|
Record number of deaths for expressing
ideas
By Alicia Fraerman
Madrid, Spain, May 3 (IPS) — Last year, merely for doing
their job, 42 journalists were killed and 766 were detained, the highest
annual figures in the past decade, according to Reporters Without Borders
(RSF, Reporters Sans Frontieres).
And the situation of journalists has not improved this year, as the
death toll already reaches 11 with 101 have been arrested, while at
least 250 have been threatened or attacked, and 142 media outlets have
been censored, RSF president Fernando Castelló told IPS.
Furthermore, he said, “The enemies of the press are replacing frontal,
bloody repression with insidious harassment that is in appearance legal,
and with economic pressure and the excuse of protecting privacy with
the aim of deceiving public opinion.”
The annual report presented on World Press Freedom Day by RSF, an international
organization based in Paris, indicates that the independent press is
in danger in Africa and that wars and armed conflicts in some of the
countries on that continent are to blame for much of the decline in
press freedoms there.
“Covering a conflict in Africa is increasingly dangerous,”
according to RSF.
Last year two reporters were murdered in Cote d’Ivoire and one
in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, says the report, adding that
in Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda, Eritrea, and Togo the press has been the
victim of authoritarianism, prompting numerous journalists to emigrate.
RSF maintains that the Americas continue to be a land of contrasts,
as freedom of the press is widely respected, but is persecuted daily
in Cuba, Haiti, and Colombia.
Cuba’s President Fidel Castro tried to put an end to the dissident
movement in 2003 with the detention of 75 people, among them 27 independent
journalists, “for publishing articles abroad and interviewing US
diplomats.”
On the American continent, the most dangerous country is still Colombia,
where five reporters were assassinated in 2003 for their coverage of
corruption cases and of the complicity with armed groups — right-wing
paramilitaries or leftist guerrillas — “which control or are
vying for entire regions” of the country.
The report also notes press problems, though of a lesser degree, in
Brazil, Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico, and Argentina.
In the case of Brazil, in the past month alone, two radio reporters
known for their denunciations of corruption and drug trafficking, were
murdered.
The Committee to Protect Journalists reported the death of José
Araújo, 37, murdered by hired killers in a rural area of the
northeastern state of Pernambuco, and of Samuel Roma, 36, murdered in
Capitao Bado, on the Paraguayan border, in Mato Grosso do Sul state.
With respect to the United States, RSF underlines that the government’s
attitude to press freedoms varies according to the actions of the media
within US territory or outside its borders.
Inside the United States, the situation is largely satisfactory, says
the report. But the US army was responsible for the deaths of five journalists
in Iraq and continues to closely monitor the journalists who visit the
Guantánamo prison (located in a US enclave in Cuba), where hundreds
of terrorism suspects, mostly Arab, are being held.
Among the journalists killed in Iraq following the US-led invasion in
March 2003 were Taras Protsyuk, of the British news agency Reuters,
and José Couso, of the Spanish television network Telecinco.
They died in Baghdad when a US tank fired on the Palestine Hotel on
Apr. 8, 2003, where most of the foreign journalists lived and worked
during the early weeks of the war. There were no Iraqi troops, police,
or militias anywhere near the hotel at the time.
The dictatorships of the Asia-Pacific region have not let down their
guard, says RSF in the report. With 200 journalists detained in 2003,
Asia was the largest prison in the world for news professionals. The
communist regimes and the military junta of Burma punish journalists
who demand freedom of expression or who denounce tyranny, states the
text.
Censorship is a true plague in that region, though there is some room
for optimism as community radio stations and FM broadcasters continue
to gain ground.
In the Philippines, hired assassins killed seven journalists in 2003,
while five escaped attempts on their lives. Only in three countries,
says RSF, is there real freedom of information and expression: India,
Indonesia, and Thailand.
In the Middle East and Maghreb, the non-governmental organization notes
that in addition to lack of independent media, and strong pressure for
self- censorship, the invasion of Iraq and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
have put press freedom and reporters’ safety to a tough test.
Fifteen journalists and two assistants died in 2003 in that region in
the course of their work. Iran continues to hold the most news professionals
behind bars in that region, said Séverine Cazes, RSF director
for the Middle East. Press freedoms have also suffered serious setbacks
in Morocco and Algeria, said the activist.
The report’s chapter on Europe states that a satisfactory situation
continues, as there were fewer cases reported of violation of source
privacy or aggression against journalists.
However, in the former Soviet republics, conditions are increasingly
worse: attacks, detentions, censorship, state monopoly over the print
media, and a lack of pluralism in the audiovisual media.
RSF notes that in Spain the threat of the terrorist group ETA continues
to loom over journalists who do not share the Basque separatist organization’s
point of view. When asked if the 2004 report would cover what happened
in the Spanish media in the wake of the Mar. 11 train bombings in Madrid,
Castelló said it would not.
Early reports on the blasts, which claimed nearly 200 lives, pinned
the blame on ETA, though it was found later that Islamic extremists
with ties to al-Qaeda were responsible.
RSF will not focus on the Spanish media’s coverage of the incident
“because it does not have international relevance,” he said.
“Of course, there was manipulation [of the facts], but it occurred
both in the pro-government and anti-government media, and not to the
extreme that RSF should intervene. Spain has unions, associations and
a justice system that work, and there is media pluralism, where all
of this can be discussed,” said the veteran Spanish journalist
who worked for two decades for the state-run news agency EFE.
The RSF report includes a list of those who the organization considers
“predators of press freedoms.”
In that category are the armed Islamic militant groups in Afghanistan,
Algeria, Bangladesh, Kashmir, Pakistan, and the Philippines; the Colombians
Carlos Castaño, leader of the right-wing paramilitaries, and
Manuel Marulanda, head of the leftist FARC guerrillas; the Basque group
ETA, and the heir to the crown of Saudi Arabia, prince Abdullah.
Also on that list are presidents Hu Jintao of China, Kim Jong Il,of
North Korea, Fidel Castro of Cuba, Muammar Ghaddafi of Libya, Pervez
Musharraf of Pakistan, Vladimir Putin of Russia, Zine el-Abidine Ben
Ali, of Tunisia, and Islam Karimov, of Uzbekistan.
Censorship of ads criticizing ‘war
on drugs’ challenged
Washington, DC, Apr. 28— In arguments in federal
court today, the nation’s major drug policy reform groups urged
a judge to strike down a law that bars local transit authorities from
accepting advertisements critical of the government’s “War
on Drugs.”
“Through its censorship of our ads, the government is hiding an
embarrassing truth from America,” said Graham Boyd, Director of
the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project, one of the groups involved
in the lawsuits. “Marijuana laws are a cruel and expensive failure,
a failure so profound that once Americans know the facts they will demand
a change.”
At issue is the constitutionality of the Istook Amendment, a measure
adopted by Congress last year that cuts off more than $3 billion in
federal funding from local transit authorities that accept advertisements
critical of current marijuana laws. With at least $85 million in jeopardy,
the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority rejected an advertisement
submitted by the ACLU, Change the Climate, the Drug Policy Alliance,
and the Marijuana Policy Project that criticizes marijuana laws.
The rejected advertisement shows a group of ordinary people standing
behind prison bars under the headline, “Marijuana Laws Waste Billions
of Taxpayer Dollars to Lock Up Non-Violent Americans.”
“The ad suggests a new way of thinking about how to address the
issues of illegal drugs in this country,” said Joe White, Executive
Director of Change the Climate. “But the government is so afraid
that Americans will start thinking critically about our drug laws, that
it has resorted to violating the Constitution.”
The Istook Amendment comes in the wake of a fiscal crisis for the Washington
Metro, which has reported that it needs $1.5 billion over the next six
years for maintenance and day-to-day functioning. Richard White, CEO
of the Washington Metro and a defendant in one of the lawsuits, recently
told the Washington Post, “We’re talking about a systemic
service meltdown condition as early as three years from now… It’s
a death spiral.”
“Today, it’s the government trying to censor ads that present
an alternative to the failed drug war. Tomorrow it could be gagging
organizations that are critical of US environmental policy,” said
Bill Piper, Director of National Affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance.
“This isn’t just about drug policy-freedom of speech is on
the line.”
The lawsuits, ACLU, et al v. Mineta and ACLU, et al v. White, ask the
court to declare the Istook Amendment unconstitutional and to order
the Washington Metro system to accept the groups’ paid advertisement.
“The government is afraid to let private groups buy ad space to
say ‘Wait a minute. This isn’t working,’” said Steve
Fox, Director of Government Relations for the Marijuana Policy Project.
“The only purpose of this law is to stifle otherwise protected
debate.”
The same groups that sought to run the advertisement filed the lawsuits.
They are represented by the law firm Arnold & Porter LLP, which
will present oral arguments on their behalf in federal court today.
The lawsuits name Norman Y. Mineta, US Secretary of Transportation,
and Richard White, the CEO of WMATA, as defendants.
“Congress is trying to block needed political change by censoring
speech that gives the public the facts about drugs and drug laws,”
said Arthur B. Spitzer, Legal Director of the ACLU of the National Capital
Area. “All messages should be allowed to compete in the marketplace
of ideas. That’s what America is about.”
Source: American Civil Liberties Union
‘No oomph and guts’ in the
media?
By Wilson Johwa
Bulawayo, May 1 (IPS) — Even within its own ranks, Zimbabwe’s
ruling party has shown it is intolerant of ambitions hinting at expansion
of the tiny independent press.
It counts for very little that the government already controls all
broadcast media, and that reporters who work for privately-owned publications
live in fear of arrest and harassment.
Last week a member of parliament (MP) was suspended from ZANU-PF (
Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front) for allegedly courting
the publishers of the country’s only independent daily newspaper,
which was forcibly closed by the government seven months ago. Very
popular with readers, The Daily News was a thorn in the side of President
Robert Mugabe’s government which accused it of being an opposition
mouthpiece.
Additionally, the journalist-turned-legislator -- Kindness Paradza
-- is accused of seeking British funds in a bid to acquire a controlling
stake in a weekly newspaper that he helped set up almost two years
ago. Britain, the former colonial power in Zimbawe, has had opprobrium
heaped on it by Mugabe, who views it as having spearheaded Zimbabwe’s
international isolation.
The country has been uncomfortably pinned in the spotlight since the
start of 2000, when the seizure of white-owned farms by so-called
war veterans gained international attention. Reports of political
violence, two problematic elections and wide-spread food shortages
have done little to remove Zimbabwe from the headlines.
Paradza is also being held to account for speaking out against repressive
media laws in his maiden speech to parliament a month ago.
The MP’s suspension, says Abel Mutsakani of the Independent Journalists
Association of Zimbabwe, confirms what is now well-known. “It’s
more of the same, what we’ve seen in the last 12 months, where
the government wants to control the media -- even sacrificing one
of their own.”
As the international community prepares to mark World Press Freedom
Day (May 3), the fuss surrounding Paradza’s business plans has
again focused attention on how the media, like other institutions
in Zimbabwe, have been emasculated and politicized by the government.
The Vice-President of the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists, Njabulo Ncube,
says since the same event was observed last year, media freedom in
the Southern African country has been eroded to an even greater extent
than was previously the case.
Three pieces of legislation, especially that compelling both journalists
and media houses to register under a state-appointed commission, have
made it difficult for independent voices to be heard.
“AIPPA [the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act]
directly resulted in the closure of The Daily News, throwing into
the streets over 200 media workers,” observes Ncube.
However, a journalism lecturer at the National University of Science
and Technology, Ronit Loewenstern, believes reporters have only themselves
to blame for the dearth of press freedom in the country.
She says that in South Africa, journalists working in the 1980s disregarded
race and color to stand up to media repression during the Apartheid
era.
But, she adds, by the time her journalism students are in the second
year of a four-year course, many have lost hope and elected to pursue
a career in another sector of the communication industry: “There
is no oomph and guts in the media fraternity in Zimbabwe.”
The results of a 2003 global survey released last month by a Washington-based
media watchdog, Freedom House, point to a different reality.
The survey lumps Zimbabwe with Eritrea and Equatorial Guinea, concluding
that reporting conditions in all three states remain dire. It says
authoritarian governments there use legal pressure, imprisonment and
other forms of harassment to severely curtail the ability of independent
outlets to report freely.
In a development guaranteed to raise the temperature of ZANU-PF officials,
it now appears that the information void created by the closure of
The Daily News is being filled by foreign broadcasts. One of them
is Voice of America’s (VOA) “Studio Seven” program,
specifically meant for Zimbabweans.
This weekend, Studio Seven extended its week-day news programs to
Saturday and Sunday. Broadcasting in all three of Zimbabwe’s
national languages, the hour-long shows were launched last year.
With parliamentary elections 10 months away however, the government
is readying for a fight.
Information Minister Jonathan Moyo -- last year’s recipient of
the Golden Raspberry award for enemies of press freedom -- has labeled
Studio Seven “subversive” and threatened its stringers with
unspecified dire consequences. He has also criticized neighboring
Botswana for hosting a VOA transmitter.
Although they create opportunities for a few journalists, such foreign-based
stations are no substitute for a solid and diverse media in Zimbabwe
itself.
Ncube says as a result of the present narrow media landscape, reporters’
ability to bargain for better salaries has also been severely undercut.
“We’re now in a cul-de-sac,” he observes. “We
simply accept whatever employers offer us.”
This situation, he says, has given rise to “brown envelope journalism”
where reporters approach business people and personalities for funding,
to give them publicity. In this scenario, female journalists appear
particularly vulnerable to abuse, Ncube adds.
The plight of The Daily News’ ex-employees further illustrates
the lack of job opportunities.
In a statement on Apr. 30, the workers detailed the financial hardship
they had endured, despite an undertaking made by the publisher to
continue paying their salaries for up to two years.
And, there is little prospect of the media losing its shackles soon.
The only beacon of hope is talk that another independent daily newspaper
has been registered and will be launched before end of the year.
What Sinclair didn’t want you
to see on Nightline
Apr. 30— ABC’s Nightline broadcast
Apr. 30 was devoted to reading a list of US soldiers who have died
in Iraq. But some viewers weren’t able to see the program: The
Sinclair Broadcast Group, which owns several ABC affiliates, announced
that it would not air Nightline on its stations.
A statement on Sinclair’s web site explains: “While the
Sinclair Broadcast Group honors the memory of the brave members of
the military who have sacrificed their lives in the service of our
country, we do not believe such political statements should be disguised
as news content. As a result, we have decided to preempt the broadcast
of Nightline...on each of our stations which air ABC programming.”
Sinclair’s rationale for the censorship of Nightline is explicitly
political: “Before you judge our decision, however, we would
ask that you first question Koppel as to why he chose to read the
names of the 523 troops killed in combat in Iraq, rather than the
names of the thousands of private citizens killed in terrorists attacks
since and including the events of Sept. 11, 2001. In his answer, you
will find the real motivation behind his action scheduled for [Apr.
30].” A response statement from ABC said that the network did
broadcast a list of the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks on the one-year
anniversary.
This is not the first time that Sinclair’s conservative political
leanings — 98 percent of its 2004 political contributions have
gone to Republicans (MediaChannel.org, 4/29/04) — have led the
company into journalistic controversy. In February, a Sinclair news
crew was sent to Iraq to cover the “good news” that was
allegedly going unreported in the rest of the media (Baltimore Sun,
2/18/04). And shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, Sinclair executives
required stations to air editorial statements in support of the Bush
administration (Extra!, 11-12/01). Sinclair controls about 60 TV stations,
including eight ABC affiliates, some in substantial population centers:
WSYX — Columbus, OH; KDNL — St. Louis, MO; WXLV — Greensboro,
Winston-Salem, High Point, NC; WEAR — Mobile, AL & Pensacola,
FL; WLOS — Asheville, NC; WCHS — Charleston and Huntington,
WV; WGGB — Springfield, MS; WTXL — Tallahassee, FL.
It’s possible that some Nightline viewers, faced with how many
American lives have been lost in Iraq, may become opposed to the war.
It’s also possible that others saw the show as an argument for
fighting and winning in Iraq, so that these deaths will not have been
in vain.
Journalists, however, should not decide whether to report the reality
of a war depending on what they assume the political reaction might
be. The American people need full reporting on the situation in Iraq
— including the toll in US and Iraqi lives — so that they
can make an informed judgment on whether the war’s goals are
worth the costs. Sinclair may claim that it honors the memory of the
dead members of the military. It evidently prefers, however, that
they should be remembered without being mentioned — a dishonorable
position for a media outlet in a democratic country.
Source: FAIR
Boston radio host says ‘kill all
muslims’
Washington, DC, Apr. 23 — The Council on
American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called for the termination
of a Boston-area radio talk show host who allegedly said, “Let’s
kill all Muslims.” CAIR made that demand after receiving a complaint
from a concerned Muslim who heard WTKK-FM host Jay Severin’s
afternoon program. WTKK-FM General Manager Matt Mills told CAIR that
in a discussion about how Severin claims Muslims want to take over
America, even if it takes centuries, Severin said, “I’ve
got an idea, let’s kill all Muslims.”
“I have spoken to Jay Severin and he knows we take this seriously
and do not condone offensive remarks toward any religious groups and
he will be apologizing on his show Monday afternoon,” said Mills
in an e-mail. “He did not intend to offend anyone.”
Yet, Mills also acknowledged to CAIR that if Severin had said the
same thing about African-Americans that he would no longer be on the
air.
“We believe a mere reprimand and apology is insufficient and
demand that he be taken off the air as he would be if he had attacked
any other religious or ethnic group,” said CAIR’s Chairman
of the Board Omar Ahmad.
Ahmad added that such hateful rhetoric has a direct impact on the
American Muslim community. He cited examples of anti-Muslim incidents
that took place recently in Texas, such as a shooting at a Denton
mosque, an e-mailed threat against the Islamic Center of El Paso,
arson attacks on Muslim businesses in San Antonio and racist graffiti
scrawled on the interior of a Lubbock mosque.
The alarming increase of hate crimes against the Muslim community
required CAIR today to issue a security advisory for American Muslims.
The “Muslim Community Safety Kit” booklet, designed to help
local Islamic leaders protect institutions and individuals, may be
obtained by e-mailing pubs@cair-net.org or calling 202-488-8787.
Last week, CAIR announced a new campaign designed to counter anti-Muslim
hate on radio talk shows. The campaign, called “Hate Hurts America,”
is based on the premise that the increasing attacks on Islam by talk
show hosts harm the United States by creating a downward spiral of
interfaith mistrust and hostility.
CAIR, America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group, is headquartered
in Washington, D.C., and has 26 regional offices and chapters nationwide
and in Canada.
Source: PRNewswire
|
