US Defence Department releases report on fatal shooting of Reuters journalist

first_img Related documents Reuters_20Final_t_20Version-4.pdfPDF – 2.84 MB News Download the US Defence Department report Organisation RSF_en The US Defence Department has released a report confirming that US soldiers were responsible for the fatal shooting of a Reuters journalist three years ago. Reporters without borders shares the report’s view that the US military’s rules of engagement need to be harmonised with the procedures followed by the media in dangerous situations and it pledges to monitor whether the US military takes measures to ensure that such tragedies to not recur. Reporters Without Borders notes that a US Defence Department report released on 16 June confirms that US soldiers were responsible for the fatal shooting of Reuters soundman Waleed Khaled in Baghdad on 28 August 2005. The press freedom organisation shares the report’s view that the US military’s rules of engagement need to be harmonised with the procedures followed by the media in dangerous situations and it pledges to monitor whether the US military takes measures to ensure that such tragedies to not recur.Khaled drove with Reuters cameraman Haider Kadhem to the Baghdad district of Al-Adil to cover a situation in which an Iraqi police unit had been ambushed. When they arrived, their vehicle came under fire from US soldiers who had rushed to the scene and taken up position on the roof of a building. Khaled, who was at the wheel of their vehicle, was shot once in the face and four times in the chest, and died on the spot. Kadhem sustained only minor injuries.“The report’s conclusions leave no doubt about the US army’s responsibility,” Reporters Without Borders said. “But its examination of the behaviour of the soldiers and Reuters journalists reveals each party’s ignorance about the rules of engagement and safety procedures followed by the other party. It is incomprehensible that it has taken five years after the start of the war in Iraq to realise that, the US military did not brief the media about the rules that journalists should respect when facing soldiers during clashes in the field.”The organisation added: “This report does not absolve the soldiers of their responsibility for Khaled’s death. Whatever the circumstances of the Reuters journalist’s death, sanctions should be taken against those who fired the shots.”Safety rules and media-hostile terrain – a dilemma for Iraqi journalistsKhaled’s death could perhaps have been avoided. It happened because the Reuters crew misunderstood the warning signals from the US soldiers and because the soldiers misinterpreted the TV crew’s intentions when they put their vehicle into reverse in order to leave the scene. The US military criticised the TV crew for entering a fire-fight zone without protective equipment and in an unmarked vehicle. According to the report’s conclusions, there was no reason to think the vehicle’s occupants were journalists, and the soldiers said they thought Kadhem’s camera was an anti-tank rocket launcher.Reuters advises its staff to withdraw from combat zones when the risks become too great. But the US military’s rules of engagement regard a hasty withdrawal as suspicious. In such situations, the military recommends immobilising the vehicle until the perimeter has been secured. Kadhem and Khaled had not been informed of this.The situation on the ground in Iraq does not allow journalists to work safely. Armed groups have been operating with impunity throughout the country, targeting journalists, for more than five years. As a result, journalists have to take care not to be identified. In all, 216 journalists and media assistants have been killed in Iraq since the start of the war in March 2003. Most of them were ambushed outside their home or workplace. As a result, many journalists conceal their profession and are unable to go around vehicles bearing their news media’s logo.A total of 10 journalists have been killed by US gunfire in separate incidents since the start of the war. Three of them worked for Reuters. The reports of the military investigations into these incidents concluded in each case that the victims were shot accidentally.Flawed initial investigationAn initial enquiry conducted by a US officer was disputed by Reuters, which had the services of business consultants specialised in risk management. The soldiers who fired the shorts were not told to put their statements in writing and went back to their duties without being forbidden to talk about the case so that they would not come to an agreed version of the incident. The investigating officer also incorporated their statements into his report without trying to question other witnesses. Even more seriously, after the investigation, he lost the original videotape that Kadhem filmed in the minutes prior to the shooting. Nonetheless, the panel that viewed it before its disappearance did not think it contained grounds for disputing the report’s conclusions. The officer submitted his conclusions to his superiors on 31 August 2005, four days after the incident.The US Defence Department ordered the second investigation after Reuters released its own report on the incident in March 2006. A ballistic study, the autopsy on Khaled’s body, the statements of additional witness and an examination of the scene of the shooting, including estimates of the distances between the target and those who fired the shots, resulted in a more thorough report that lends more credibility to the conclusions, which were similar to those of the initial investigation.On the same subject:2.09.2005 – US army recognises firing on two-member Reuters TV crew News Help by sharing this information IraqMiddle East – North Africa News June 19, 2008 – Updated on January 20, 2016 US Defence Department releases report on fatal shooting of Reuters journalist Three jailed reporters charged with “undermining national security” to go further RSF’s 2020 Round-up: 50 journalists killed, two-thirds in countries “at peace” News Follow the news on Iraq December 28, 2020 Find out more IraqMiddle East – North Africa Iraq : Wave of arrests of journalists covering protests in Iraqi Kurdistan Receive email alerts February 15, 2021 Find out more December 16, 2020 Find out morelast_img read more

Continue reading

Hiring times almost double in four years, claims Glassdoor

first_imgRelated posts:No related photos. Research by Glassdoor Economic Research has revealed that hiring times in the UK have almost doubled over the past four years.The employer review site’s report Why is hiring taking longer? shows that the average UK job application took 28.6 days to process in 2014, up from just 14 days in 2010.A similar upward trend was evident for other countries included in the survey, with hiring times also growing in Australia, Canada, France, Germany and the US. After controlling for economic factors including industry sector, job type and geographic area, the length of the recruitment process has grown, on average, by between 3.3 and 3.7 days.French candidates reported the longest wait for employment, at an average of 31.9 days, followed by Germany at 28.8 days and Australia at 27.9 days. By contrast, Canada takes the least amount of time to hire new employees, only taking 22.1 days, on average.Recruitment resourcesRecruitment selection techniquesRecruitment selectionRecruitment process checklistThe longest recruitment processes were reported for jobs in government, academic or senior executive positions.Police officers in the US reported the longest wait (127.6 days), followed by patent examiners (87.6 days), assistant professors (58.7 days) and senior vice presidents (55.5 days).The shortest processes were typically found among entry-level or unskilled job descriptions, with the quickest hiring times reported for entry-level positions in marketing (3.9 days), sales (5.4 days), and account management (5.9 days). Servers and bartenders also reported a short wait of just 5.7 days.One reason for the increased wait could be the higher number of pre-employment screening processes that are being conducted, Glassdoor suggested.These include more background checks, skills assessments, drug tests and personality profiles. Each of these additional employer “screens” was found to add a significant amount to the average time required for candidates to go through the recruitment process, in some cases adding a full week.“Right now hiring delays can represent money left on the table both for workers and employers. There has been surprisingly little research on ‘interview durations’ from the job seeker’s perspective, and how company HR policies influence delays in job matching throughout the economy,” said Dr. Andrew Chamberlain, chief economist at Glassdoor. Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. Hiring times almost double in four years, claims GlassdoorBy Clare Allerton on 18 Jun 2015 in Candidate experience, Labour market, Personnel Today, Recruitment & retention, Pre-employment screeninglast_img read more

Continue reading

Harvard students help show Sox faithful ‘green’ is the new ‘crimson’

first_imgAs President Drew Faust threw out the ceremonial first pitch during Harvard Night at Boston’s Fenway Park on Sept. 22, thousands of spectators  were busy throwing out their recyclable plastic cups and bottles in the bags held by 30 Harvard students who spent the evening volunteering for the Red Sox Green Team.  The students, the majority of whom were freshmen who had expressed a commitment to the environment and sustainability through the Green ’14 program, were joined by the University’s recycling czar Rob Gogan and staff from the Office for Sustainability.The volunteers’ evening kicked off with an orientation from a member of the Red Sox staff and then the eager group of students spread throughout Fenway to collect bags of recyclables. The students said they appreciated the opportunity to help the environment and represent the University while exploring the nation’s oldest ballpark.“The experience was incredible! Not only did we get to explore Fenway Park, but we all got to do something we were passionate about,” said Kristen Wraith ’14.  “It was amazing how well the crowd responded to the Green Team. I had so many people thank me for what I was doing and ask how they could do the same. This is something that I would do again in a second.”This wasn’t the first group of Harvard students to help show the Fenway faithful that “green” is the new “crimson.” Last spring, a group of Graduate School of Education students volunteered on the Fenway Green Team during the Red Sox first home game of the season. The Red Sox organization recruits volunteer Green Teams to collect recyclables during games throughout each season.As part of Harvard’s commitment to building a healthier, more sustainable campus the University has made recycling and composting a priority.  The recycling rate at Harvard’s main campus is 55 percent, thanks in part to the adoption of single stream recycling.  Single stream recycling means all recyclables – from paper products to bottles and cans – go in the same bin. Recently, Harvard Recycling announced that even paper coffee cups and pizza boxes (if the food has been scraped out) can be recycled. Of course, it’s always best to bring your own reusable coffee mug with you to reduce waste and even save money (many cafes on campus offer discounts to students with reusable mugs). Recycling is also incorporated into all home football games at Harvard Stadium.To learn more about single stream recycling, check out Harvard’s September Green Tip of the Month.last_img read more

Continue reading