Lorenzo Natali Prize launched for human rights journalism
Posted by Jean Yves Chainon on November 30, 2006 at 10:46 AM
The selection process of the 15th edition of the Lorenzo Natali Prize, a journalism award sponsored by the European Commission, has begun. It was created by the EU Commission in 1992 to promote the right to information, a prerequisite to freedom of expression.
Participants – print and paper journalists, from nearly all regions of the world – submit only one piece focusing on the issue of democracy or human rights, written between September 2005 and December 2006.
All prize nominees will be special guests of the European Commission in Brussels. Each prize winner will receive a Trophy and a financial award, a piece of the 50.000€ of total prize money.
Source: Lorenzo Natali Prize
Posted in :
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Lorenzo Natali Prize launched for human rights journalism.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4539
You might want to schange around those links a little.
The Truth Laid Bearis a measurement tool. My blog is called "Tim Worstall".
Interesting to read these comments. As someone who has been publishing news in electronic from since the early 1980s, the statistics on accessing so-called Blogs seems to fall far short of reality.
My own website gets an average of about 8000 successful requests for pages each day, with something like 400,000 visits per month and can't see why my own modest publication is so exceptional.
Here are the stats for a very typical week
Successful requests: 94,340
Average successful requests per day: 13,478
Successful requests for pages: 57,043
Average successful requests for pages per day: 8,149
Distinct files requested: 6,768
Distinct hosts served: 12,832
As to the assertion that 'bloggers' are "contributors" but not journalists, isn't it time we killed this nonsense about 'professional' journalists, after all, what is it predicated on?
Abiding by some basic rules such as checking facts, identifying sources (something that many 'professional journalists' don't do, preferring to use the term 'sources' or 'unnamed sources'). The big difference is that 'professional' journalists are employed by corporations or governments and far greater (in theory) resources at thei command, although given that ever since the invasion of Iraq, all the so-called news now being reported in the maistream press was being reported from the very beginning by so-called blogs but simply ignored because it didn't fit the worldview of the owners of the corporate/state media.
As to all the nonsense about 'objective', I find it laughable that the distinction is made between US and British media on the basis that
"The American media has always striven to remain "fair and balanced," objective. This left a hole that wasn't satisfied by newspaper op-ed pages and radio talk shows. That hole is now being filled by the blogosphere, chock full of opinionated Americans wanting to be express themselves and be heard.
"But the media situation in Britain is different. People are used to a press whose journalists speak their minds and whose papers clearly lean left or right. Berger thinks that these already well-documented opinions have hindered the growth of the British blogosphere."
Is this guy for real? "fair", balanced"? When the invasion of Iraq took place, the US media fell into line behind Bush almost completely! And the British media was even more slavish in its support of the invasion with studies showing that anti-invasion news coverage totalled no more than 2% of all the mainstream news (mail me for the source of the stats).
William Bowles