|
||
主頁→評論：時評我們的焦點在哪？
|
||
| 如果我們這次只顧報導這些周邊的細節，這只會造成一種「內耗」，浪費了精力，更分散了社會公眾對世貿議題本身的注意力。 |
世貿部長級會議揭幕，香港主流傳媒鋪天蓋地繪聲繪影報導南韓農民的行動。這樣的取材角度，其實忽略了很多重要問題/議題：
1. 世貿會場內的會議進程 - 沒錯，反世貿的活動既像嘉年華，又有激烈場面，很引人注目也很易做文章。但最重要的議題、足以影響各地農民工人的決定，卻是在會場內發生。如果我們真的關心全球化的問題，而不是只為了「攞景贈興」的話，我們是否更需要監察會場內的談判進展和參與會議的眾多部長？
2. 遊行集會的全貌 - 有到維園或遊行現場，都會知道遊行集會的過程其實很和平，傳媒能大做的文章不多，除了南韓農民在遊行末段衝擊世貿封鎖線的場面。整日的集會遊行中，只有最後的一小時左右，大家遊行到世貿的封鎖線前，才稍有衝突。當時身在現場的筆者，距離封鎖只有十米左右，卻感受不到任何威脅。除了封鎖線附近，被攝影記者、防暴警察和部分南韓農民擠得水洩不通之外，其他南韓農民和來自菲律賓、泰國、日本等示威者，都井然有序的席地而坐，或打鼓或聲援或表演或唱歌或叫口號或休息。然而，主流傳媒就用那一小時和十數平方米發生的事，概括了遊行集會的全貌，彷彿之前眾多的民間團體發言和表演根本不存在。(還有傳媒擺放攝影機位置和鏡頭角度的問題，在這裡暫且不提)
3. 各國社運工運團體那被隱去的名字和意見 - 綜觀香港主流傳媒的報導，對示威者稱呼只有兩種「南韓農民」和「其他示威者」，而對他們所表達的意見/訊息，就只以一句「他們抗議世貿」概括之。其實，除了南韓農民，千辛萬苦來港表達意見的，還有很多全球各地的民間團體、農民團體、勞工團體、NGO代表等，例如：亞太研究網絡、亞洲農民聯盟、國際農民之路、韓國農民聯盟、台灣苦勞網、香港婦女平等機會聯席、南非總工會、巴西總工會、國際自由勞聯、東南亞漁民聯盟、香港紫藤、台灣工人民主協會、香港全球化監察、印度農民行動、亞洲學生協會、韓國民主勞總、國際Women Say No to WTO、美國學生反血汗工廠聯盟、紐西蘭anti-WTO、菲律賓SINAGBAYAN「服務人民的藝術」等等等等。他們關注的有教育、醫療、食水、電、環境等議題，是否能夠用一句「他們的抗議」概括？
4. 民間記者的報導焦點 - 最令筆者擔心的是，有關開幕日的民間報導，焦點彷彿也集中在批評主流傳媒、批評警方過敏、批評市民冷漠。沒錯，我們應該監察主流傳媒和警方。但民間媒體更重要的角色是，讓本身不知道世貿幹甚麼的人，或本身關心世貿談判進展的人，甚至是本身想行動卻無從入手的人，知道更多世貿本身的問題/議題/進展。如果我們這次只顧報導這些周邊的細節，這只會造成一種「內耗」，浪費了精力，更分散了社會公眾對世貿議題本身的注意力。這不正是世貿組織本身所想見的嗎？
希望各香港主流傳媒清楚，這次世貿部長級會議中，他們所定的報導焦點，到底會帶來甚麼影響。作為民間記者(包括筆者自己)，我們亦需要不斷反省觀照自己報導的焦點。
Since the opening of WTO MC6, HK mainstream media has reported overwhelmingly and vividly on Korean farmers' actions. By obtaining materials merely from such angle, the media in fact neglected (or ignored?) many important problems/issues.
1. The WTO MC6's progress - It's true that anti-WTO's activities are like fun and exciting parties, with some violent scene, which are so eye-catching and easy to make article with. But the most important issues, which can affect farmers and workers over the world, are taking place inside the WTO MC6 venue. If we really care about the problems of globalization, not just for our own gossips and entertainment, shouldn't we monitor the negotiations progress and the participating parties within the WTO MC6 venue?
2. Whole picture of assembly and rally - Whoever been to Victoria Park or the march scene that day know that the process was in fact very peaceful, and there's not much rooms for the media to make articles on, except when the protest nearly came to the end, some Korean farmers tried to strike the WTO block line. There's only a violent scene within the whole day, happening at the last hour and only in front of the block line. I was there too, just about 10m away from the front line, but didn't feel any threat. Only the area around the block line is crowded with camerapersons, policepersons and some Korean farmers, other protestors from Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Japan, etc., all sat on the floor in neat order. Some playing drums, expressing support to the front, some performing, some singing, some shouting slogans, some resting. However, most mainstream media used the scene of just that hour, and only within that 10m square or so to conclude the whole picture, pretending the speech and performance of different social groups to be not existed.
3. Neglected/Hidden names and opinions of international social movements and trade unions – from HK mainstream media's news, there's only 2 kinds of protesters, i.e. “Korean farmers” and “other protesters”; and their opinions/messages is just concluded as “resisting WTO”. In fact, besides Korean farmers, there are many citizen unions, farmers/workers unions, NGO representatives coming from different countries with lots of efforts to express their opinions. For example, Indonesian Migrants Workers Union, Far East Oversea Nepalese Association, Taiwan workers unions, South Africa Workers unions, Brazil workers unions, Southeast Asia Fishermen's Alliance, Indian Farmers Action, International Women Say No to WTO, USA Students anti-WTO unions, New Zealand anti-WTO, etc They are talking about issues like education, medicine, water, electricity, environment issues. Can all these be simplified into just one single line that “they oppose WTO”?
4. Reporting focus of Independent media - What worried me most is that independent media's report on the opening day of WTO MC6 seemed to focus on criticizing mainstream media, police's over-sensitivity, and general citizen's indifference. It's right that we should monitor mainstream media and police, but I think that the most important role of independent media should be making more people know about WTO's problems, issues, progress, etc, including those who don't know what WTO's doing, who already care about the discussion progress, or who want to do something but don't know how. If we ONLY report on the trivial details around the WTO MC6 (but not inside), it will lead to a kind of "interior worn-out", which waste the energy of the social movement, and distract the public's attention from the issues being discussed in WTO MC6 itself. Isn't it what the WTO committee wants to see?
I hope the mainstream media in Hong Kong (and around the world) understand the effects of their reporting focus within this WTO MC6 event. Being citizen reporters (including myself), we also need to keep on reflecting and evaluating our focus of report.
:: 主 頁
::