Posts Tagged ‘Russia’


Swedish radio chief calls for more protection for journalists

Roy Greenslade at The guardian published an open letter from the director general of Swedish Radio, Cilla Benkö, calling for the safety of journalists to be taken more seriously by the international community.

He put the whole letter in his latest March 11 column. A portion of that letter is posted below. To see the whole letter and Greenslade’s column, click here.

Cilla Benkö

Enough is enough. Every policy initiative that can be taken to secure the safety of journalists, both here in Sweden and internationally, through bodies such as the UN and the EU, must now be implemented. This is an urgent matter if we want to protect the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression.

On Wednesday (9 March), our correspondent, Maria Persson Löfgren, was attacked while on assignment in the Russian state of Ingushetia. On 11 March 2014, our Asia correspondent, Nils Horner, was murdered in Kabul. Two completely unacceptable events.

Both Maria and Nils were engaged in normal assignments for a foreign correspondent. The job is demanding, tough and sometimes associated with danger.

We should be thankful that there are people who want to engage in this kind of journalism, because it’s through them that the rest of us learn about a reality that is often more complicated than those governing in a country would suggest.

The issue of the safety of journalists must be taken more seriously at an international level. Ceasing to cover troubled areas is not an option. In an increasingly digitised world, it is very easy for extremist groups and others to spread their propaganda.

For rest of letter click here.

 

Confronting shadows and corruption-media freedom linked

Kudos to an Australian news team that decided to confront members of the Chinese security forces who where shadowing the journalists.

Chinese “minders” filmed by news crew

Russia signs anti-bribery accord, but still shackles best method to fight corruption: free and independent media.

Russia, corruption and press freedom

 

RSF Internet Enemies List: Few Surprises

First posted at Journalism, Journalists and the World

Reporters Without Borders has a great list of governments that are “Enemies of the Internet.”

And there are no real surprises. The hostility governments in places such as Burma, China, Cuba exhibit toward freedom of speech, press and expression is well documented. What I like about the RSF Internet list is the detail it provides about those governments.

For example in China we learn more than just the Great Firewall is functioning but also that the number of Internet users in the country exceeds the population of the United States (384 million Chinese Internet users v. 308 million people in the United States.)

We also learn that the average cost of one hour of Internet cafe time is US$2/hour. To me this is interesting because the average MONTHLY wage in China is US$219-274.

And we learn that 72 “netizens” are in Chinese jails, among them Nobel Peace Prize winner Lio Xaiobo who is serving an 11-year jail term for writing his opinions on the Internet and helping launch Charter 08.

We also see more details about the censoring of information in China and its impact on a generation of Chinese:

On the eve of the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square events, a dozen websites such as Twitter, YouTube, Bing, Flickr, Opera, Live, WordPress and Blogger were blocked. The information blackout has been so well-enforced for the last 20 years that the vast majority of young Chinese citizens are not even aware that the events of June 1989 ever happened.

Other countries listed as enemies of the Internet are:

  • Burma: Two high-ranking government officials sentenced to death for having e-mailed documents abroad: Net censorship is a serious matter in Burma. Massive filtering of websites and extensive slowdowns during times of unrest are daily occurrences for the country’s Internet users.
  • Cuba: Despite a few improvements, Internet access actually remains beyond the reach of most of the population because of its high cost and low connection speeds. The regime, which maintains two parallel network, is now taking aim at a small blogger community that is becoming increasingly active.
  • Egypt: Since early 2007, the government has been reinforcing Web surveillance in the name of the fight against terrorism, under the iron fist of a special department of Egypt’s Ministry of Interior. Facebook is monitored, rather than blocked, so that activists can be observed or arrested. Authorities are monitoring their people’s emails and telephone calls without any court order, by virtue of the Telecommunications Law, which requires Internet service providers to supply them with the necessary surveillance services and equipment.
  • Iran: Censorship is a core part of Iran’s state apparatus. Internet surveillance has been centralized, thereby facilitating implementation of censorship.
  • North Korea: Let’s start with an average charge for one hour’s connection at a cybercafé at US$8.19 with an average monthly salary of US$17.74. The large majority of the population is not even aware that the Internet exists. An extremely limited Intranet has been created, but few can access it.
  • Saudi Arabia: Websites that broach the subject of religion, human rights or positions taken by the opposition are rendered inaccessible. Far from denying it, the authorities maintain that their censorship decisions are justified and claim to have blocked some 400,000 websites.
  • Syria: The country is reinforcing its censorship of troublesome topics on the Web and tracking netizens who dare to express themselves freely on it. As a result, social networks have been particularly targeted by omnipresent surveillance.
  • Tunisia: The Internet is seen as a potential threat to the country’s stability and image and is thus the target of pernicious censorship. Very strict filtering, opponent harassment and Big Brother-like surveillance enable the authorities to keep tight control over the news media.
  • Turkmenistan: Very strict filtering is now focused on critical publications likely to target local users and potential dissidents. Opposition websites and regional news sites covering Central Asia are also blocked. YouTube and LiveJournal are rendered inaccessible.
  • Uzbekistan: This country is deprived of independent media outlets. The authorities impose a very strict Internet censorship, while refusing to admit it publicly. Website filtering, sanctions and intimidation are used against potential critics of the regime. Netizens have learned to practice self-censorship.
  • Vietnam: The government claims to filter only content that is obscene or endangers national security, but censorship also affects opposition websites or those that are in any way critical of the regime. Censorship primarily involves blocking website addresses, and particularly concerns sites in Vietnamese.

Then there are countries the RSF is keeping an eye on, such as Australia:

Under the guise of fighting child pornography, the government wants to set up a filtering system never before seen in a democracy. The State of South Australia has passed a law prohibiting online anonymity in an electoral context.

And South Korea:

The authorities are using the criminalization of defamation against their critics and do not hesitate to make examples of them. Since June 2008, a dozen Web surfers have been briefly arrested and interrogated for having posted online comments critical of the government within the context of these demonstrations.

New international press freedom index out and why it’s important

First posted at Journalism, Journalists and the World.

Reporters Without Borders came out with their annual Press Freedom Index this week.

Press Freedom Index 2010

Unfortunately, things don’t look all that great for press freedom around the world. And that could also mean more economic and human rights problems.

First let’s look at the RSF report and what it has to say about press freedom in the world.

According to RSF, Europe was a major disappointment.

Reporters Without Borders has repeatedly expressed its concern about the deteriorating press freedom situation in the European Union and the 2010 index confirms this trend. Thirteen of the EU’s 27 members are in the top 20 but some of the other 14 are very low in the ranking. Italy is 49th, Romania is 52nd and Greece and Bulgaria are tied at 70th. The European Union is not a homogenous whole as regards media freedom. On the contrary, the gap between good and bad performers continues to widen.

It is worth noting that, for the first time since the start of the index in 2002, Cuba is not one of the 10 worst countries. (It is #13 from the bottom.)

This is due above all to the release of 14 journalists and 22 activists in the course of the past summer. But the situation on the ground has not changed significantly. Political dissidents and independent journalists still have to deal with censorship and repression on a daily basis.

So we are not really looking at anew opening in Cuba, just the political leadership looking for a few global brownie points.

Brazil moved up 12 points in its freedom ranking largely due to real progress in media law and free press practices. It leads the way for freedom among the so-called BRIC countries as well.

Economic growth does not mean press freedom

The BRICs – Brazil, Russia, India and China – may all be at a roughly similar stage of economic development but the 2010 index highlights major differences in the press freedom situation in these countries. Thanks to favourable legislative changes, Brazil (58th) has risen 12 places in the past year, while India has fallen 17 places to 122nd. Russia, which had a particularly deadly preceding year, is still poorly placed at 140th. Despite an astonishingly vibrant and active blogosphere, China still censors and jails dissidents and continues to languish in 171st place. These four countries now shoulder the responsibilities of the emerging powers and must fulfil their obligations as regards fundamental rights.

Brazilian journalists are rightfully proud of the efforts they have made in the past couple of years to remove the last vestiges of the dictatorship years.

Yes, there is still a long way to go, but the progress has been impressive.

The bottom 10 countries on the RSF list should not surprise anyone:

169 Rwanda
170 Yemen
171 China
172 Sudan
173 Syria
174 Burma
175 Iran
176 Turkmenistan
177 North Korea
178 Eritrea

Sometimes it is interesting to compare the rankings of one group with another. In this case, I will take the bottom 10 from the RSF and compare their rankings with the Freedom House Press Freedom Index and the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index.

Freedom House takes other issues into consideration when making its evaluation. (In my opinion, it is a more thorough reading of press and media freedom because it does take into consideration political freedoms and human rights violations as well.)

The Transparency International corruption index has been a great source of information about corruption around the world. In general, you see more corruption where the media are more constrained.

RSF Ranking Country Freedom House Transparency Intl.
Worst=178 RSF Bottom 10 Worst=196 Worst=180
169 Rwanda 178 89
170 Yemen 173 154
171 China 181 79
172 Sudan 165 176
173 Syria 178 126
174 Burma 194 178
175 Iran 187 168
176 Turkmenistan 194 168
177 North Korea 196 No Data
178 Eritrea 192 126

The countries with numbers in red indicate “membership” in the bottom 10 of their respective indexes.

So there is a clear consensus of who the bad guys are when it comes to press freedom.

There is also a pretty clear correlation between the lack of press freedom and corruption.

Just in case anyone asks why Americans should be concerned about press freedom in other countries, besides the usual “if one person is not free no one is free” philosophical answer, you can also point out that without a free press corruption and all its evils is allowed to flourish.

Update: First Caucasian Channel expected back on the air

Update on the Georgian Russian-language satellite dispute.
Noted in SPJ/IJC report: Russian-language station in Georgia suspended

Reported on Media.ge

First Caucasian Channel to Resume Broadcasts through American Satellite

The Georgian Public Broadcasting (GPB) is conducting talks with the Hot Bird satellite network in regard to the Georgia’s Russian-language First Caucasian channel.

“It’s an American provider company being conducted the talks with,” GPB staff reported.

Hot Bird launched talks when EUTELSAT declared of its final denial to GPB over concluding the contract on the First Caucasian channel. On February 2 the Georgian side sued the French company at the Paris court.

EUTELSAT cut the GPB-based First Caucasian two-week trial broadcasting on January 28.

According to the Georgian side taking the First Caucasian channel off was due to the Russian pressure; EUTELSAT though cited the expiration of the trial period as a reason.

“From our viewpoint Russia has got less levers of pressure upon the American company,” GPB staff told Media.ge.

The contract to be concluded with Hot Bird in the near future, according to the staff, provides the First Caucasian broadcasts across Europe.

The TV broadcasts are currently available via the Internet.

Russian-language station in Georgia suspended

I just posted a lengthy piece on a new war of words between Georgia and Russia. Rather than repeat it all here, I am posting the first few grafs and then a link to my site on international journalism.

Russian-language station in Georgia suspended

We all know there is no love lost between Georgia and Russia.

Remember that little war in 2008?

Oh, and remember that this same war was seen as the first cyber-war?

Now, we have accusations of Russian pressure to censor news from Georgia. (See below for a list of related articles.)

Georgian Public Broadcast had its new Russian-language channel, First Caucasian, carried on Eutelsat for the last half of January.

And here is where it gets interesting. The Georgians say the channel was dropped because of pressure from Moscow. The satellite company says the two-week run was just a trial.

More at Journalism, Journalists and the World

No surprise, but glad to see more reporting on Russian government control of media.

Soviet-era media control persists

From Variety 11/29/09

It’s nice to see different U.S. media outlets talking about the growing problem of how the Russian government seems to be working harder and harder to get the news organizations under its thumb.

As the article points out, there was a brief period of freedom in the 90s. That was quickly smashed.

Journalists in Russia are not only facing growing censorship of their work, they are also facing the ultimate form of censorship: death. And the government has done little to arrest, try and jail the killers.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, odds are on the side of murders of journalists in Russia. Fifty-two journalists have been killed in Russia since 1992, 32 were murdered and 32 killed with impunity.

Killers are convicted in just one in 17 slayings since 2000. Victims include acclaimed reporter Anna Politkovskaya

The issue of unsolved killings hit the media outside Russia. The CPJ prepared a special report on the topic: Anatomy of Injustice: The Unsolved Killings of Journalists in Russia.

First published at Journalism, Journalists and the World.

Connect

Twitter Facebook Google Plus RSS Instagram Pinterest Pinterest LinkedIn


© Society of Professional Journalists. All rights reserved. Legal

Society of Professional Journalists
Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center, 3909 N. Meridian St., Indianapolis, IN 46208
317/927-8000 | Fax: 317/920-4789 | Contact SPJ Headquarters | Employment Opportunities | Advertise with SPJ