us too old and brittle to go again in harm's way salute the brave reporters who carry on the struggle. A special salute to the memory of the ones who fall as they try to bring truth to the often unwilling ears of the world.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 27, 2012)

garza said:


> the brave reporters who carry on the struggle. rofl A special salute to the memory of the ones who fall as they* try to bring truth* to the often unwilling ears of the world.



On the other hand, there are constant reports of battles arranged for the photographers. Why should the public believe anything? Trying is lying.



Arranged battles have been around since the days of the Aztecs.


----------



## dale (Feb 27, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> On the other hand, there are constant reports of battles arranged for the photographers. Why should the public believe anything? Trying is lying.
> 
> 
> 
> Arranged battles have been around since the days of the Aztecs.



i agree with you. "war correspondents" are generally all rabble rousing propagandists with no real regard for "truth" or the well being
of anyone.


----------



## garza (Feb 27, 2012)

That's a lie.   When you've been there and been shot at, threatened to your face with death, when you've seen your friends die in the mud, when you've taken the pictures of women and school children shot down in cold blood, then you can make fun of the reporter who does his or her best to show the truth to the world.   I've been shot at in Viet Nam, Cambodia, Mississippi, and El Salvador just so you can sit back fat and happy and read all about the wars and the protests. You ever lie in the bush on your face while a 14-year-old guerrila holds an AK47 to the back of your neck waiting for El Comandante to tell him whether to shoot? (Friendships are born in strange ways. That kid now lives in Valley of Peace Village, Belize, and we get together often and talk about the war.) You ever have the KKK call you at midnight to tell you they plan to kill you tomorrow?   So trying is the same as lying? So making an effort, putting your life on the line, sweating to get the story written and the pictures taken, is all a part of lying? That's a new theory I've not heard of before. 'Trying is the same as lying.' I'll have to remember that. Any effort to accomplish anything is the same as a falsehood.   And I suppose the Syrian Army bombardment of Homs, killing civilians including the journalists writing about the civil war is just a show so someone can get some nifty pictures? All the blood, all the destruction, is just for someone's entertainment? Is that what you're saying?


----------



## dale (Feb 27, 2012)

the entire arab spring is a crock. and all those "jounalists" are doing is purposely fanning the flames. i mean, egypt, tunisia, and libya ARE sooooooooo
better off now with the muslim fundamentalists now in charge. the entire movement is a staged facade purposefully designed to surround israel with
unfriendly puppet governments. and i have associated with a few of these "journalists". my opinions are from listening to them personally and drawing
 my own conclusion.


----------



## Kevin (Feb 27, 2012)

dale said:


> the entire arab spring is a crock. and all those "jounalists" are doing is purposely fanning the flames. i mean, egypt, tunisia, and libya ARE sooooooooo
> better off now with the muslim fundamentalists now in charge. the entire movement is a staged facade purposefully designed to surround israel with
> unfriendly puppet governments. and i have associated with a few of these "journalists". my opinions are from listening to them personally and drawing
> my own conclusion.


 puppets of who? be-elzabub or something?


----------



## dale (Feb 27, 2012)

Kevin said:


> puppets of who? be-elzabub or something?



maybe santa claus and his 8 tiny reindeer.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 27, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> On the other hand, there are constant reports of battles arranged for the photographers. Why should the public believe anything? Trying is lying.
> 
> Arranged battles have been around since the days of the Aztecs.



Some of the footage shown would give credence to this.  In the last week, we've seen cameramen filming in nowhere's land where so-called oppressed rebels were openly firing into a police station complex, and of course that was all the Syrian government's fault.  Then we had the stupid EU demand that the Syrian government withdraw all military/police personnel into their complexes because the rebels had Al Queda operatives as a part of their numbers.

I'm sorry, but doesn't this sound a touch insane to anybody else?  I rather suspect that truth is taking a nice holiday in Tasmania.


----------



## garza (Feb 27, 2012)

So, again, it's all the reporters' fault for being there. Reporters aren't supposed to go where people are shooting. My, no. Reporting that people are shooting at one another is certain to upset someone.

My opinions were formed in over half a century of watching up close how the world works. I had to watch up close, I'm very near sighted, which is why I carried a notebook, pencil, and camera and never a gun. But, you see, the fellows who were shooting at one another seldom bothered to see how I was armed, or how the other frontline reporters were armed. You may laugh at the thought of a reporter being brave. I dare you to go in harm's way. Go to Syria, or Afghanistan, and get in amongst the fighting, armed with nothing but notebook, pencil, and camera, and tell in your own words what you see happening in front of you. I'm 71 now and not in the best of health, but I am sore tempted to try and get to one of the hot spots one more time before I die. And if I die there, trying to tell the story, well, that wouldn't be a bad way to go, except I'll know at the end that certain of you would have no respect for a person dying trying to do his job. 

Maybe you and the Syrian government are right, after all, that it's best people don't know what is going on. Ignorance is bliss, so they say, which leads me to believe there are many happy people, and they don't want their happiness upset by hearing the truth about armies killing men, women, and children. The ignorant have always blamed the messenger. 

It was the same in the South in the sixties. If only the tv wouldn't show Birmingham Police Chief 'Bull' Connor setting police dogs on children or bowling the over with fire hoses, then everyone could pretend it never happened. If only I hadn't taken pictures and written articles about Jackson Mayor Allen Thompson and his 'Thompson Tank', then people could pretend there was no problem and life could go on as it had for a hundred years. 

But we did write the stories and we did take the pictures and we did help to bring change where change was needed. Indiana of course has never had racial problems and no one in Indiana has ever belonged to the Ku Klux Klan so you can be excused for no knowing what was going on in Alabama and Mississippi. 

And of course if we had never reported on what was going on in Southeast Asia then the Viet Nam war would never have happened and all those body bags shipped into Andrews would have held the remains of unfortunate victims of auto accidents somewhere in Europe. 

You know, I really don't care how much you want to insult me. I'm just a worn out old news guy, over the hill and on my way to a burying ground somewhere. But when you slur the name of all journalists because there are some rotten ones, then you offend in a way that cannot easily be forgiven, and certainly never forgotten. I think of people like Edward R. Murrow, standing on a rooftop in London during the blitz. But perhaps if he hadn't been there Hitler would never have bombed London, at least as far as people in the U.S. knew, and the whole war thing could have been kept quiet and everyone could have died happy. 

I do sometimes despair when I read of the misbehaviour of some journalists, but they are a minority. The good ones you hear little about. You probably never notice the by-line in your local newspaper, and you never know the writers and editors who get the script ready for the plastic blow-dried anchor to read on the seven o'clock news. And until one is shot dead or blown to pieces you are not likely to hear or read the names of the men and women who have gone in harm's way so that you can learn a bit more about how the world works.


----------



## dale (Feb 28, 2012)

the competition level of "journalism" today gives rise to propagandist sensationalism. every "blogger" out there is striving to make
a name for himself, and it leads to essentially treasonous practices. the "journalists" in southeast asia caused america to lose vietnam.
it seems the priority of war journalism is to take the side of the insurgency or communist aggressor, regardless of who or how many suffer
for their practices. nothing good has come of the insurgencies in egypt, tunisia, and libya...and nothing good will come if the current syrian
government is toppled, either. and the "journalism" efforts in relation to the israeli/palestinian fiasco are a complete disgrace. journalism in
war has essentially been a socialist hollywood style production since the formation of the UN.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 28, 2012)

garza said:


> You may laugh at the thought of a reporter being brave. I dare you to go in harm's way. Go to Syria, or Afghanistan, and get in amongst the fighting, armed with nothing but notebook, pencil, and camera, and tell in your own words what you see happening in front of you.
> 
> You know, I really don't care how much you want to insult me. I'm just a worn out old news guy, over the hill and on my way to a burying ground somewhere. But when you slur the name of all journalists because there are some rotten ones, then you offend in a way that cannot easily be forgiven, and certainly never forgotten.
> 
> I do sometimes despair when I read of the misbehaviour of some journalists, but they are a minority. The good ones you hear little about.  And until one is shot dead or blown to pieces you are not likely to hear or read the names of the men and women who have gone in harm's way so that you can learn a bit more about how the world works.



I could guarantee that if I were ever to be reporting in such a situation, I wouldn't be moronic enough to be idly filming in front of the rebels who were shooting into police complexes.  It's such an obvious prearranged setup.

When certain reporters support armed groups, go along with sensationalist propaganda, arrange to be at a particular point in time for a sensationalist rebel attack, stand in the middle of the road to bring forth one-sided propaganda, and then go on about how dangerous it is & how bad the government is; yeah I'm going to be skeptical.

These types of reporters aren't neutral, and they don't deserve to be treated as such.

If you wish to be offended by this, it's your choice; but it doesn't make the current reporting credible, because it isn't.


----------



## garza (Feb 28, 2012)

So you condemn all of us because of your misconception about what often must often be done to get the story. So there's never been an honest journalist. So all those years I devoted to doing the best I could to be an impartial witness to events in front of me, of doing my level best to present the story as accurately as I knew how, mean nothing. I'm nothing. All journalists are nothing. I've stood in the line of fire more than a few times, because sometimes it's the only way to get at the truth. So that makes me a moron. So be it. All reporters are stupid morons. None of us is worth a crap. Edward R Murrow was a damned fool. He once flew on a bomber mission over Berlin. Stupid. All reporters are stupid.


----------



## Kyle R (Feb 28, 2012)

I think it's terrible what's happening in Syria right now, and I think it's very brave of the journalists to put themselves in danger in order to be the public's eyes and ears.

Very sorry to hear about Tony Shadid. I don't even follow journalism but I've heard his name before.


----------



## garza (Feb 28, 2012)

Tony was one of the best. He was only 43. He should have been with us for many more years. He was devoted to the very highest standards of journalism. 

The misbehaviour of many of today's generation of reporters is disgusting. But I will not sit still and have all the people who've ever put themselves in harm's way to tell the story castigated as morons. I have devoted my life to being as accurate and impartial as possible. Often that means being attacked by all sides and laughed at as a fool by the observer sitting comfortably in an armchair thousands of miles away with no idea of what is sometimes required. 

I did not know Marie Colvin except by reputation. All reports I've read indicate the house she and Remi Ochlik were using as a base was targeted by the Syrian Army because the Army knew there were journalists there. That may or may not be true, but she had been warned that if captured she would probably be shot.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 28, 2012)

Truth In Reporting - Take One

CNN Fake Newscast Best Quality - YouTube


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 28, 2012)

Truth In Reporting - Take Two


----------



## Olly Buckle (Feb 28, 2012)

> So you condemn all of us because of your misconception about what often must often be done to get the story. So there's never been an honest journalist.


No, but we do know there are many lying, cheating, scum working for the likes of News International and using illegal and immoral means to get stories, we do know that when we look back historically no evidence of allied atrocities in WWII was ever presented to the public, but they happened. I am sure there are brave and honest reporters, but I am not in the business, I have no way of telling which are which. Not just that, their copy is going to be mediated by an editor, and I am even less willing to accept what they choose to present to me, let's face it , even if they choose the truth there are truths and truths and aspects of the truth.

Your personal affront is very touching garza, but I really think a huge dose of scepticism is actually a very healthy thing, you must know they are not all reporters of facts and purveyors of truth and that among them are some real dogs of rabble rousers. It is not that we think they all lie all the time, it is that we are pretty damn certain some of them do sometimes and don't have the means to tell which. Take this 'Arab Spring' in Libya, reading between the lines I reckon we have simply helped topple one tribal group for another, we hit a lot of guys in pick up trucks with high power sophisticated bombs and took out anything better we had sold them. Now we have a bunch of guys who murder prisoners and put the body on display, just like the last ones, but will sell us oil cheap so they can buy a new lot of arms to suppress the other tribe, just like the last ones. When they get established enough they think they can have some independence they will become the bad guys and we will bomb them in turn. But I don't see anyone reporting war as the filthy business it is, designed to make the powerfull more powerful and the rich richer, they keep telling me it is about freedom and liberation, and I know that the ordinary man is the one who fights and at the end of it he does not come home to a country fit for heroes, he is simply more and more trapped into the system and more and more he is lied to, cheated and used.

I expect there are some honest reporters, but they will rarely see the whole picture, anything too controversial they submit will be suppressed and there are also some very dishonest ones and it is hard to tell which is which. Life is tough on the good guys, good on them for being what they are, but whingeing won't change that


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 28, 2012)

"Never let the facts get in the way of a good story."


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 28, 2012)

garza - Did Edward R. Murrow happen to go on a flight over Dresden also?


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 28, 2012)

I think Olly makes a good intelligent post, which I'd struggle to say any better.  Of course, a lot of it is also the media corporations back home being politically active; sometimes its difficult to know where the lying begins.


----------



## Bilston Blue (Feb 28, 2012)

Ox - I doubt Murrow did fly over Dresden, just as Goebells didn't visit Coventry. Or Liverpool, Belfast, Clydebank, or Avonmouth. Or Glasgow for that matter. I'll wager he didn't have the time in his schedule to visit Guernica, either.

To argue that journalists distort the truth to suit their own agenda, or that of their bosses; and that they mislead and misrepresent, is one thing. But your last post deviates from that. The time for moralising over the issue of the bombing, fire-bombing, carpet-bombing (call it what you want) of cities in the only time of truly total war has passed. We knew it was wrong when the anger subsided and the war generations grew older and wiser and the legacy became one of rebuilding and looking forward instead of resentment and blame. Your question on Murrow isn't relevant. There are/have been people dying because their governments are shelling them in their homes, those very governments who are supposed to protect them and provide for them security. That people are prepared to risk their lives (however foolish one might suggest they are for doing so) to tell the rest of the world what is happening seems to be lost on you. Never mind.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 28, 2012)

@Bilston: I'm not sure the Syrian situation is as clear cut as you claim.  If you had the Scots & Welsh deciding that they had enough of Englishmen ruling over Great Britain, and they became aggressive towards ethnic Englishmen, what would you have your government do?  Add the law of the gun, and the actions we see are only to be expected.  Add to that Islamic extremism & Al Queda influences inside the anti-government movement, and we don't have this good vs evil scenario which the media are portraying.
And don't forget, ethnic ties run so deep that many so-called civilians will put themselves (and their children) up as human shields for fighters, to go along with sheltering them.  Aiding fighters negates any civilian tag.

That's not to say the Syrian government are wonderful people; but at the same time, we're being fed a lie.


----------



## garza (Feb 28, 2012)

There's no denying there has been a lot of fakery, a lot of bad reporting, a lot of biased reporting, a lot of government control. But I know what I've seen, what I've done, and the code I've lived under all my life. 


Sorry to be so touchy. All last week is a blurr of airplanes and airports ending in a jetlag hangover that lasted all of Saturday and Sunday. If you've not traveled through a U.S. airport recently, especially going in and coming out of the country, you are in for a treat. Never was I so happy to land in Ladyville and have the Customs and Immigration guys greet me by my first name and welcome me home. I'm still a bit foggy.


But we're not all News of the World or Fox News or CNN. That's the truth.


----------



## Kyle R (Feb 28, 2012)

Rustgold said:


> That's not to say the Syrian government are wonderful people; but at the same time, we're being fed a lie.



Marie Colvin was an award-winning journalist, known for her brave reporting of violent situations, who died in Syria the same week as Tony Shadid, along with photographer Remi Ochlik. You can find videos of her last reports from Syria on youtube. They were in a home, in a civilian housing district, when an artillery shell killed them.

Marie Colvin said, “It’s a complete and utter lie they’re only going after terrorists. The Syrian Army is simply shelling a city of cold, starving civilians.”

She protested against her affiliated pay wall (where subscribers to a certain news outlet get sole access to the content) as she felt the world deserved to know what was happening.

There is also Rami al-Sayed, a Syrian civilian who posted videos to youtube of the shelling of his neighborhood before he too was killed.

I understand how some people can be suspicious of propaganda, but I find it disrespectful when individuals have lost their lives trying to show what's happening in Syria, only to be dismissed by saying "I don't believe it. It's all lies."

EDIT: You can also find videos of civilians being fired upon by the Syrian army, using small weapons fire. And videos of a funeral procession being fired upon.

And here, a video that speaks for itself, that of civilians trying to rescue the injured (or dead) bodies of fellow civilians. Notice how they have to use ropes and wire to retrieve the bodies as they are too frightened to venture out into the open. Their cowering speaks volumes. (Warning, the video is graphic.)

[video=youtube;byG22NKeJTM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byG22NKeJTM&amp;oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.c  om%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3D%26esrc%3Ds%26fr  m%3D1%26source%3Dvideo%26cd%3D4%26ved%3D0CEYQtwIwA  w%26url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv  %3DbyG22NKeJTM%26ctbm%3Dvid%26ei%3DdxBNT-SAMoiKsQL40_Up%26usg%3DAFQjCNG5MCmEdJWpAHIAf9RRuSF  5X-qCJw%26sig2%3Dy09KLZV_dD2eVthH8mYLmQ[/video]


----------



## Terry D (Feb 28, 2012)

I don't think anyone reading this thread is stupid enough to believe that there are no reporters writing with an agenda.  No profession is pure, or purely altruistic.  But the history of front-line war correspondence has proven that the vast majority are honest and sincere, and anyone of us who sits back, far from where the bullets are flying, and passes judgement on the whole profession from under the safety blanket of "healthy skepticism" deserves no more regard than the stray dogs which feed on the bodies of the dead.  Hell, they deserve even less -- at least the dogs are facing the bullets.


----------



## dale (Feb 28, 2012)

Terry D said:


> I don't think anyone reading this thread is stupid enough to believe that there are no reporters writing with an agenda.  No profession is pure, or purely altruistic.  But the history of front-line war correspondence has proven that the vast majority are honest and sincere, and anyone of us who sits back, far from where the bullets are flying, and passes judgement on the whole profession from under the safety blanket of "healthy skepticism" deserves no more regard than the stray dogs which feed on the bodies of the dead.  Hell, they deserve even less -- at least the dogs are facing the bullets.



many people "risk their lives" for destructive and prejudiced causes for reasons of greed, fame and activism. and although there may be "honest and sincere" wartime propagandists, i see zero evidence of the "vast majority" being such.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Feb 28, 2012)

I don't say "It's  all lies" Kyle, people are being shot, shelled, and so on. What I don't believe is the "These are the bad guys doing it, these are the good guys who deserve our help". Armies don't shell and shoot civilians in their own countries for long normally because that is their mum and dad and aunts and uncles. Places where they do do it are places where there are already two opposing camps, they are not shooting their own, they are shooting those d****d Sunnis/Shia/ Jews/Christians/Armenians/ anything you want.

 Our governments stiched themselves up when they prosecuted the Nazis for waging adverturous wars of conquest. It was madness, the Nazi high command could hardly believe their ears, that was what wars had all been about since Alexander, but they got all high minded and said no more Pizzaro's or Clive's to get rich on. Now they are missing the booty they try to disguise their 'Divide, rule, and rip them off for everything' wars as aiding justice some how.

This is not the fault of individual journalists, true, but their reports will very often be subverted to feed the machine, "Well, we saw that gripping report from ..." Then he tells me his version of what was in it.

Not that I'm cynical of politicians or anything.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 28, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> Marie Colvin said, “*It’s a complete and utter lie they’re only going after terrorists*. The Syrian Army is simply shelling a city of cold, starving civilians.”



So people from Al Queda are considered starving people?  Btw, that wasn't from the Syrians, it was from the EU when they demanded the Syrian government send all police & military to their compounds because the Al Queda were fighting among the rebels.  As yes, these are the same compounds which the rebels were filmed initiating attacks against (for the benefit of a western film crew).

And Marie in her tearjerking attack against the Syrian government admits there are terrorists among the rebel fighters.  And to claim that families or women who house fighters & terrorists are civilians is a falsehood.


----------



## garza (Feb 28, 2012)

Rustgold and Dale - Let me ask the two of you a question. This question requires only a 'yes' or 'no' answer. 

Have you ever been inside a village where a majority of the population were opposed to the government when that village came under attack by government troops? Just yes or no.

*Here* is a bit of bad verse I wrote a while back. If you can relate to this, if this brings back memories of an event or events in your own life, then probably you can answer 'yes' to the question.


----------



## The Backward OX (Feb 28, 2012)

I’ve said this before: if people ceased concerning themselves with others’ affairs, the media would soon go out of business.


----------



## Kyle R (Feb 28, 2012)

Well, I suppose you can draw your own conclusions on the reporting you see.

I just don't think it's cool to go around bashing these people without knowing the situation yourself. And the only way you could know is if you yourself have been there with them. Otherwise, the fact is that they know the situation better than you do.

It reminds me of when Lara Logan was brutally molested and beaten in a mob in Cairo, and people mocked her and accused her of lying to try to get attention, despite the fact that her news crew fought tooth and nail against the mob for twenty minutes to try to save her.

I wonder where all this disrespect towards journalists comes from.


----------



## garza (Feb 28, 2012)

'Kill the messenger.'  'I don't want to know.' 'If I don't know about it, then it didn't happen.' 'Nothing that happens to other people is of any importance to me.'  That's where it comes from.


----------



## ppsage (Feb 28, 2012)

> I wonder where all this disrespect towards journalists comes from.



Sarah Palin


----------



## Writ-with-Hand (Feb 28, 2012)

Well, I for one, never know how any of these reporters in war zones or in other very dangerous places or situations do it. Seriously. And then you have women reporters doing it too.

It's more brave to put oneself in a dangerous situation with no firearm than it is to enter one with a firearm - or better yet with a team of men with firearms. 

Journalism is as good a profession as any other. Some do it well or even heroically and others maybe not so much. It's like anything else...




My condolences to the family and loved ones of the fallen reporter.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 28, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> It reminds me of when Lara Logan was brutally molested and beaten in a mob in Cairo, and people mocked her and accused her of lying to try to get attention, despite the fact that her news crew fought tooth and nail against the mob for twenty minutes to try to save her.
> 
> I wonder where all this disrespect towards journalists comes from.



Interesting that you mention this detestable incident, for certain interests involved in extremist Egyptian groups are also involved with the Syrian rebels.

But of course it's see no evil, here no evil when it comes to politically correct groups.  You want to know where the disrespect towards journalists comes from?  Well right here is a start.  Selective reporting, biased reporting, putting PC movements in a halo in spite of all the evidence showing otherwise.  Most westerners don't know that many young girls are being raped in Egypt over religion, or that rape gangs are being paid thousands by special interest groups to 'convert' their victims.  Most media pretends this doesn't exist.  More locally, we see media's selective reporting in our everyday lives.  Then there's the absurd, such as when one current affairs program is praising something as the greatest X since sliced bread, and the next channel is calling it a fraud.

We see media organisations being political players, and disreputable ones at that.  It's not just Murdock, it's the media spectrum.  This is where the disrespect for journalism comes from.


----------

