Nice job by the Los Angeles Times in today’s paper. (MEXICO UNDER SIEGE: Crime reporters face deadly perils)

It would be nice if other newspapers would pick up this story. It shows a side to the drug war along the Mexico-US border that many don’t see. Too often the stories about the battles along the border are short and simplistic, i.e X dead in drug related shoot out.

This story looks into the impact the intimidation by the cartels and the government has on the area media. And how that affects what the people in the area are able to see and hear in the news.

First published in Journalism, Journalists and the World.

The National Press Club joined with other journalism groups in condemning the attack on the press club in Peshawar, Pakistan.

• NPC Condemns Terrorist Attack on Peshawar’s Press Club
• CPJ: Bomber strikes press building in Peshawar

From the CPJ statement:

Pakistan ranks as the fourth deadliest country in the world for journalists this year—behind the Philippines, Somalia, and Iraq, according to CPJ research.

Marc Lynch, blogger for Foreign Policy magazine and originator of the Abu Aardvark blog on Arab media, has an interesting blog entry this week.

He discusses how the Arab media have handled the Christmas airline bombing attempt over Detroit. Granted his blog was published before Al-Qaeda took credit for the action. It is still an interesting look at how other media look at the news.

One of the real stories here, which has gone largely unremarked in the coverage I’ve seen, is that the Arab media generally couldn’t care less.

It seems there are other issues that drive the Arab media demand.

When the blog was posted (12/27/09), Gaza was the hot topic in the region.

But Lynch also talks about how relevant AQ is to the Arab audience.

The Arab media’s indifference to the story speaks to a vitally important trend. Al-Qaeda’s attempted acts of terrorism simply no longer carry the kind of persuasive political force with mass Arab or Muslim public which they may have commanded in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.

As I said, an interesting read.

First published in Journalism, Journalists and the World.

Repressive regimes keep trying to control media outlets from good old analog print to the Internet.

And keep failing.

The latest example is Iran.

Foreign journalists were ordered to stay inside. This, the government figured would keep any crackdown against anti-government demonstrators out of the international news. But protesters just started running their mobile phones in video mode and the word got out.

Looking to block Twitter and other Internet sites, the Iranian government even took a page out of the Chinese book on monitoring the Internet by hiring thousands of people to watch what is being said. But that still did not stop the mobile phones.

The Chinese faced a similar problem after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. The Chinese government did let in foreign journalists just after the earthquake so that the world could see how fast the government reacted to the disaster. But what the government tried to block were the subsequent demonstrations by grieving families who wanted to hold corrupt local and provincial officials accountable for the shoddy workmanship in the public schools.

Word of the demonstrations got out by mobile phone. The government tried to cut off the texting portion of the mobile network but to no avail.

Here are some reports about how technology played a role in Iran in not only helping people protest against their government but also in getting the news out.

• The Role of Twitter in the Iran Protests
• Twitter postpones ‘critical’ upgrade to avoid outage during Iran demonstrations
• Use of Censorship Circumvention Services Soars in Iran
  
• Iran demonstrations: Plenty of Internet news, but is it reliable?
• Beijing tightens its grip on the internet
• Beijing cuts broadcaster’s signal amid media crackdown
• China expands Internet controls

Beijing-based CNN correspondent Emily Chang has provided an update on China’s Internet restrictions, particularly those involving social media sites.

Twitter is blocked. Facebook is blocked. YouTube is blocked. And there are many other sites suffering the same restrictions.

In her latest report, Chang briefly profiles a young Chinese citizen who is placing posters throughout the city demanding access to his Facebook account. She then provides an overview of what has happened during recent months related to this issue.

The Liu Xiaobo case is heating up the wires among China watchers. Liu got 11 years for the “subversive” act of calling for change in China’s political system. He was a founder of Charter 08.

One of the most telling lines was offered by one Old China Hand:

Mao’s definition of democratic rights was essentially, “You have the right to hold full and free democratic discussions of why my policies are correct, and how they might be better implemented or improved. Discussion of why my policies are wrong would not be democracy — that would be counter-revolution.”

To my mind that sounds just like what Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales are saying.

Now, maybe people will understand why some of us have major concerns about Chavez and his followers in Latin America.

This is an issue to journalism groups because Liu, and other dissidents, used the Internet in the same way a pamphleteer would have 300 years ago. Or even today. The issue is freedom of speech and press is tightly woven into this case.

We see constant efforts by those with no love of dissent to limit or control all forms of media. Sometimes the efforts are as direct as jailing an outspoken person or forcing a radio station or newspaper to shut down. And sometimes the efforts are subtle such as waging a campaign accusing an editor or reporter with corruption.

The bottom line is the same, shut down alternative voices to the government.

Originally posted at Journalism, Journalist and the World.

Korea Times correspondent Sunny Lee has written an interesting commentary on the future of the newspaper industry.

It’s not only a pressing issue in the United States. Korea and other countries are dealing with similar newspaper challenges, as well.

To adjust to the changing industry conditions, Lee shares six ideas he picked up at the recent World Media Summit in China.

South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported earlier this week that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il “gave the ‘Kim Il-sung Youth Honor Award’ and a special leave to the North Korean border guard soldiers for their ‘feat’ in the arrest of” U.S. journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee of Current TV.

The two soldiers spoke about the incident on the Korean Central TV Broadcasting Station, which is based in Pyongyang. One soldier said he was given a hero’s welcome when he returned home during his time off.

Ling and Lee were reporting on issues related to North Korean refugees and were working along the country’s border with China when they were arrested in March 2009.

After months of detention, they were sentenced to 12 years of forced labor. However, they were later pardoned and released after a visit from former U.S. President Bill Clinton.

Alberto Velazquez of the Expresiones de Tulum was killed last week. (Mexico: Reporter Is 12th Killed in 2009) The CPJ says Velazquez was targeted because of his articles critical of local officials. Earlier the paper had received threats after each article was published.

The killing raised the number of murdered journalists to 12 for this year and to 18 since 1992.

CPJ report: Mexican newspaper owner gunned down in Quintana Roo

Luke Weyland commented on a previous post about the latest actions in Ecuador against the media. I thought it deserved a large response than just using the comment section of the discussion board.

What about press freedom in Peru, Colombia, and Honduras (post June) – journalists journalists tortured and killed by government forces, TV and radio stations closed down. – This happened in Venezuela in Carmona’s 2 day directorship but never under Chavez. Chavez never closed down any press – he merely resumed control over state government own facilities which the media long ago ceased having any legal right over.

We need to go straight to the heart of the matter. Just because there is not a posting about what goes on somewhere it does not mean anyone on this committee endorses the actions of that government. We are a group of volunteers with real jobs that often have little to do with following human rights issues. As we come across issues or as issues come to our attention, we publicize them.

At my own blog, I have been highly critical of any form of government that restricts freedom of the press. Here are two such postings:

• Things just getting worse in Honduras
• No good news in Honduras yet

I have little love for any of the governments in the countries mentioned in Weyland’s posting. Harassment of journalists by government and private organizations continues. Corruption and self-censorship are common in all of these countries. Much of this is because of weak legal institutions in the countries. Some governments are working to make reforms that mean something – like Colombia – while others just ignore the issue. Or aggravate it.

But I want to address the point that Weyland and many supporters of Hugo Chavez constantly say: “Chavez never closed down any press.”

The facts just don’t bear that out.

From Reporters Without Borders

• 34 broadcast media shut down at government’s behest
• Closure of Radio Caracas Televisión consolidates media hegemony

Some of the closed broadcast units were allowed back on the air but only after they agreed to broadcast only the government line.

The issue is press freedom, not whether stations or newspapers are allowed to operate but how free from government interference they are allowed to operate.

Chavez and his fellow travelers in Honduras (pre-coup), Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina have shown all taken steps to tighten control of news outlets and the content of the news.

One other note about why people are concerned about Venezuela. According to Freedom House, Venezuela and Cuba are the only Non-Free countries in this hemisphere.

And just for the record, here are the rankings of these countries from a couple of organizations that pay attention to such things (In each case, the lower the number the better.):