Thursday, April 2, 2009

What a movie.

More than anything, "Welcome to Sarajevo" made me even more critical of news organizations and what they see as valuable. There were a couple of ideas presented that really set me off – the idea that no one knew of Sarajevo and that it wasn't always the lead story. How could it not be? The divorce of a duke is in no way more important than the battle in Sarajevo. Every day I get more and more disgusted with the selection of news in all mediums. I often think I am in the wrong business because at least half of the stuff that gets coverage – I see no importance in it. The divorce of a duke vs. war is the perfect example. The world needed to know of Sarajevo and journalists, at least the one's sitting safe in their offices, failed. Big time. The one's in Sarajevo deserve huge credit.

At the start of the film, I was irritated with Flynn for helping carry that woman's body off the street. I thought it wasn't his place and he needed to just do his job. Journalists are to observe and report, not get involved emotionally. Then, as someone told him, I think Michael ironically enough, "We're not here to help. We're here to report." I agreed with him 100 percent. By the end of the movie, however, I was completely torn. Journalists are suppose to uncover wrongdoings and raise awareness of serious issues. What's to stop them from doing this personally, not just professionally? My dilemma reminded me of the case study we discussed in class about the photographer who caught the two children falling from the balcony on film. Had he put down his camera to catch them, could he have saved them? Saving a life is a lot more important and heroic than an a Pulitizer Prize or ratings. Ultimately, I think I am OK with Michael taking Emira home. He should have done it legally, of course, but I think his empathy improved his reporting and made the viewers experience something more personal. He made it something other than another news bulletin. He gave it a face.

No comments:

Post a Comment