September 25, 2006

Your Liberal Media

Afghan women's affairs chief dead (credited to Reuters):

Gunmen riding motorcycles shot dead the head of a women's department in the southern Afghan province of Kandahar on Monday, a security official and a relative said.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the shooting of Safia Ama Jan. Taliban insurgents have killed numerous government officials as part of their war against the government and foreign forces supporting it.

Ama Jan was on her way to work, getting into a car outside her house, when the gunmen struck, said her nephew, who identified himself as just Farhad.

"She died on the spot," he told reporters.

Farhad declined to speculate on the identity or motive of the gunmen, except to say: "We had no personal enmity with anyone."

Ama Jan had served as the head of the province's women's affairs department since shortly after U.S.-led troops overthrew the Taliban in 2001.

A security official said no arrests had been made and an investigation had been launched.

Kandahar was the Taliban's main bastion of support during the 1990s when the militia emerged from Islamic schools on the Pakistani border and swept to power in Kabul.

The province is at the heart of an increasingly vicious Taliban insurgency.

Their liberal media: Afghan women's official shot dead

A leading Afghan official working on women's rights has been shot dead in the southern province of Kandahar.

Safia Amajan, head of the province's women's department, was leaving her home for work when a gunman on a motorcycle opened fire, police said.

She may have been targeted by Taleban militants because of their opposition to women taking part in politics and education, the BBC's Dan Isaacs says.

Hundreds have died in clashes between troops and Taleban fighters this year.

Nato-led forces have been battling a resurgent Taleban militia, with some of the fiercest fighting taking place in the south of the country.

Nobody has claimed responsibility for the attack on Safia Amajan.

She had served as head of women's affairs in Kandahar's provincial government since the Taleban government was toppled by US-led forces in 2001.

In her speeches, she had openly condemned the Taleban for their treatment of women.

Her requests for secure official transport and personal bodyguards had not been granted by the government.

At the time of the attack, she was travelling in a taxi.

A spokesman for the UN agency overseeing development in Afghanistan condemned the "senseless murder of a woman who was simply working to ensure that all Afghan women play a full and equal part in the future of Afghanistan".

A little different, eh? Even looking past the idea of quoting UN officials.

Posted by binky at September 25, 2006 09:25 AM | TrackBack | Posted to Media


Comments

Is this bias, or bad reporting?

Posted by: baltar at September 25, 2006 11:26 AM | PERMALINK

Are they disconnected?

Posted by: binky at September 25, 2006 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

I would think so. Good reporting, I think, is a prerequisite for bias (you have to have an accurate picture before you can distort it your way).

Posted by: baltar at September 25, 2006 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

Intentional bias or unintentional bias? Good reporting might be required for the former, but certainly not the latter. And I'm not so sure about the former - you can still be lazy and do what you can to protect your buddies, personal position, etc.

Posted by: Armand at September 25, 2006 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

I think lazy reporting can lead to unintentional bias. CNN failed to get the big picture (poor reporting), and thus undersells the significance of this assassination, thus biasing the story (showing it as less important than it is as a harbinger of what's going on with the Taliban).

Posted by: binky at September 25, 2006 01:37 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?