About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

  • Click to view arskhach's profile
    Posted December 4, 2008 by
    Yerevan, Armenia
    This iReport is part of an assignment:
    Ask Christiane Amanpour

    Media's Role in Genocide Coverage


    Hi, My name is Arsineh Khachikian. I was born and raised in Washington, DC and I currently live in Armenia, the homeland of my ancestors. My grandfather was a survivor of the Armenian Genocide, as are the grandparents of most Armenians across the globe. In fact, few of my friends have a family tree that extends beyond 3 generations.


    My question is this. What is the extent of research done by media outlets, including CNN, on the facts of genocide when covering a related story. In the case of the Armenian Genocide (as we saw in the coverage of the assassination of Turkish-Armenian Journalist Hrant Dink, as well as last year’s controversial resolution passed in the House Foreign Affairs committee recognizing the Armenian Genocide), we rarely hear the genocide presented as a historical fact, rather as the “alleged” genocide, or “what Armenians say was genocide.” How is that possible when a majority of historians worldwide site the Armenian genocide as a fact, providing amply evidence to support their argument. Isn’t it true that by not presenting these facts, you are opening a forum for denial, which is the precedent that encourages other nations to follow the example, as Hitler followed Turkey’s example when he said, “Afterall, who remembers the annihilation of the Armenians.” Later the Hutus in Rwanda, and now Sudan continue to follow the same example.


    My second question is this. What do you believe to be the media’s role in post-genocide story coverage, as pertaining to the denial campaigns by the perpetrator, which is widely considered to be the continuation of genocide committed.


    Thank you for very important program on this global epidemic.

    Add your Story Add your Story