Journalists killed while reporting in Ukraine
The bodies of journalists Roman Nezhyborets and Zoreslav Zamoysky were discovered in April in Ukrainian towns that had been occupied by Russian forces. Nezhyborets was found buried in the village of Yahidne. He had been shot and his hands were tied, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Zamoysky was found on a street in Bucha. The committee has urged an investigation to determine if the two Ukrainian journalists were deliberately targeted for their work.
The committee says at least seven journalists have been killed in Ukraine. This conflict has seen the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians, with fresh horrors emerging in the reports of torture and rape by Russian soldiers and possible mass graves, spurring calls for war crimes investigations.
Tuesday marks World Press Freedom Day, meant to bring attention to the work of journalists, issues facing the media and sadly, to remember those who lost their lives in the course of their mission to bear witness and report the facts.
This war has reminded us just how critical that mission is. We depend on journalists to provide trusted information from chaotic scenes of conflict and tragedy, often against a backdrop of misinformation and deliberate disinformation.
Mstyslav Chernov, a video journalist with The Associated Press, and photojournalist Evgeniy Maloletka remained in Mariupol to ensure there were factual accounts of the Russian actions that laid waste to the city. “With no information coming out of a city, no pictures of demolished buildings and dying children, the Russian forces could do whatever they wanted. If not for us, there would be nothing,” Chernov wrote in a first-person account.
“That’s why we took such risks to be able to send the world what we saw, and that’s what made Russia angry enough to hunt us down,” he wrote.
In a New York Times’ essay, Pulitzer Prize-winning photographer David Hume Kennerly reflected on the images taken by photojournalists of bodies in the streets of Bucha.
“The images of these atrocities were taken by trusted photojournalists. They are the truth, and a record of the mendacity and brutality of the Russian military. As accusations of war crimes mount, these photos are the documentation the world needs to finally understand what is really happening in Ukraine,” he wrote.
Such images and reporting by journalists are vital at a time when Russia is actively spreading falsehoods about the war, dismissing, for example, the deaths in Bucha as a “hoax.” In the wake of the Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine, Russia imposed censorship laws to muzzle facts about the war. Independent news outlets in the country have closed and journalists detained and fined for their reporting on the conflict.
Press credentials — even a “press” badge affixed to body armour — is no assurance of safety for a journalist or a guarantee they’ll be allowed to do their job. It can make one a target for arrest, even for death.
Survey misfire
Several readers complained about a recent online “Have your say,” informal surveys meant to tap opinions on issues of the day. The topic that day was the handgun ban in Ontario proposed by the provincial Liberals. Those who reached out complained the survey was badly worded.
They noted that one survey option expressing disapproval of the ban endorsed handgun ownership for self-defence. “Licensed vetted handgun owners are not allowed handguns for self-defence,” wrote one reader.
Readers highlighted too that valid reasons for owning a handgun — sport shooting or collecting — were not among the available choices. “There are no answers that match the legal and valid reasons that Canadians can own a handgun,” said another reader.
The RCMP lists target practice, shooting competitions and a collection as reasons to acquire or possess a restricted firearm. In “limited circumstances,” it’s also permitted when related to one’s occupation or to protect life.
Good points by the readers. The survey choices should have been better worded.
Spongy moth
Readers will recall that LDD moth, short for Lymantria dispar dispar, took the place of “gypsy moth,” which was considered ethnically insensitive. Now, just in time for spring, the invasive pest will be known as the “spongy moth,” a name adopted by entomologists in the U.S. and Canada. “The new common name was selected to acknowledge the conspicuous, spongy egg masses that the insect produces,” the Entomological Society of Canada explained. Readers can expect to see this new name in articles. BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH IS THE STAR’S PUBLIC EDITOR AND