radiofree.asia

Category: Media Freedom

  • AJF, RSF and other media freedom watchdogs condemn China’s ‘suffocation’ of free press

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Apple Daily has announced its imminent closure in a dark day for Hong Kong’s press freedom and democracy, sparking condemnation by global media freedom watchdogs.

    The Australian-based Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, Reporters Without Borders in Paris and the Committee to Protect Journalists were among the watchdogs that issued statements criticised the crackdown by authorities that has forced Hong Kong’s last pro-democracy daily to close.

    Founded by Jimmy Lai, who is currently jailed on a series of charges including unlawful assembly, fraud and “colluding with foreign forces”, Apple Daily has been a longstanding and well-read publisher for 26 years.

    This closure comes days after more than 100 police raided their offices, arrested five Apple Daily executives and froze their assets on Monday. Another columnist was arrested yesterday afternoon.

    These incidents occurred under a new National Security Law, which critics say restricts the territory’s autonomy and undermines the human rights of its citizens.

    Peter Greste, spokesperson and director of the AJF said:

    “Since the national security law was introduced, we’ve seen: the arrest and ongoing detention of Jimmy Lai as he awaits trial; the freezing of a news publisher’s assets so they can no longer pay their staff; the mass-raid of the publisher’s offices – in numbers fit for terrorists – and the arrest of five executives; and the arrest of a columnist during a company board meeting only days later.

    ‘This is not normal’
    “This is not normal. This is not democracy,” said Dr Greste, who is also the UNESCO chair in journalism at the University of Queensland, Brisbane.

    “Press freedom and democracy cannot function when journalism in the public interest is restricted or denied. Apple Daily was a vocal critic of the government, but that should not be a crime.

    “They were a legitimate news outlet. If a publisher like Apple Daily cannot exist in Hong Kong anymore, it is hard to see what remains of their democracy.

    “The AJF implores Hong Kong to re-commit to the democratic principle of press freedom, release the Apple Daily journalists and employees now in custody, and unfreeze the company’s assets so they can continue to report freely.”

    In Paris, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) deplored the shutdown following the announcement by the parent Next Digital media group’s board of directors yesterday that Apple Daily would cease all its operations from Sunday, June 27, due to the government’s decision to freeze its financial assets, leaving the media outlet unable to pay their employees and suppliers.

    On Tuesday, June 22, RSF submitted an urgent appeal to the United Nations, asking the organisation to “take all necessary measures” to safeguard press freedom in Hong Kong.

    “The tearing down of Apple Daily, one of the last major Chinese-language media critical of the Beijing regime, after years of harassment, is sending a chilling message to Hong Kong journalists,” said Cédric Alviani, RSF East Asia bureau head.

    Erasing press freedom
    “If the international community does not respond with the utmost determination, President Xi Jinping will know that he can erase press freedom in Hong Kong with complete impunity, as he has already done in the rest of China.”

    In New York, the Committee to Protect Journalists also denounced the Chinese government’s “outrageous efforts to stomp out critical voices in Hong Kong”.

    Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia programme coordinator, said: “Even under colonial rule, the people of Hong Kong enjoyed robust freedom of expression. China has managed to snuff that out, in stark violation of firm commitments it made to the people of Hong Kong during the handover from British rule in 1997.”

    Apple Daily, launched in 1995, was one of the last major Chinese-language media to still dare publish information contradicting the Beijing regime’s propaganda and editorials critical of its authoritarian policies, and for many years it was the target of harassment by government and pro-Beijing camps.

    On the 17 June 2021, approximately 500 police officers raided its headquarters and five executive staff members were arrested on suspicion of “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces”, a crime that bears a life sentence under the National Security Law imposed last year by the Chinese regime.

    Apple Daily founder and 2020 RSF Press Freedom Awards laureate, Jimmy Lai, detained since December 2020, was recently sentenced to a total of 20 months in prison for taking part in three “unauthorised” pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in 2019 and also faces six other procedures, including two charges for which he risks life imprisonment.

    On the May 28, RSF submitted another urgent appeal asking the UN to “take all measures necessary’ to obtain his immediate release.

    Hong Kong, once a bastion of press freedom, has fallen from 18th place in 2002 to 80th place in the 2021 RSF World Press Freedom Index.

    The People’s Republic of China, for its part, has stagnated at 177th out of 180.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RSF condemns Hong Kong police storming of Apple Daily – 5 arrested

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned yesterday’s police raid on Hong Kong media outlet Apple Daily’s headquarters — the second time in less than one year — and has urged the release of the five arrested senior staff.

    On 17 June, 2021 independent Hong Kong media outlet Apple Daily’s chief editor Ryan Law, chief executive Cheung Kim-hung, chief operating officer Royston Chow, associate publisher Chan Pui-man and director of Apple Daily Digital Cheung Chi-wai were arrested on suspicion of “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces”, a crime that bears a life sentence under the National Security Law imposed last year by the Chinese regime.

    Approximately 500 police officers also raided the media outlet’s headquarters, forcing journalists to leave the newsroom, seizing their computers, phones and other devices.

    Authorities have also frozen Apple Daily’s HK$18 million assets (about €2 million).

    “Today’s arrests and raid on Apple Daily’s headquarters show that the government will do anything in their power to silence one of the last independent media outlets and symbols of press freedom in Hong Kong”, said Cédric Alviani, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) East Asia bureau head.

    He called for “all charges to be dropped and all defendants immediately released”.

    This is not the first time that Hong Kong police have raided the media outlet’s headquarters: in August 2020, 200 police officers searched Apple Daily’s premises, blocked its journalists from entering the newsroom and obstructed several major news outlets from covering the incident.

    Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai, 2020 RSF Press Freedom Awards laureate, has been detained since December 2020 and was recently sentenced to a total of 20 months in prison for taking part in three “unauthorised” pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

    He also faces six other procedures, including two charges under the National Security Law for which he risks life imprisonment.

    Hong Kong, once a bastion of press freedom, has fallen from 18th place in 2002 to 80th place in the 2021 RSF World Press Freedom Index.

    The People’s Republic of China, for its part, has stagnated at 177th out of 180.

    Pacific Media Watch is an associate of Reporters Without Borders.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Lawyer Clooney welcomes dismissal of second libel suit against Maria Ressa

    By Camille Elemia in Manila

    Human rights lawyers Amal Clooney and Caoilfhionn Gallagher, who lead the international defence legal team, have call on the international community to ensure that all charges against Philippines journalist and editor Maria Ressa are dropped.

    The legal team of Rappler CEO Ressa welcomed the recent dismissal of the second cyber libel charge filed against her.

    Clooney said Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 148 Judge Andres Soriano was correct in dismissing the “absurd case”, reports Rappler.

    Clooney called on authorities to drop the other charges filed against Ressa and overturn her 2020 conviction of cyber libel, a decision that is still pending with the Court of Appeals.

    “One down, eight to go. Prosecutors in the Philippines were right to drop this absurd case, and Judge Soriano was right to dismiss it with prejudice,” she said in a statement.

    “But since none of the cases against Maria have any merit, the authorities should also drop the other prosecutions and overturn her criminal conviction for libel.”

    UK lawyer Caoilfhionn Gallagher, co-leader of the team, also lauded the dismissal of the case and thanked Ressa’s supporters for fighting the “nonsensical charges”.

    Stemmed from Ressa’s tweets
    The second cyber libel complaint stemmed from Ressa’s tweets, which were screenshots of an old newspaper article about the complainant, businessman Wilfredo Keng.

    “Ms Ressa should never have faced an arrest warrant, the threat of imprisonment, and the stress and expense of defending herself over an innocuous tweet and screengrab,” Gallagher said.

    “This [month’s] good news marks one small battle victory in a far larger and longer war.

    “Ressa already faces up to six years imprisonment following her conviction on baseless charges last year, and she continues to be threatened by the Philippines authorities with decades more in prison,” Gallagher said.

    Clooney and Gallagher called on the European Union and the international community to ensure that all charges against Ressa are dropped.

    “She is a journalist who is being pursued for her journalism and she should be allowed to get back to work without further harassment. If not, we should see concrete action by the United States, the EU, and the group of states that form the Media Freedom Coalition,” Clooney said.

    Gallagher said the Philippines benefits from a preferential trading agreement with the EU, on the basis that it complies with international human rights standards.

    Continuing barrage
    “This continuing barrage of cases against Ms Ressa, punishing her for her work and attempting to silence investigative journalists in the Philippines, makes a mockery of this. The EU and the international community must now press the authorities to ensure that all charges against Ms Ressa are dropped and all other proceedings against her halted,” Gallagher said.

    The #HoldTheLine Coalition, composed of 80 international media, human rights, and advocacy groups, also welcomed the dismissal of the case and urged President Rodrigo Duterte and his administration to follow suit and drop all eight remaining cases and charges against the award-winning journalist.

    Ressa faces eight other charges before the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), the Pasig City Regional Trial Court, and the Manila Regional Trial Court.

    Republished from Rappler with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Angry male student mob targets media over UPNG sexual abuse protest

    By Charlie Dumavi in Port Moresby

    Women students at the University of Papua New Guinea silently suffering from persistent sexual harassment and abuse in the vicinity of the Waigani campus have become as national issue with a protest leading to a clash with media.

    The issue was brought to public attention when a woman student was held up by a group of about 10 male students in front of the Toluan female dormitory when a male student grabbed her butt and her breast.

    Her friend posted on Facebook condemning the sexual harassment. The post was shared and attracted much criticism of male students of UPNG.

    Women students then staged a mini peaceful protest at Waigani campus with the media invitated to show their frustration about the treatment from a minority of male students. They also wanted the administration to address the issue.

    Some male students attempted to prevent the protest from happening and the media from reporting it.

    UPNG Student Representative Council (SRC) women’s vice-president Nancy Poglau, leading her fellow students during the protest with tears yesterday, cried out to the student body and the administration that the issue had been faced by female students for many years.

    “We want to address this issue. We want our voices to be heard. We came to UPNG because of our knowledge and why are you harassing us?” she asked.

    “Most male students don’t harass females on the campus but those few who are doing this — please see us as your sisters and mothers.

    “We must put an end to this issue.”


    The UPNG protest meeting today. Video: Michael Kabuni


    Angry mob attacks media
    The forum was interrupted by an angry mob of male students that verbally insulted and attempted to physically harass media workers comprising a journalist, camera man and photographers from several media organisations.

    The media workers were chased on foot by a group from UPNG’s Forum square to the new Student Services office.

    University security and administration staff were present but were overpowered by the mob.

    The mob demanded the media not give coverage to the issue, saying that it was an “internal matter” and would be dealt with by the UPNG administration.

    The media workers left the scene without harm.

    Charlie Dumavi is a PNG Bulletin journalist.

    Some 'good men' students
    A placard displayed by women students shows not all male students at UPNG harass female harassing female students on campus. Image: Charlie Dumavi/PNG Bulletin

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Male students at UPNG attack media for reporting on sexual harassment

    By Jemimah Sukbat in Port Moresby

    A group of male students attacked the media covering a harassment protest by female students at the University of Papua New Guinea today.

    The rowdy group said they did not want the media to report on an issue of sexual and physical harassment by males, claiming it was an “internal matter”.

    Media personnel were made aware of the protest that was to take place on campus.

    They showed up to capture what the female student protesters wanted to addressabout the continuous harassment by some male students.

    After the female students had marched from the Games Village into the university’s Forum square, a group of rowdy male students also entered the area and charged angrily at journalists, cameramen and photographers, demanding that they leave.

    Members of the governing University Council were present, but were outnumbered and were unable to contain the clash as it escalated.

    The frustrated male students said the media did not need to be there to cover an issue that could be solved internally.

    Media personnel were unharmed.

    The PNG Media Council is expected to release a statement condemning the attack.

    Jemimah Sukbat is a reporter for Loop PNG.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Papuan resistance slams Indonesian internet gag amid leader crackdown

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Indonesia has cut off the internet in West Papua to conceal its crackdown on the peaceful liberation movement, says a leading Papuan campaigner.

    Benny Wenda, interim president of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), has condemned the internet gag while Indonesia’s leading English-language daily newspaper, The Jakarta Post, has also criticised Jakarta’s actions.

    In an editorial last Friday, the Post said that many people “suspect that the disruption to the [Papua] internet service in April was actually a deliberate move to silence anti-government critics and activists”.

    “The government has been cutting off Papua from the outside world for decades by measures that included restricting foreign visitors, especially foreign journalists,” the newspaper said.

    Jakarta remained “stubbornly insistent on maintaining its isolation policy for Papua”.

    Erik Walela, secretary of the ULMWP’s “Department of Political Affairs”, is now in hiding, and two of his relatives — Abi, 32, and Anno, 31 — were arrested by the Indonesian colonial police on June 1.

    Victor Yeimo, spokesperson of the KNPB, had already been arrested.

    Stigmatised as ‘terrorists’
    “I am concerned that all the ULMWP leaders and departments inside West Papua are now at risk after Indonesia has tried to stigmatise us as ‘terrorists’,” said Wenda.

    “The head of Indonesia’s National Counterterrorism Agency (BNPT) has stated that it considers the entire liberation movement, including anyone associated with me, to be terrorists.

    “Anyone who stands up to injustice in West Papua is now in danger. Indonesia is cutting off the internet to conceal its crackdown and military operations, continuing its long tradition of concealing information from the world by banning international journalists and spreading propaganda.

    “The only way anyone can currently access the internet inside is by standing near a military, police, or government building.”

    Wenda said Indonesian authorities had tried to label Papuan pro-independence groups “separatists”, “armed criminal groups”, and in 2019, “monkeys’”.

    “Now they are labelling us ‘terrorists’. This is nothing but more discrimination against the entire people of West Papua and our struggle to uphold our basic right to self-determination,” he said.

    “I want to remind the United Nations and the Pacific and Melanesian leaders that Indonesia is misusing the issue of terrorism to crush our fundamental struggle for the liberation of our land from illegal occupation and colonisation.”

    21,000 troops deployed
    More than 21,000 troops had been deployed in less than three years, including last month ‘Satan’s forces’ implicated in genocide in East Timor, said Wenda.

    Densus 88, trained by the West, were also using their skills “against my people”.

    These operations were being carried out on the direct order of the President and the head of the Parliament.

    “My people are traumatised, scared to go to their gardens, to hunt or fish. Everywhere they turn there are military posts and bases,” said Wenda.

    “How long will the world ignore my call? How long can the world watch what is happening to my people and stand by?”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ Saturday Morning: How will the Samoan constitutional crisis end?

    RNZ Saturday Morning

    Samoa found itself in a constitutional crisis this week when the caretaker Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) government locked the doors to Parliament in an attempt to stop prime minister-elect Fiame Naomi Mata’afa being sworn in to office following her FAST party’s one-seat election win.

    Samoa now finds itself in the position of having “two governments” claiming a mandate to rule, and the United Nations is urging the party leaders to find a solution through discussion.

    Cherelle Jackson

    Saturday Morning host Julian Willcox (Ngāpuhi, Te Arawa), broadcaster and Te Reo orator deputising for RNZ presenter Kim Hill, talks to Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson. She is the Apia-based editor of Pacific Environment Weekly and has been covering events surrounding Samoa’s election.

    Jackson also talks about the abuse faced on line by her and other Pacific journalists when reporting unwelcome facts and says it is part of the territory of being a journalist.

    Cherelle Jackson on Twitter

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Māori in the gallery: Coping with daily racism in the Beehive as a Māori journalist

    COMMENT: By Rukuwai Tīpene-Allan

    “Welfare dependent”, “inferior”, “savages”, “natives”…

    Walking through Parliament, I head to my office in the press gallery, passing gilded portraits of reporters who came before, and I recall that the people who adorn these walls were the same people who published some of the most racist rhetoric that has ever been printed, rhetoric that has shaped our society and the way the public perceives my people.

    That’s how I feel every day walking into my office and, while there are days I feel numb to it, there definitely are days when it shakes me and makes me feel alone – because not only does the space not look like me or represent me, it also celebrates those who oppressed the very thought that someone like me could exist.

    A good friend of mine often reminds me that “growth and comfort cannot coexist,” and, ultimately, that’s why I continue to put myself in this uncomfortable environment because I know my people deserve to have their perspectives represented.

    I know growth exists here because, for me, comfort sure as hell doesn’t.

    However, the discomfort level has felt even more oppressive than usual over the past couple of weeks as Māori have been the centre of attention in parliamentary debates, with Māori-focused health initiatives being called separatist.

    Attempts by Māori to claim tino rangatiratanga, the right of self-determination as promised in te Tiriti o Waitangi, are scoffed at.

    High-level political banter follows that basically amounts to: “Shut up, Māori. You’re not special. You’re lucky to have us managing you so just try to conform. Try to be a Pākehā like us and your life will be much better.”

    It’s about me and my whānau
    While some New Zealanders probably see this debate as robust and necessary, I don’t believe they understand the overwhelming effect it has on Māori personally.

    This is because while non-Māori may hear phrases like, “Māori are more likely to be diagnosed with type-2 diabetes than non-Māori counterparts,” what I hear is that I am more likely to be diagnosed with type-2 diabetes.

    When you hear that Māori are twice as likely to die from cancer as the average New Zealander due to inequities in the health system, what I hear is that my siblings are more likely to die of cancer.

    When you hear that Māori will probably die seven years younger than other nationalities, what I hear is that my parents will probably die seven years younger than my friends’ parents.

    To non-Māori, these are just statistics. But for Māori, it is literally a case of life and death.

    So why wouldn’t Māori want to see more money and energy put into Māori health? Why wouldn’t Māori want a health system created and managed by Māori?

    The very existence of disparities is racist. It makes sense that we would want to pull away from a system where it seems that just being Māori is a deficit.

    Stop the rhetoric
    This is the reality we know and understand too well. This is also why hearing non-Māori debate what is good for Māori and whether it’s a viable option for New Zealand is sickening. It’s painful and once again it’s uncomfortable.

    While my years in journalism have taught me to avoid making assumptions, I often think that parliamentarians must know how their words influence and affect the country, resulting in discomfort at best and outright racial discrimination at worst.

    Hearing the echo of their own words in hate speech on the streets must be enough for them to take care with how they speak about Māori.

    If people dying directly from the outcomes of racial discrimination is not enough to stop the rhetoric, what will?

    These thoughts are my reality, the reason I make that lonely walk through the press gallery every day.

    Because the fact of the matter is that while the majority of our national leaders talk about how Māori can be better, I have to live it and be one of the bridges between the political world and the public and ensure that te iwi Māori is informed on the issues that affect us all.

    I don’t get to hang my Māori hat up at the end of the day. Walking away would be the easy option.

    But when that thought rears its head, and when unseen voices whisper at me that it’d be easier to just give up and try to fit in with the Pākehā instead, I remember the wise words of another Māori who challenged the rhetoric of what a Māori should be, and I get on with the job:

    “It is preposterous that any Māori should aspire to become a poor Pākehā, when their true destiny, prescribed by the creator, is to become a great Māori.” – Tā James Himi Hēnare

    Rukuwai Tīpene-Allan is a journalist for Te Ao Māori News. She has also worked on Te Kaea, Kawekōrero and Rereātea. This article first appeared on Māori Television’s website and has been republished on Asia Pacific Report with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The man who kicked the hornet’s nest – focus on the Newsroom police probe

    ANALYSIS: By Gavin Ellis, Knightly Views columnist

    Sometime this week Newsroom co-editor Mark Jennings is due to be interviewed under caution by the New Zealand police because he kicked the hornet’s nest.

    The particular hornet’s nest he disturbed was Oranga Tamariki, a state agency, and the reason it was given a boot was a now-discredited policy called reverse uplifts.

    Jennings took editorial responsibility for a series of ground-breaking investigations led by Melanie Reid that including a video documentary containing shocking images of the “uplifting” of a child.

    The Knightly Views 180521
    The man who kicked the hornet’s nest – The Knightly Views. Image: APR sceenshot

    In a story on the Newsroom website last week, co-editor Tim Murphy revealed the police investigation that named Jennings and the demand that he attend the under-caution interview. “Under caution” means that anything he says could be used in a criminal prosecution against him.

    The story noted that the case highlighted in the video led directly to Children’s Minister Kelvin Davis seeking a “please explain” from the agency and then directing Oranga Tamariki to stop the new policy of “reverse uplifts’” under which Māori children around the country who had been put in permanent care were being summarily removed and taken, in the case investigated, to unknown and distant whānau.

    A Māori advisory panel was appointed from outside the ministry and the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki (OT), Grainne Moss, later resigned.

    However, OT did not take the Newsroom investigation on the chin. In fact, it came out fighting and enlisted Crown Law. That intervention led to a High Court order to remove a video from the Newsroom website and the media organisation being hit with a $13,000 costs order it can ill-afford.

    Finding may be challenged
    The judge in the case did not accept that the matter was of such public interest that it over-rode the (strongly contested) matter of potential identification. While I accept that the identity of vulnerable persons must be protected under both the Family Court Act and the Oranga Tamariki Act, it remains to be seen whether that finding against Newsroom will be challenged. My own – strictly layman’s – view is that it could be.

    Now one of Newsroom’s most senior executives is being threatened with criminal prosecution under the Family Court Act. Jennings could face up to three months in prison or a maximum fine of $2000 under that legislation. Arguably, he might even face a charge of contempt of court which can carry up to six months imprisonment or a $25,000 fine.

    My question is a simple one: Why?

    Why was Crown Law asked to intercede on Oranga Tamariki’s behalf? Why was an injunction sought in spite of Newsroom’s willingness to take steps to avoid identification of children? Why, after the initial aim of removing the video had succeeded, was an order for costs pursued against a fledgling news organisation struggling to maintain financial viability? Why have the police now been involved to pursue a criminal investigation against one of its co-founders? And why has this whole matter been pursued with such vigour?

    My own view is that Newsroom’s investigation was very much in the public interest and that the video was a critical element in bringing about a policy change. I thought the possibility of identifying the children was remote.

    Collectively, my questions have a simple answer: To send a message that, if you kick a state agency’s hornet’s nest, expect to get stung.

    In legal and media circles it has a name: The Chilling Effect. It’s a concept that has been around for a long time.

    Sedition laws as punishment
    One of America’s founding fathers, James Madison, had real concern during the framing of the Constitution of the United States over the use of sedition laws to punish those who criticised government. Madison rightly concluded that it would lead to an author thinking twice before publishing and create a form of self-censorship.

    And so it does.

    In 2015 I swore an affidavit in support of Nicky Hager’s action against the Police when they executed a search warrant on his home following publication of Dirty Politics. It was one of three affidavits on the nature of the chilling effect that searches for the identity of confidential sources would have on investigative journalism.

    Justice Clifford acknowledged the possibility of a chilling effect and noted that the three statements on its nature and consequence went unchallenged by the Attorney-General’s counsel. Of course, Hager won that challenge, and one might have thought Police would have become more than a little reticent about actions against journalists and their lawful pursuits.

    It is doubtful that Crown Law acted against Newsroom of its own volition. It is far more likely that Oranga Tamariki arrived on its doorstep complaining that poor children were being identified and “something has to be done”. OT had genuine concerns for these tamariki and children in general, but there is no doubt its reputation had been damaged by the Newsroom investigations.

    The lengths that it has been prepared to go in pursuing Newsroom – in the complete absence of any complaint to the news organisation by any member of the public over possible identification of the children or their whanau –is  nonetheless puzzling.

    Put simply, there is no evidence that children or whanua have been publicly identified and, in any event, Newsroom has had the publication of that particular part of its investigation banned. It has also incurred a very substantial financial penalty with the awarding of full costs.

    A clear warning
    Assuming the police action stems from a complaint emanating from OT, I am left with a nasty feeling that the result is a clear warning about delving too deeply into the agency’s activities. In other words: Don’t kick the hornet’s nest!

    It has a chilling effect that extends beyond OT. What is to stop other state agencies from threatening criminal charges if they can find a convenient piece of law?

    Convenient laws can be found in unlikely places. Twenty years ago, the British government tried to use the Treason Felony Act of 1848 to hammer The Guardian. The Act contained a clause making it unlawful to call for an end to the monarchy.

    Editor Alan Rusbridger was on a republican campaign when he got hit from behind. The House of Lords ruled the particular clause in the Treason Felony Act had (unsurprisingly) been superseded but the action remains an object lesson on the lengths governments might go to send a message.

    And some of those messages can be quite chilling.

    Dr Gavin Ellis is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications – covering both editorial and management roles – that spans more than half a century. This article is republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Future of AUT’s Pacific Media Centre still up in the air

    By Justin Wong in Auckland

    Auckland University of Technology has denied it is sidelining the Pacific Media Centre in the School of Communication Studies, but it is yet to announce the new leadership following disputes over office space and a succession plan.

    The multi-disciplinary research and professional development unit was founded in 2007 by Professor David Robie with a focus on Pacific media research and producing stories of marginalised communities in New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific region.

    The centre also housed several outlets that provided journalists covering regional issues and Pasifika researchers a space to publish their work, such as the academic journal Pacific Journalism Review and the award-winning Pacific Media Watch.

    Dr Robie retired last December as the centre’s director but the position was not filled immediately. There have been no updates from the PMC’s website, YouTube and Soundcloud channels since, while Southern Cross, the weekly radio segment produced by the PMC on 95bFM’s The Wire at Auckland University has not had a new episode since last August.

    PMC website
    The Pacific Media Centre news and current affairs website … silent. Image: APR screenshot PMC

    Only one month after his retirement, Dr Robie was told that the PMC’s office on the 10th floor of the WG Building had been emptied of its awards, theses, books and other memorabilia, with people involved with the centre not being notified or consulted about the move.

    The Pacific Newsroom reported that the contents, including a traditional carved Papua New Guinean storyboard presented by then Pacific Island Affairs Minister Luamanuvao Dame Winnie Laban to celebrate the centre’s opening in October 2007, had been removed “with the lack of a coherent explanation from AUT”.

    Dr Robie told Debate in April that there was a gap between what was said by AUT and “reality”, saying that the office being cleared out affirmed a lack of commitment by the university for the PMC’s future.

    He also said a succession plan drawn up several years ago that had involved “headhunting” possible successors before his sabbatical in 2019 so the candidate could familiarise themselves with the role before formally taking over, but AUT did not follow through on this.

    The Pacific Media Centre office ... stripped
    The Pacific Media Centre office in AUT’s Sir Paul Reeves Building … stripped clean in February. Image: PMC

    ‘Opportunity wasted by the school’
    “This opportunity was wasted by the school and by the time I left, nobody had been prepared for continuity and the very able and talented people still working hard for the centre were not given support,” he said.

    “This is unconscionable in my view.

    “The school needs to listen to the vision of the stakeholders and treat them with respect.”

    The move was also criticised by journalists and academics, with the influential Sydney-based Australia Asia Pacific Media Initiative (AAPMI) advocacy group calling on AUT’s vice-chancellor Derek McCormack in an open letter in February to ensure that the PMC would continue to be developed “at a time when Pacific journalism is under existential threat”.

    Meanwhile, Dr Camille Nakhid, the chair of the PMC’s advisory board and an associate professor in AUT’s School of Social Sciences and Public Policy, told The Spinoff that she believed the PMC directorship should be advertised externally to “attract a range of qualified candidates”.

    Dr Rosser Johnson, the head of AUT’s School of Communications Studies, told Debate at the end of April that the office “relocation” was due to security reasons and the PMC’s “new space” on the 12th floor of the WG Building has “twice as much office space” for students and affiliate researchers.

    The new PMC leadership had been expected to be announced in April, but has been again delayed.

    ‘Expensive specialist gear’
    “There’s one department who uses specialist gear that is very expensive and we have a very high level of risk around that gear,” Dr Johnson said.

    “We had to consider the space that the Pacific Media Centre was in because it can be made secure through two sets of security doors.”

    The school also scheduled two faculty and school-wide planning days to talk with people who would be affected.

    Dr Johnson said the School had opted for an expression of interest approach within the department to fill Dr Robie’s position because the original plan did not follow protocol. An external hiring freeze imposed by AUT last year and the part-time nature of the PMC’s directorship meant the school preferred to look internally.

    “David [Robie] was asking if it was possible for us to shoulder-tap two or three people to be co-directors but the School is supposed to have a transparent process where everyone who wants to be considered can be considered.

    “If you want to grow and develop a research culture, it makes sense to look internally first.”

    Dr Johnson also said he respected the care and commitment Dr Robie had towards the PMC, but insisted the school had no intention to shape the centre’s future direction, as the responsibility would fall on the next director.

    Justin Wong is a postgraduate student journalist at AUT.  He is also the student news reporter at AUT’s Debate magazine and the presenter of The Wire on student radio station 95bFM at the University of Auckland. This article is republished with permission from Debate.


    This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • RSF asks ICC if Israeli airstrikes on media in Gaza are war crimes

    A building that has housed international media offices including Al Jazeera’s in the Gaza Strip was hit by an Israeli air strike that totally demolished the structure. Video: Al Jazeera

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has called on International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda to include Israeli air strikes on more than 20 media outlets in the Gaza Strip in her investigation into the attacks on the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

    Targeted Israeli airforce attacks have destroyed the premises of 23 Palestinian and international media outlets in the past week, reports the Paris-based global media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders.

    The latest airstrikes destroyed the offices of the US-based news agency Associated Press and the Qatari-based global TV broadcaster Al Jazeera.

    According to the Israeli military, these attacks were justified because the “military intelligence” wing of Hamas, the Gaza Strip’s ruling Islamist movement, had equipment in this building.

    “Deliberately targeting media outlets constitutes a war crime,” RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.

    “By intentionally destroying media outlets, the Israel Defence Forces are not only inflicting unacceptable material damage on news operations.

    “They are also, more broadly, obstructing media coverage of a conflict that directly affects the civilian population. We call on the International Criminal Court’s prosecutor to determine whether these airstrikes constitute war crimes.”

    First Israeli attack on media
    The first Israeli attack on media outlets occurred four days ago, after Hamas fired a series of rockets into Israel.

    In the early hours of May 12, Israeli airstrikes destroyed the Al Jawhara Tower, a 10-storey building in Gaza City that housed 14 media outlets, including the Palestine Daily News newspaper and the pan-Arab TV channel Al-Araby.

    The next day, an Israeli airstrike destroyed Gaza City’s Al Shorouk Tower, a 14-storey building that housed seven media outlets, including the Al Aqsa radio and TV broadcaster.

    The IDF claimed it was “striking Hamas weapons stores hidden inside civilian buildings in Gaza”.

    Israel is ranked 86th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

    Al Jazeera bombed
    On May 15 in Gaza,the offices of the US news agency Associated Press, and the Qatari TV broadcaster Al Jazeera were destroyed by targeted Israeli airstrikes. Image: Mahmud Hams/RSF/AFP

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Palestine: Hold Israel accountable for crimes against journalists, says IFJ

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Media offices have been bombed and Palestinian and international journalists arrested, beaten and threatened by Israeli forces amid escalating violence in Gaza, reports the International Federation of Journalists.

    The IFJ has declared in a statement that it stands in solidarity with the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS) and all Palestinian and foreign media workers that have been targeted.

    It demands immediate international action to hold Israel accountable for its deliberate targeting of journalists and the media.

    On the night of May 11, the Israeli military bombed the Al-Jawhara tower, located in Gaza, which hosts the offices of 13 media institutions and NGOs. The PJS said the attack was deliberate and targeted.

    There were no injuries as journalists evacuated their offices after the Israeli army warned some of the media that the building would be bombed.

    However, media organisations lost their equipment. The IFJ said the Israeli government must compensate the media for their financial losses.

    The offices of the media organisations – the National Information Agency, Palestine newspaper, Al-Arabi Channel, Al-Ittijah TV, Al-Nujaba TV, the Syrian TV, Al-Kufiya Channel, Al Mamalaka channel, APA Agency, Sabq Agency 24, Bawaba 24, the Palestinian Media Forum, the Palestinian Forum for Democratic Dialogue and Development – were completely destroyed.

    The offices of Al Jazeera TV, adjacent to the targeted building, were also damaged

    Spanish news agency EFE’s correspondent in Jerusalem said on Twitter that their correspondent in Gaza had to flee its office at Al Jawhara tower after a warning message from the Israeli military.

    In addition to the targeted attacks against media organisations in Gaza, the PJS reported that the Israeli forces arrested photojournalist Hazem Nasser in the West Bank on May 12.

    Since the beginning of the clashes in Jerusalem, the Israeli authorities have arrested at least 27 media workers in what the PJS and other press groups denounced as a clear attempt to silence media reporting on the ground.

    The PJS said in a statement: “The PJS calls on all the guarantors of freedom of journalistic work, especially the United Nations and its organisations and the Red Cross to provide urgent field protection for journalists, and to activate Security Council Resolution 2222 so to obligate the occupation to implement and respect it.”

    IFJ general secretary Anthony Bellanger said: “We stand in solidarity with all the Palestinian journalists and the PJS during these hard moments. The international community cannot turn a blind eye to the systematic violations of human rights and the deliberate targeting of media and journalists. Urgent actions must be taken to hold those responsible for these crimes internationally accountable”.

    In December 2020 the IFJ submitted two complaints to the UN Special Rapporteurs over Israel’s systematic targeting of journalists working in Palestine and its failure to properly investigate killings of media workers.

    The complaint stated that this was “a violation of the right to life, freedom of expression and in breach of international law and may amount to war crimes”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Samoa Observer: Silence tears down a nation

    EDITORIAL: By the Samoa Observer editorial board

    The caretaker Prime Minister, Tuilaepa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi, thinks the newspaper you hold in your hands is dedicated to trying to “tear down” the Samoan government but the broader economic progress of Samoa.

    So, reader, are you subsidising borderline treachery by having paid for the edition you hold in your hands?

    We certainly don’t think so. This newspaper has been part of Samoan public life for longer than the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) and Tuilaepa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi. And for all these 43 years we have lived by a simple rule: telling truths, however uncomfortable, is the best thing for our country.

    Our loyalties belong to our readers, the people of Samoa, and the truth and nothing and no one else. We consider not telling the truth about failures of government or corrupt goings-on to be the height of disloyalty to one’s country.

    Tuilaepa’s statement was not entirely surprising to us but further evidence that he evidently lives by the saying that consistency is a preoccupation of small minds.

    Many would have noticed that the Prime Minister’s office space at the Human Rights Protection Party Headquarters has as its backdrop several articles from what he this week described (and later retracted as a ) “vile” and “miserable” tabloid.

    It is a strange thing indeed for a leader to have clippings from the pages of what he has described as essentially a magazine subversive to national loyalties.

    Flattering coverage
    There is after all an alternative, government-owned newspaper in this country and one that has not been short at all of flattering coverage of the Prime Minister that could serve as alternative decoration.

    But perhaps he’s taken these pages down following the front-page article of this edition of the Weekend Observer.

    On Thursday, Tuilaepa asserted that it was very typical of Samoans to try and tear each other down even when they are trying to do good.

    “That’s like this paper, the [Samoa] Observer. Everything [they publish] is incorrect, I do not know when they will correct it,” he said.

    “Others try to do something good while others try to tear it down […] just like the Samoa Observer newspaper.

    “Whatever happens, they never report about anything bad from other political parties, but when it is criticism from something very minimal, oh, the [Samoa] Observer would be so full of a collection of irrelevant reports on it.”

    We would beg to differ with the caretaker Prime Minister’s observations. But of course we would; no one would admit to harbouring such a rotten agenda as to seek to sabotage this country.

    So we suggest you don’t take our word for it but rather Tuilaepa’s own.

    ‘Loved’ Samoa Observer
    It was earlier this year that the then-Prime Minister said that he “loved” the Samoa Observer.

    He was mixing his words with a touch of irony but as the old Russian saying goes: in every joke, there is a trace of a joke. And in this case, he was obviously making a serious point about the deficiencies of this country’s state-owned media empire and its inability to ask questions of him during press conferences.

    He reproached the announcers at the state-owned radio station 2AP for deriving all the questions they asked of the Prime Minister from the Samoa Observer.

    “Even though I make harsh comments towards them most of the time, I still love the (Samoa) Observer,” he said.

    “You guys then go and read their articles and use those articles to formulate the questions you ask me during our weekly programmes.

    “That is how you get your questions and that is what makes these interviews interesting, but it’s all because of the issues highlighted in the Observer.”

    If Tuilaepa truly desired scrutiny he would have invited us to ask him unscripted questions at press conferences over the last two years for which he was in power. We never requested nor required what the Government Press Secretariat styled as the special “privilege” of being the only media outlet obliged to submit questions in advance to the Prime Minister.

    Returning scrutiny
    Returning scrutiny to your press conferences, Tuilaepa, is only a phone call away.

    But let’s consider the Prime Minister’s broader accusation. Do we set out to undermine the credibility of our government?

    No, we just do our job every day.

    Politics is about power. Journalism is about asking questions about how that power is exercised to ensure that it is in the interest of the public.

    In recent times at the Samoa Observer, this has involved a range of stories.

    We of course measured the multi-million dollar airstrip at Ti’avea Airport – sold to the public as an alternative to Faleolo International Airport – and found it three times too small to land a passenger jet. There were plenty of questions there.

    In 2019, we asked why the government was continuing to downplay the possibility that Measles had reached Samoa when, as we then revealed, an isolation unit for the disease had already been established at the national hospital.

    Protecting the youth
    More recently, we asked why the government had ignored the advice of its own advisory committee, issued months before, to move quickly to protect the youth of the nation before the disease ravaged the health of Samoa’s children.

    Is it the Prime Minister’s contention that we should not investigate matters such as these and ask questions about them? Especially when, by his own admission, state-media employees are not providing scrutiny or even ideas off their own steam.

    To be frank, we don’t much care. Our responsibility is not to please the powerful – far from it. But it is obvious that governance in Samoa would be much the worse without a critical press.

    But as to the accusation that we are biased, in fact, whichever way misdeeds draw our attention our reporters will follow.

    So it was with our critical editorial and coverage of the Faatuatua ile Atua Samoa ua Tasi (FAST) party manifesto. We asked how the party planned on funding a policy platform that would almost double the size of the national budget at a time when the economy was shrinking faster than ever.

    What about our March front-page story that three electoral committee members from the party were facing charges relating to election forgery?

    (Note the party, which is not happy with our journalism, denied this story but has refused to say what the titles of the people arrested were. Until it does so, we stand by our reporting.)

    Taking on all comers
    The Samoa Observer takes on all comers and has always done so.

    If we sense that the rules are being breached or the people of Samoa are being hard done by we will report on it. If we believe that the ongoing level of poverty in this nation is obscene, as we do, we report on it.

    What is the alternative of a country without a newspaper with a critical edge?

    We see it regularly in the Prime Minister’s press conferences where a sense of apathy radiates around the room as announcers tee up the Prime Minister with questions that fit his agenda.

    Question marks loom particularly large over Samoa’s democracy at the moment. The final institution of government standing between Samoa and dictatorship appears to be the judiciary.

    Tuilaepa has done his best to undermine that institution through casting aspersions.

    But we can assure you that whatever the caretaker Prime Minister says about us will make us think twice about publishing a story.

    This editorial was published by the Samoa Observer on 8 May 2021.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Samoa Observer: Silence tears down a nation

    EDITORIAL: By the Samoa Observer editorial board

    The caretaker Prime Minister, Tuilaepa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi, thinks the newspaper you hold in your hands is dedicated to trying to “tear down” the Samoan government but the broader economic progress of Samoa.

    So, reader, are you subsidising borderline treachery by having paid for the edition you hold in your hands?

    We certainly don’t think so. This newspaper has been part of Samoan public life for longer than the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) and Tuilaepa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi. And for all these 43 years we have lived by a simple rule: telling truths, however uncomfortable, is the best thing for our country.

    Our loyalties belong to our readers, the people of Samoa, and the truth and nothing and no one else. We consider not telling the truth about failures of government or corrupt goings-on to be the height of disloyalty to one’s country.

    Tuilaepa’s statement was not entirely surprising to us but further evidence that he evidently lives by the saying that consistency is a preoccupation of small minds.

    Many would have noticed that the Prime Minister’s office space at the Human Rights Protection Party Headquarters has as its backdrop several articles from what he this week described (and later retracted as a ) “vile” and “miserable” tabloid.

    It is a strange thing indeed for a leader to have clippings from the pages of what he has described as essentially a magazine subversive to national loyalties.

    Flattering coverage
    There is after all an alternative, government-owned newspaper in this country and one that has not been short at all of flattering coverage of the Prime Minister that could serve as alternative decoration.

    But perhaps he’s taken these pages down following the front-page article of this edition of the Weekend Observer.

    On Thursday, Tuilaepa asserted that it was very typical of Samoans to try and tear each other down even when they are trying to do good.

    “That’s like this paper, the [Samoa] Observer. Everything [they publish] is incorrect, I do not know when they will correct it,” he said.

    “Others try to do something good while others try to tear it down […] just like the Samoa Observer newspaper.

    “Whatever happens, they never report about anything bad from other political parties, but when it is criticism from something very minimal, oh, the [Samoa] Observer would be so full of a collection of irrelevant reports on it.”

    We would beg to differ with the caretaker Prime Minister’s observations. But of course we would; no one would admit to harbouring such a rotten agenda as to seek to sabotage this country.

    So we suggest you don’t take our word for it but rather Tuilaepa’s own.

    ‘Loved’ Samoa Observer
    It was earlier this year that the then-Prime Minister said that he “loved” the Samoa Observer.

    He was mixing his words with a touch of irony but as the old Russian saying goes: in every joke, there is a trace of a joke. And in this case, he was obviously making a serious point about the deficiencies of this country’s state-owned media empire and its inability to ask questions of him during press conferences.

    He reproached the announcers at the state-owned radio station 2AP for deriving all the questions they asked of the Prime Minister from the Samoa Observer.

    “Even though I make harsh comments towards them most of the time, I still love the (Samoa) Observer,” he said.

    “You guys then go and read their articles and use those articles to formulate the questions you ask me during our weekly programmes.

    “That is how you get your questions and that is what makes these interviews interesting, but it’s all because of the issues highlighted in the Observer.”

    If Tuilaepa truly desired scrutiny he would have invited us to ask him unscripted questions at press conferences over the last two years for which he was in power. We never requested nor required what the Government Press Secretariat styled as the special “privilege” of being the only media outlet obliged to submit questions in advance to the Prime Minister.

    Returning scrutiny
    Returning scrutiny to your press conferences, Tuilaepa, is only a phone call away.

    But let’s consider the Prime Minister’s broader accusation. Do we set out to undermine the credibility of our government?

    No, we just do our job every day.

    Politics is about power. Journalism is about asking questions about how that power is exercised to ensure that it is in the interest of the public.

    In recent times at the Samoa Observer, this has involved a range of stories.

    We of course measured the multi-million dollar airstrip at Ti’avea Airport – sold to the public as an alternative to Faleolo International Airport – and found it three times too small to land a passenger jet. There were plenty of questions there.

    In 2019, we asked why the government was continuing to downplay the possibility that Measles had reached Samoa when, as we then revealed, an isolation unit for the disease had already been established at the national hospital.

    Protecting the youth
    More recently, we asked why the government had ignored the advice of its own advisory committee, issued months before, to move quickly to protect the youth of the nation before the disease ravaged the health of Samoa’s children.

    Is it the Prime Minister’s contention that we should not investigate matters such as these and ask questions about them? Especially when, by his own admission, state-media employees are not providing scrutiny or even ideas off their own steam.

    To be frank, we don’t much care. Our responsibility is not to please the powerful – far from it. But it is obvious that governance in Samoa would be much the worse without a critical press.

    But as to the accusation that we are biased, in fact, whichever way misdeeds draw our attention our reporters will follow.

    So it was with our critical editorial and coverage of the Faatuatua ile Atua Samoa ua Tasi (FAST) party manifesto. We asked how the party planned on funding a policy platform that would almost double the size of the national budget at a time when the economy was shrinking faster than ever.

    What about our March front-page story that three electoral committee members from the party were facing charges relating to election forgery?

    (Note the party, which is not happy with our journalism, denied this story but has refused to say what the titles of the people arrested were. Until it does so, we stand by our reporting.)

    Taking on all comers
    The Samoa Observer takes on all comers and has always done so.

    If we sense that the rules are being breached or the people of Samoa are being hard done by we will report on it. If we believe that the ongoing level of poverty in this nation is obscene, as we do, we report on it.

    What is the alternative of a country without a newspaper with a critical edge?

    We see it regularly in the Prime Minister’s press conferences where a sense of apathy radiates around the room as announcers tee up the Prime Minister with questions that fit his agenda.

    Question marks loom particularly large over Samoa’s democracy at the moment. The final institution of government standing between Samoa and dictatorship appears to be the judiciary.

    Tuilaepa has done his best to undermine that institution through casting aspersions.

    But we can assure you that whatever the caretaker Prime Minister says about us will make us think twice about publishing a story.

    This editorial was published by the Samoa Observer on 8 May 2021.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • EMTV accuses police of ‘abducting’ newsman over buai market video

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    MTV have accused Papua New Guinean police of abducting staff news man Richard Magei after he reportedly filmed officers destroying buai markets at 5 Mile in the capital of Port Moresby.

    An appeal by the television channel for more information was posted on the network’s Facebook page, saying Magei “was taken by police around midday today after he reportedly filmed them destroying buai markets at 5mile market on his phone”.

    The posting said: “We do not have the identity of the policemen, but we have identified the plate number of the vehicle, as BFG 002.

    “We need your assistance in tracking down the vehicle and Richard.”

    There was no immediate response from the PNG police or the television station’s management but the accusation comes as an independent blog in Australia accused the PNG police of a culture of brutality.

    However, Police Minister Bryan Kramer posted on the EMTV News Facebook page this message: “I’ve raised this issue with ACP [Assistant Commissioner of Police] for NCD [National Capital Distriict] for Wagambie Jnr and he responded [that he had] asked Met Sup to look into it.”

    The chewing of betel nut, the seed of the Areca palm known as “buai” in PNG, is common across parts of Asia and the Pacific. It is a strong tradition in PNG but some authorities have been trying to suppress the custom.

    Police brutality a concern for PNG
    “The use of force by police and police brutality continue to be a concern to the people of Papua New Guinea,” wrote Terence Kaidadaya and Okole Midelit today in the blog of the Development Policy Centre at the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific.

    “Police brutality is only perpetrated by a minority of ill-disciplined rogue police officers and does not reflect the mindset of the Royal PNG Constabulary (RPNGC) in its entirety, but it certainly gives the constabulary a bad reputation,” the blog posting published today said.

    “It creates distrust of the police by citizens and reflects badly on the PNG government.”

    #URGENT: EMTV staff, Richard Magei, was taken by police around midday today after he reportedly filmed them destroying…

    Posted by EMTV Online on Thursday, May 6, 2021

    Kaidadaya is a Foreign Affairs Officer with the Papua New Guinea Foreign Affairs Department and Midelit is a teaching fellow with the political science department at the University of Papua New Guinea.

    The blog cited two examples – one from last month and one from 2016 – to illustrate the fact that police brutality often stems from political influence in policing:

    • “On 18 April 2021, a few police officers attached to the Fox Unit in Port Moresby allegedly forcefully entered [lawyer Laken] Aigilo’s residence at night and assaulted him, and later kidnapped and threatened to kill him before detaining him at the Boroko Police Station. As Mr Aigilo has indicated, this was done without any prior formal complaint lodged against him, and without an arrest or search warrant. He was released the next day after instructions were issued by PNG Police Commissioner David Manning.
    • “A practising lawyer, Mr Aigilo alleges that the police attack raises the question of whether or not police acted impartially or in support of Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas against him. This is because Mr Aigilo’s alleged assault and detainment came a day after he formally lodged a complaint with the PNG Ombudsman Commission against Sir Peter over allegations relating to financial mismanagement of the Porgera mine landowners’ royalty payments totalling up to K1.6 billion over a 30-year period.”
    • “In 2016, students at the University of Papua New Guinea led nationwide protests against Prime Minister Peter O’Neill. Their grievances were many but centred on accountability and the lack of execution of a long-standing corruption charge and arrest warrant against the prime minister.
    • “To quell the protest, armoured police officers went to UPNG and opened fire on unarmed university protesters, [shooting four dead and wounding 13]. The action was viewed by the public as politically motivated in order to protect politicians.”

    Appropriate discipline needed
    Kaidadaya and Midelit said in their blog that “appropriate disciplinary action needs to be taken against officers who either violate their constitutional roles or take sides when it comes to political interests”.

    “Most importantly, politicians need to stop interacting with the police, and stop using them for political reasons,” the authors said. “Perhaps then, trust in, and the credibility of, the RPNGC could be restored.”

    Police at the University of Papua New Guinea during the June 2016 student protests when four people were shot dead. Image: Asia Pacific Report/Citizen Journalist
    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • PNG police release EMTV employee detained over buai market video

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    Papua New Guinean police have released a detained EMTV staff man, Richard Magei, after he reportedly filmed officers destroying buai markets at 5 Mile in the capital of Port Moresby.

    An appeal by the television channel for more information was posted on the network’s Facebook page, saying Magei, a sales executive, “was taken by police around midday today after he reportedly filmed them destroying buai markets at 5mile market on his phone”.

    It added: “We need your assistance in tracking down the vehicle [number given on the posting] and Richard.”

    The television station’s management later removed the Facebook posting apparently while negotiations for Magei’s release were under way. But the incident came as an independent development blog in Australia today accused the PNG police of “rogue brutality” over several incidents.

    Police Minister Bryan Kramer posted on the EMTV News Facebook page this message: “I’ve raised [the Magei] issue with ACP [Assistant Commissioner of Police] for NCD [National Capital Distriict] for Wagambie Jnr and he responded [that he had] asked Met Sup to look into it.”

    The Minister for Communications and Information Technology, Timothy Masiu, appealed for Magei’s release, calling for “common sense to prevail”, the PNG Bulletin reports.

    “I wish for Mr Magei’s unconditional release if he is indeed being held by police,” Minister Masiu said in a statement.

    A senior EMTV news executive later confirmed that Magei had been released without charge.

    The chewing of betel nut, the seed of the Areca palm known as “buai” in PNG, is common across parts of Asia and the Pacific. It is a strong tradition in PNG but some authorities have been trying to suppress the custom.

    Police brutality a concern for PNG
    “The use of force by police and police brutality continue to be a concern to the people of Papua New Guinea,” wrote Terence Kaidadaya and Okole Midelit today in the blog of the Development Policy Centre at the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific.

    “Police brutality is only perpetrated by a minority of ill-disciplined rogue police officers and does not reflect the mindset of the Royal PNG Constabulary (RPNGC) in its entirety, but it certainly gives the constabulary a bad reputation,” the blog posting said.

    “It creates distrust of the police by citizens and reflects badly on the PNG government.”

    EMTV News FB posting 070521
    A Facebook posting by media defender Bob Howarth to colleagues sharing the EMTV News “taken away” item that was subsequently deleted. Image: APR screenshot

    Kaidadaya is a foreign affairs officer with the Papua New Guinea Foreign Affairs Department and Midelit is a teaching fellow with the political science department at the University of Papua New Guinea.

    The blog cited two examples out of many over the past few years – one from last month and one from 2016 – to illustrate the fact that alleged police brutality often stemmed from political influence in policing:

    • EMTV detention appeal 070521
      The original EMTV appeal on Facebook. Image: APR screenshot

      “On 18 April 2021, a few police officers attached to the Fox Unit in Port Moresby allegedly forcefully entered [lawyer Laken] Aigilo’s residence at night and assaulted him, and later kidnapped and threatened to kill him before detaining him at the Boroko Police Station. As Mr Aigilo has indicated, this was done without any prior formal complaint lodged against him, and without an arrest or search warrant. He was released the next day after instructions were issued by PNG Police Commissioner David Manning.

    • “A practising lawyer, Mr Aigilo alleges that the police attack raises the question of whether or not police acted impartially or in support of Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas against him. This is because Mr Aigilo’s alleged assault and detainment came a day after he formally lodged a complaint with the PNG Ombudsman Commission against Sir Peter over allegations relating to financial mismanagement of the Porgera mine landowners’ royalty payments totalling up to K1.6 billion over a 30-year period.”
    • “In 2016, students at the University of Papua New Guinea led nationwide protests against Prime Minister Peter O’Neill. Their grievances were many but centred on accountability and the lack of execution of a long-standing corruption charge and arrest warrant against the prime minister.
    • “To quell the protest, armoured police officers went to UPNG and opened fire on unarmed university protesters, [shooting four dead and wounding 13]. The action was viewed by the public as politically motivated in order to protect politicians.”

    Appropriate discipline needed
    Kaidadaya and Midelit wrote in their blog that “appropriate disciplinary action needs to be taken against officers who either violate their constitutional roles or take sides when it comes to political interests”.

    “Most importantly, politicians need to stop interacting with the police, and stop using them for political reasons,” the authors said. “Perhaps then, trust in, and the credibility of, the RPNGC could be restored.”

    Police at UPNG in 2016 shooting
    Police at the University of Papua New Guinea during the June 2016 student protests when four people were shot dead. Image: Asia Pacific Report/Citizen Journalist

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Media alliance calls in Jokowi’s pledge to allow foreign journalists into Papua

    By Achmad Nasrudin Yahya in Jakarta

    The Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) is calling in a pledge made by President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo in 2015 over press freedom in Papua that has never been fulfilled over the past five years.

    AJI trade union advocacy division head Erick Tanjung said that at the beginning of Widodo’s first term in office he pledged to allow foreign and domestic journalists to freely report in Papua.

    “But the fact is that to this day this promise has never been fulfilled by President Jokowi,” he said during an event on World Press Freedom Day launching an AJI report titled The Press Freedom Situation in Indonesia in 2021.

    “So we have consistently called on the president to open access to foreign journalists to report in Papua, including domestic journalists and journalists from Papua.”

    Based on AJI’s records, between 2012 and 2015 there were at least 77 cases where journalists were prevented from carrying out their work in the Land of the Bird of Paradise, as Papua is known.

    In addition to this, AJI also recorded 74 cases of journalists having to obtain prior permission to report in Papua and 56 cases of permits being refused.

    Meanwhile, out of the scores of applications for permits to report in Papua, only 18 permits were issued.

    Six deportation cases
    “There were six cases of deportations,” said Tanjung.

    In addition to the issue of access, freedom of information in Papua also faces obstacles due to the high level of violence against journalists in Papua.

    Tanjung said that there were at least 114 cases of violence against journalists in Papua over the last 20 years or between 2000 and 2021.

    “Based on data we gathered through the AJI Papua subdivision, the number of cases of violence against journalists and the media in Papua over the last 20 years or between 2000 and 2021 was 141 cases of violence,” said Tanjung.

    Thirty-six out of these 114 cases were against journalists from Papua while 40 were against non-Papuan journalists.

    Finally, there were 38 cases of intimidation against media companies and the media in general.

    When he visited Wapeko Village in the Kurik subdistrict of Merauke regency, Papua, on Sunday, 10 May 2015, President Widodo said that foreign journalists from any country were allowed to arrive and report in all parts of Indonesia, including Papua and West Papua provinces.

    Two provinces closed
    Up until then, the two provinces were closed to foreign journalist on the grounds that conflicts and violence in Indonesia’s two eastern-most provinces was still frequent, such as actions by armed groups wanting to separate from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI).

    “Starting today, foreign journalists are allowed to and are free to come to Papua, just the same (as they can come and report) in other parts of the country,” said Widodo.

    According to Widodo at the time, the situation in Papua and West Papua provinces was different than in the past.

    “We have to think positive and trust each other on all issues”, said the President when asked what would happen if foreign journalists began reporting more on armed groups in the highlands.

    Widodo asserted that the decision must be implemented.

    “This decision must be implemented. Enough, don’t ask negative questions about this issue any more,” said Widodo.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “AJI Tagih Janji Jokowi soal Akses bagi Jurnalis Asing ke Papua”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Media alliance calls in Jokowi’s pledge to allow foreign journalists into Papua

    By Achmad Nasrudin Yahya in Jakarta

    The Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) is calling in a pledge made by President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo in 2015 over press freedom in Papua that has never been fulfilled over the past five years.

    AJI trade union advocacy division head Erick Tanjung said that at the beginning of Widodo’s first term in office he pledged to allow foreign and domestic journalists to freely report in Papua.

    “But the fact is that to this day this promise has never been fulfilled by President Jokowi,” he said during an event on World Press Freedom Day launching an AJI report titled The Press Freedom Situation in Indonesia in 2021.

    “So we have consistently called on the president to open access to foreign journalists to report in Papua, including domestic journalists and journalists from Papua.”

    Based on AJI’s records, between 2012 and 2015 there were at least 77 cases where journalists were prevented from carrying out their work in the Land of the Bird of Paradise, as Papua is known.

    In addition to this, AJI also recorded 74 cases of journalists having to obtain prior permission to report in Papua and 56 cases of permits being refused.

    Meanwhile, out of the scores of applications for permits to report in Papua, only 18 permits were issued.

    Six deportation cases
    “There were six cases of deportations,” said Tanjung.

    In addition to the issue of access, freedom of information in Papua also faces obstacles due to the high level of violence against journalists in Papua.

    Tanjung said that there were at least 114 cases of violence against journalists in Papua over the last 20 years or between 2000 and 2021.

    “Based on data we gathered through the AJI Papua subdivision, the number of cases of violence against journalists and the media in Papua over the last 20 years or between 2000 and 2021 was 141 cases of violence,” said Tanjung.

    Thirty-six out of these 114 cases were against journalists from Papua while 40 were against non-Papuan journalists.

    Finally, there were 38 cases of intimidation against media companies and the media in general.

    When he visited Wapeko Village in the Kurik subdistrict of Merauke regency, Papua, on Sunday, 10 May 2015, President Widodo said that foreign journalists from any country were allowed to arrive and report in all parts of Indonesia, including Papua and West Papua provinces.

    Two provinces closed
    Up until then, the two provinces were closed to foreign journalist on the grounds that conflicts and violence in Indonesia’s two eastern-most provinces was still frequent, such as actions by armed groups wanting to separate from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI).

    “Starting today, foreign journalists are allowed to and are free to come to Papua, just the same (as they can come and report) in other parts of the country,” said Widodo.

    According to Widodo at the time, the situation in Papua and West Papua provinces was different than in the past.

    “We have to think positive and trust each other on all issues”, said the President when asked what would happen if foreign journalists began reporting more on armed groups in the highlands.

    Widodo asserted that the decision must be implemented.

    “This decision must be implemented. Enough, don’t ask negative questions about this issue any more,” said Widodo.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “AJI Tagih Janji Jokowi soal Akses bagi Jurnalis Asing ke Papua”.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Pacific journos call on governments to uphold public right to information

    By Geraldine Panapasa in Suva

    Information as a public good is a powerful theme for this year’s World Press Freedom Day and serves as a reminder to Pacific Island governments that the public have a right to information that affects their lives, says a Fiji-based media educator.

    Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, coordinator of the regional journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific’s Laucala campus, said that as the people’s representatives, governments were sworn to uphold this right to information.

    In his World Press Freedom Day message, Dr Singh said Pacific news media played a crucial role in facilitating public access to information.

    Besides acting as a conduit for information, he said the media had the additional job of protecting the public’s right to information, further underscoring their pivotal role.

    “It goes without saying that this year’s WPFD theme is not just a reminder for governments, but also for journalists and media organisations about their sacred duty to uphold the public right to information, which is a contested, rather than a guaranteed right,” he said.

    “Indeed, trends indicate that some Pacific governments are more inclined to attempt to limit the public’s access to information, for one reason or another.

    “For journalists, the challenge is to produce accurate, balanced and relevant information to be delivered in timely fashion to as wide an audience as possible. It requires a high level of professionalism to be doing this job diligently on a daily basis.”

    Implement greater access
    In recognition that information is a public good, Dr Singh said governments could implement greater and easier access to information through the Access to Information Act and Whistleblower Protection Legislation.

    “However, regional governments seem more inclined towards legislation that hinders the free flow of information and access to it,” he said.

    “For example, the Vanuatu government’s implementation of criminal defamation legislation this week could arguably be seen as an impingement on the public’s right to information.

    Stanley Simpson's press freedom message 2021
    Fijian Media Association general secretary Stanley Simpson’s press freedom message to FMA members and tribute to the covid-19 coverage. Image: APR screenshot

    “Besides Vanuatu’s national media, the regional media such as Radio Australia were in the forefront of generating debate and discussion on the issue.

    “This is the media fighting government attempts to deny the public the right to a public good – information – by limiting freedom of expression through punitive legislation.”

    Before Vanuatu passed criminal libel laws that impact on media freedom and the people’s right to express their opinions, Dr Singh said Samoa had re-introduced its Criminal Libel Act in 2017, and Fiji effected the punitive Media Industry Development Decree in 2010.

    “Such legislation weakens democracy and decreases the public’s access to information due to a chilling impact on free speech. As part of upholding the public’s right to information, media are duty bound to challenge such laws by, among other things, writing articles to generate debate and discussion on the topic, with the aim of reforming some of these laws to better serve the people,” he said.

    Hurdles still faced
    Dr Singh said this year’s WPFD underscored the fact that while information was a public good, the full access to this good still faced many hurdles that needed to be overcome.

    Meanwhile, the Fijian Media Association paid tribute to its members for their courageous and committed reporting on the coronavirus covid-19 pandemic, which had played a key role in keeping Fijians safe from the virus.

    General secretary Stanley Simpson urged journalists to keep learning and developing from the experiences gained and to keep improving their work in disseminating information.

    “Work with authorities but keep them accountable and honest, scrutinise the decisions of our leaders and ensure they meet the highest standards, and to ensure that all voices are heard including those that are marginalised,” Simpson said.

    “We thank you for the sacrifices you have made, the long hours endured, for taking the flak and criticisms in your stride, for asking the questions that needed to be asked, and for the creativity to disseminate information through various platforms to the Fijian public.

    “To our journalists, you have earned this day – World Press Freedom Day.”

    Simpson also thanked stakeholders for working with the media and urged them to keep staying true to the ideals and principles of media freedom.

    Essential role of journalists
    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation director-general Audrey Azoulay said the theme of this year’s WPFD underlined the indisputable importance of verified and reliable information.

    “It calls attention to the essential role of free and professional journalists in producing and disseminating this information, by tackling misinformation and other harmful content,” she said.

    World Press Freedom Day is celebrated on May 3. It has its origins in a UNESCO conference in Windhoek in 1991.

    The event ended with the adoption of the landmark Windhoek Declaration for the Development of a Free, Independent and Pluralistic Press.

    According to UNESCO, after 30 years, the historic connection made between the freedom to seek, impart and receive information and the public good remains as relevant as it was at the time of its signing.

    Asia Pacific Report collaborates with Wansolwara, the USP journalism newspaper and website. Geraldine Panapasa is the editor-in-chief of Wansolwara and an assistant lecturer at USP.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • #HoldTheLine – hundreds of Maria Ressa supporters post ‘pressure’ videos

    Pacific Media Watch newsdesk

    On World Press Freedom Day 2021, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the #HoldTheLine coalition launched an innovative campaign of solidarity with journalist Maria Ressa, who faces a possible lifetime in prison in the Philippines.

    A new website features hundreds of videos from prominent supporters around the world – with a call for public contributions – that will stream on a continuous loop until all charges are dropped against Ressa and the media outlet Rappler.

    Ressa, the founder and CEO of the online media outlet Rappler, whose courageous journalism and stand for press freedom in the Philippines were recognised by UNESCO.

    Developed in partnership with French advertising agency BETC, the solidarity website features content on a steady loop that will stream until the Philippine government drops all the charges and ceases its pressure campaign.

    Members of the public are encouraged to submit their own videos to be added to the stream.

    “The Duterte regime’s vicious attacks against Maria Ressa are attacks on journalism itself, and on democracy,” said RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire.

    “At RSF we have been proud to stand in solidarity with this courageous journalist, and now we call for the international public to mobilise in her support, which could provide her with vital protection as she faces the escalating threat of a possible lifetime in prison.”

    Video contributors
    Prominent supporters and video contributors include former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay; US Nobel Economics Prize Laureate Joseph Stiglitz; Tiananmen Square activist and Chinese dissident Wu’er Kaixi; the former White House Press Secretary under President Clinton, Mike McCurry; and the executive director of the National Press Club in Washington, Bill McCarren.

    At least nine cases are currently open against Ressa in the Philippines, where she has also faced 10 arrest warrants in under two years.

    The cases against her include three cyber-libel cases as well as criminal tax charges. Ressa was convicted on the first cyber-libel charge in June 2020, which carries a possible prison sentence of six years if not overturned on appeal.

    #HoldTheLine is an international coalition that has come together in support of Maria Ressa and independent media in the Philippines.

    It consists of more than 80 groups led by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), the International Centre for Journalists (ICFJ) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

    The Philippines is ranked 138th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Media freedom fraternity must counter attacks on j-education, says JERAA

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Australia’s leading journalism education advocacy body has marked World Press Freedom Day by condemning attacks on journalism education and research, including individual academics.

    President Dr Alexandra Wake of the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia (JERAA) said such attacks had a real impact on press freedom, adding: “I call on all those who want quality journalism in Australia to flourish, to support our work within the academy”.

    In a statement released today, she said that in the past year:

    • the cost of journalism degrees had increased by 110 percent,
    • universities had been “ditching journalism programmes”,
    • headlines about job losses were encouraging “our best and brightest students” to choose other courses of study, and
    • some parts of the media continued attacks on universities and individual academics.

    “Journalist watchdogs, like all other professionals, must be trained,” she said.

    “They do not learn their skills by osmosis in understaffed news organisations, stripped of senior staff.”

    Dr Wake’s statement said:

    Focus on attacks on journalism education

    “On World Press Freedom Day 2021 I would like us to focus on how attacks on journalism education and research, including on individual academics, have a real impact on press freedom in Australia. I call on all those who want quality journalism in Australia to flourish, to support our work within the academy.

    “In the past year we have seen the cost of journalism degrees increase by 110 percent, universities ditching journalism programmes, headlines about job losses encouraging our best and brightest students to choose other courses of study, and some parts of the media continuing their attacks on universities and individual academics.

    “However, it is within Australia’s universities that much world-leading research is happening, seeking out answers for our ailing industry, not just around financial viability, but also around important social issues – from the need for greater diversity, equity and inclusion to ethics and artificial intelligence, misinformation and regional security issues.

    “It is also within our universities that budding journalists are trained in all the skills of journalism: from fact checking and verification to data analysis and analytics, while still learning to write and broadcast news stories which ask the tough questions of the rich and powerful.

    “Journalist watchdogs, like all other professionals, must be trained. They do not learn their skills by osmosis in understaffed news organisations, stripped of senior staff. At universities we not only teach new recruits to be watchdogs, we ask them to consider themselves as guide dogs showing audiences which issues are worth the investment of their time, and even therapy dogs to help build and rebuild communities.

    “Journalists within the university system work in all kinds of roles, sometimes in traditional modes, with others experimenting with new styles and theories of journalism. In fact, some of the highest quality journalism currently taking place is produced by students and academics. It is often under the guidance of academic staff, most of whom were long-time journos, that students have won the highest local, national and even international journalism awards.

    “Journalism programmes clearly don’t just result in jobs in journalism. But such a course of study does give students the opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills, to build their knowledge of the world, and it gives them the time to think deeply about the issues that need changing in the world.

    “Many of our graduates have thanked us for their training in journalism even those who later choose careers in medicine, engineering, politics and international development.

    Vital life-long skills
    “Undergraduate journalism degrees certainly give students vital life-long skills of media literacy, while graduate diploma and masters programmes in journalism result in highly-skilled and deep thinking journalists.

    “I do not claim that all of Australia’s journalism programs are perfect, but all those who work in journalism within the academy are constantly reviewing curricula and upskilling for the current and future industry requirements.

    “Journalism programmes aren’t stuck in what some newsroom leaders learned in the 1980s, or 2000s. Today’s classes are filled with tools and skills to debunk ‘deep fakes’ and edit incredible sound. Industry professionals are brought in to ensure the students know what is expected in the modern workforce.

    “But with so many newsrooms now devoid of senior staff with the time to guide younger recruits, in many cases, that role has reverted to their academic.

    “More than ever before new journalists find that the only people available to support them, particularly when they are under siege as freelancers, or are within an unwelcoming newsroom is their former lecturer.

    “Although this year I am raising concerns about a lack of support for journalism education and research as a key press freedom issue for Australia, I do not overlook the serious issues faced by Australian journalists working on the front line of covid-19, under the gaze of an unsympathetic public.

    Australians in jail
    “We also remain concerned about the Australians who are in jail in China (Cheng Lei) and the UK (Julian Assange), the very difficult work conditions faced by women, particularly Indigenous women, women of colour and those with disabilities. These are issues which fill our classrooms and conversations with students and all have been heighted during covid.

    “As covid-19 continues to wreak havoc around the world, I would like to call on all those who support excellent journalism – university leaders, newsroom bosses, parents, and philanthropists – to be more vocal in their support of journalism education and research, the overlooked but vital supplier of current and future talent, ideas and solutions.”

    Dr Alexandra Wake
    President
    Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Media freedom fraternity must counter attacks on j-education, says JERAA

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Australia’s leading journalism education advocacy body has marked World Press Freedom Day by condemning attacks on journalism education and research, including individual academics.

    President Dr Alexandra Wake of the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia (JERAA) said such attacks had a real impact on press freedom, adding: “I call on all those who want quality journalism in Australia to flourish, to support our work within the academy”.

    In a statement released today, she said that in the past year:

    • the cost of journalism degrees had increased by 110 percent,
    • universities had been “ditching journalism programmes”,
    • headlines about job losses were encouraging “our best and brightest students” to choose other courses of study, and
    • some parts of the media continued attacks on universities and individual academics.

    “Journalist watchdogs, like all other professionals, must be trained,” she said.

    “They do not learn their skills by osmosis in understaffed news organisations, stripped of senior staff.”

    Dr Wake’s statement said:

    Focus on attacks on journalism education

    “On World Press Freedom Day 2021 I would like us to focus on how attacks on journalism education and research, including on individual academics, have a real impact on press freedom in Australia. I call on all those who want quality journalism in Australia to flourish, to support our work within the academy.

    “In the past year we have seen the cost of journalism degrees increase by 110 percent, universities ditching journalism programmes, headlines about job losses encouraging our best and brightest students to choose other courses of study, and some parts of the media continuing their attacks on universities and individual academics.

    “However, it is within Australia’s universities that much world-leading research is happening, seeking out answers for our ailing industry, not just around financial viability, but also around important social issues – from the need for greater diversity, equity and inclusion to ethics and artificial intelligence, misinformation and regional security issues.

    “It is also within our universities that budding journalists are trained in all the skills of journalism: from fact checking and verification to data analysis and analytics, while still learning to write and broadcast news stories which ask the tough questions of the rich and powerful.

    “Journalist watchdogs, like all other professionals, must be trained. They do not learn their skills by osmosis in understaffed news organisations, stripped of senior staff. At universities we not only teach new recruits to be watchdogs, we ask them to consider themselves as guide dogs showing audiences which issues are worth the investment of their time, and even therapy dogs to help build and rebuild communities.

    “Journalists within the university system work in all kinds of roles, sometimes in traditional modes, with others experimenting with new styles and theories of journalism. In fact, some of the highest quality journalism currently taking place is produced by students and academics. It is often under the guidance of academic staff, most of whom were long-time journos, that students have won the highest local, national and even international journalism awards.

    “Journalism programmes clearly don’t just result in jobs in journalism. But such a course of study does give students the opportunity to develop their critical thinking skills, to build their knowledge of the world, and it gives them the time to think deeply about the issues that need changing in the world.

    “Many of our graduates have thanked us for their training in journalism even those who later choose careers in medicine, engineering, politics and international development.

    Vital life-long skills
    “Undergraduate journalism degrees certainly give students vital life-long skills of media literacy, while graduate diploma and masters programmes in journalism result in highly-skilled and deep thinking journalists.

    “I do not claim that all of Australia’s journalism programs are perfect, but all those who work in journalism within the academy are constantly reviewing curricula and upskilling for the current and future industry requirements.

    “Journalism programmes aren’t stuck in what some newsroom leaders learned in the 1980s, or 2000s. Today’s classes are filled with tools and skills to debunk ‘deep fakes’ and edit incredible sound. Industry professionals are brought in to ensure the students know what is expected in the modern workforce.

    “But with so many newsrooms now devoid of senior staff with the time to guide younger recruits, in many cases, that role has reverted to their academic.

    “More than ever before new journalists find that the only people available to support them, particularly when they are under siege as freelancers, or are within an unwelcoming newsroom is their former lecturer.

    “Although this year I am raising concerns about a lack of support for journalism education and research as a key press freedom issue for Australia, I do not overlook the serious issues faced by Australian journalists working on the front line of covid-19, under the gaze of an unsympathetic public.

    Australians in jail
    “We also remain concerned about the Australians who are in jail in China (Cheng Lei) and the UK (Julian Assange), the very difficult work conditions faced by women, particularly Indigenous women, women of colour and those with disabilities. These are issues which fill our classrooms and conversations with students and all have been heighted during covid.

    “As covid-19 continues to wreak havoc around the world, I would like to call on all those who support excellent journalism – university leaders, newsroom bosses, parents, and philanthropists – to be more vocal in their support of journalism education and research, the overlooked but vital supplier of current and future talent, ideas and solutions.”

    Dr Alexandra Wake
    President
    Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • World Press Freedom Day 2021: Hostility towards journalists on rise

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Journalists are fearful that increased harassment, abuse and violence directed towards them during the covid-19 pandemic could become the new normal, says the union for Australian media workers.

    Releasing its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance says attacks on journalists increased both globally and and in Australia throughout 2020.

    MEAA has been cataloguing the decline of press freedom in Australia now for 20 years.

    MEAA says political polarisation caused by the pandemic was behind much of the rising animosity towards journalists, particularly through social media.

    But the union also warns that law enforcement agencies have become more heavy-handed in their treatment of journalists.

    According to MEAA’s 2021 press freedom survey – the fourth year it has been conducted – Australian journalists are fearful of an increasingly hostile working environment where physical assaults, online abuse and harassment by law enforcement agencies are becoming common.

    Although most working journalists who completed the survey said they had not been physically attacked or harassed themselves, 88.8 percent said they were fearful that threats, harassment and intimidation was on the rise.

    Assaults on journalists
    A quarter of all journalists surveyed said they had been assaulted at least once during their career, and one-in-five said they had been harassed by police while reporting over the past 12 months.

    A larger number – 35 percent – have been subjected to threats to their safety online and 70 percent said they did not believe their employer provided sufficient training or support in situations where they faced threats or assaults.

    MEAA chief executive Paul Murphy said an MEAA media release that the survey results were unsettling.

    “Journalists know that their work will always be under scrutiny and expect it to be criticised, but they are entitled to a safe workplace like all other workers,” he said.

    “But in recent years, and encouraged by politicians, journalists are being exposed to much more than an acceptable critique of their work.

    “They are threatened and sometimes assaulted at public events, while social media has now evolved into a vehicle for abuse, harassment and threats against journalists. Sometimes these attacks are one-offs but increasingly they are part of a torrent of abuse, which is a weapon to hurt and to harm.

    “The polarisation of politics is a key feature in much of this abuse.

    Urgent action needed
    “Urgent action is needed to ensure journalists can carry on their duties to our communities free from abuse, harassment, arrests and violence.”

    Overall, MEAA says that there has been little improvement in press freedom in Australia over the past 12 months, although the union welcomed the decision by the Australian Federal Police not to prosecute three journalists on national security grounds following raids in 2019.

    MEAA is hopeful that reform is slowly approaching towards a national uniform defamation regime, and there are positive signs that the Queensland government will finally adopt journalist shield laws, bringing it into line with all other jurisdictions.

    MEAA will release its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, on UNESCO World Press Freedom Day today – Monday, May 3.

    The annual report catalogues MEAA’s press freedom concerns in Australia, and the region.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • World Press Freedom Day 2021: Hostility towards journalists on rise

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Journalists are fearful that increased harassment, abuse and violence directed towards them during the covid-19 pandemic could become the new normal, says the union for Australian media workers.

    Releasing its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance says attacks on journalists increased both globally and and in Australia throughout 2020.

    MEAA has been cataloguing the decline of press freedom in Australia now for 20 years.

    MEAA says political polarisation caused by the pandemic was behind much of the rising animosity towards journalists, particularly through social media.

    But the union also warns that law enforcement agencies have become more heavy-handed in their treatment of journalists.

    According to MEAA’s 2021 press freedom survey – the fourth year it has been conducted – Australian journalists are fearful of an increasingly hostile working environment where physical assaults, online abuse and harassment by law enforcement agencies are becoming common.

    Although most working journalists who completed the survey said they had not been physically attacked or harassed themselves, 88.8 percent said they were fearful that threats, harassment and intimidation was on the rise.

    Assaults on journalists
    A quarter of all journalists surveyed said they had been assaulted at least once during their career, and one-in-five said they had been harassed by police while reporting over the past 12 months.

    A larger number – 35 percent – have been subjected to threats to their safety online and 70 percent said they did not believe their employer provided sufficient training or support in situations where they faced threats or assaults.

    MEAA chief executive Paul Murphy said an MEAA media release that the survey results were unsettling.

    “Journalists know that their work will always be under scrutiny and expect it to be criticised, but they are entitled to a safe workplace like all other workers,” he said.

    “But in recent years, and encouraged by politicians, journalists are being exposed to much more than an acceptable critique of their work.

    “They are threatened and sometimes assaulted at public events, while social media has now evolved into a vehicle for abuse, harassment and threats against journalists. Sometimes these attacks are one-offs but increasingly they are part of a torrent of abuse, which is a weapon to hurt and to harm.

    “The polarisation of politics is a key feature in much of this abuse.

    Urgent action needed
    “Urgent action is needed to ensure journalists can carry on their duties to our communities free from abuse, harassment, arrests and violence.”

    Overall, MEAA says that there has been little improvement in press freedom in Australia over the past 12 months, although the union welcomed the decision by the Australian Federal Police not to prosecute three journalists on national security grounds following raids in 2019.

    MEAA is hopeful that reform is slowly approaching towards a national uniform defamation regime, and there are positive signs that the Queensland government will finally adopt journalist shield laws, bringing it into line with all other jurisdictions.

    MEAA will release its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, on UNESCO World Press Freedom Day today – Monday, May 3.

    The annual report catalogues MEAA’s press freedom concerns in Australia, and the region.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • World Press Freedom Day 2021: Hostility towards journalists on rise

    Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    Journalists are fearful that increased harassment, abuse and violence directed towards them during the covid-19 pandemic could become the new normal, says the union for Australian media workers.

    Releasing its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance says attacks on journalists increased both globally and and in Australia throughout 2020.

    MEAA has been cataloguing the decline of press freedom in Australia now for 20 years.

    MEAA says political polarisation caused by the pandemic was behind much of the rising animosity towards journalists, particularly through social media.

    But the union also warns that law enforcement agencies have become more heavy-handed in their treatment of journalists.

    According to MEAA’s 2021 press freedom survey – the fourth year it has been conducted – Australian journalists are fearful of an increasingly hostile working environment where physical assaults, online abuse and harassment by law enforcement agencies are becoming common.

    Although most working journalists who completed the survey said they had not been physically attacked or harassed themselves, 88.8 percent said they were fearful that threats, harassment and intimidation was on the rise.

    Assaults on journalists
    A quarter of all journalists surveyed said they had been assaulted at least once during their career, and one-in-five said they had been harassed by police while reporting over the past 12 months.

    A larger number – 35 percent – have been subjected to threats to their safety online and 70 percent said they did not believe their employer provided sufficient training or support in situations where they faced threats or assaults.

    MEAA chief executive Paul Murphy said an MEAA media release that the survey results were unsettling.

    “Journalists know that their work will always be under scrutiny and expect it to be criticised, but they are entitled to a safe workplace like all other workers,” he said.

    “But in recent years, and encouraged by politicians, journalists are being exposed to much more than an acceptable critique of their work.

    “They are threatened and sometimes assaulted at public events, while social media has now evolved into a vehicle for abuse, harassment and threats against journalists. Sometimes these attacks are one-offs but increasingly they are part of a torrent of abuse, which is a weapon to hurt and to harm.

    “The polarisation of politics is a key feature in much of this abuse.

    Urgent action needed
    “Urgent action is needed to ensure journalists can carry on their duties to our communities free from abuse, harassment, arrests and violence.”

    Overall, MEAA says that there has been little improvement in press freedom in Australia over the past 12 months, although the union welcomed the decision by the Australian Federal Police not to prosecute three journalists on national security grounds following raids in 2019.

    MEAA is hopeful that reform is slowly approaching towards a national uniform defamation regime, and there are positive signs that the Queensland government will finally adopt journalist shield laws, bringing it into line with all other jurisdictions.

    MEAA will release its 2021 report into the state of press freedom in Australia, Unsafe at Work – Assaults on Journalists, on UNESCO World Press Freedom Day today – Monday, May 3.

    The annual report catalogues MEAA’s press freedom concerns in Australia, and the region.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Branding armed Papuan resistance as ‘terrorists’ angers rights groups, sparks media warning

    By David Robie

    Branding armed Papuan groups as “terrorists” has sparked strong condemnation from human rights groups across Indonesia and in West Papua, some describing the move as desperation and the “worst ever” action by President Joko Widodo’s administration.

    Many warn that this draconian militarist approach to the Papuan independence struggle will lead to further bloodshed and fail to achieve anything.

    Many have called for negotiation to try to seek a way out of the spiralling violence over the past few months.

    Ironically, with the annual World Press Freedom Day being observed on Monday many commentors also warn about the increased dangers for journalists covering the conflict.

    Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy chairperson Hendardi (Indonesians often have a single name) has criticised the government’s move against “armed criminal groups” in Papua, or “KKB)”, as they are known by military authorities.

    The move to designate them as terrorists is seen as a short-cut and an expression of the government’s “desperation” in dealing with the Papuan struggle for independence.

    “The labeling of resistance groups in Papua will not break the long and recurring cycle of violence”, Hendardi said, according to a report in Merdeka by Yunita Amalia.

    Failure of the security forces
    Hendardi said that the failure of security forces to cripple armed groups in Papua had largely been caused by the lack of support and trust by local people.

    This was as well as the difficult and rugged terrain while local resistance groups were very familiar with their mountainous hideouts.

    “The terrorist label and the subsequent [military] operations is Jokowi’s [President Joko Widodo] worst ever policy on Papua,” he claimed.

    Setara Institute chairperson Hendardi
    Setara Institute chairperson Hendardi … “The labeling of resistance groups in Papua will not break the long and recurring cycle of violence”. Image: CNN Indonesia

    Yesterday, the government declared that the so-called KKB were terrorists, following a string of clashes with security forces that saw the region’s intelligence chief, one police officer and at least five guerrilla fighters killed.

    Coordinating Minister for Security, Politics and Legal Affairs Mahfud MD officially announced that the Papuan KKB had been included in the category of terrorist organisations.

    He cited Law Number 5/2018 on the Eradication of Terrorism as a legal basis.

    “The government considers that organisations and people in Papua that commit widespread violence are categorised as terrorists,” Mahfud told a media conference broadcast on the ministry’s YouTube channel.

    AII Usman Hamid
    Amnesty International Indonesia’s Usman Hamid … “The government should focus on investigating [human rights violation] cases and ending the extrajudicial killings.” Image: Kompas
    Adding to list rights violations
    Amnesty International Indonesia said the move had the potential to add to a long list of human rights violations in the region.

    Amnesty International executive director Usman Hamid believes that branding the armed groups terrorist will not end the problems or human rights violations in Papua.

    “Even if they are so easily labelled terrorist, this will in fact have the potential of adding to the long list of human rights violations in Papua,” Hamid told Kompas.com.

    Based on Amnesty International Indonesia’s records, there were at least 47 cases of extrajudicial killings committed by Indonesian security forces between February 2018 and December 2020 resulting in the death of about 80 people.

    Also, already in 2021 there had been five cases of alleged extrajudicial killings by security forces resulting in the death of seven people, said Hamid.

    “The government should focus on investigating these cases and ending the extrajudicial killings and other human rights violations by law enforcement agencies in Papua and West Papua, rather than focus on the terrorist label,” he said.

    ‘Transparent, just, accountable’ law enforcement
    National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) Deputy Commissioner Amiruddin Al-Rahab said he was disappointed with the government’s decision.

    “Pak Menko [Mr Security Chief] announced that the solution is to add the terrorist label. Speaking frankly I feel disappointed with this”, said Al-Rahab.

    Al-Rahab believes that it is more important to prioritise “transparent, just and accountable” law enforcement as the way to resolve the Papua problem rather than labelling armed groups in Papua as terrorists.

    “It is far more important to prioritise this rather than transforming labels,” he said.

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) has also criticised the Indonesian government’s decision, dismissing the “terrorist label” as a colonial creation.

    ULMWP executive director Markus Haluk said that the government often attached “certain labels” on the Papuan nation which were intentionally created.

    “The terms KKB, GPK [security disturbance groups] and so forth are terms created by Indonesian colonialism, the TNI [Indonesian military] and the Polri [Indonesian police]. So, the Papuan people don’t recognise any of these”, Haluk told CNN Indonesia.

    Haluk said that the National Liberation Army (TPN) and the OPM (Free Papua Organisation) were born out of a humanitarian struggle and that they opposed humanitarian crimes and systematic racist politics.

    Veronica Koman
    Indonesian human rights lawyer Veronica Koman with New Zealand journalist David Robie … “Indonesia has just burnt the bridge towards a peaceful resolution.” Image: Bernard Agape/PMC

    Severing attempts for peaceful solution
    Lawyer and human rights activist Veronica Koman condemned the Indonesian government’s move.

    Through her personal Twitter account @VeronicaKoman, she said that the decision would sever attempts to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Papua.

    “Indonesia has just burnt the bridge towards a peaceful resolution,” she wrote in a tweet.

    Koman believes that the label could trigger an escalation in the armed conflict in the “land of the Cenderawasih”, as Papua is known. Not to mention, she said, concerns over possible human rights violations.

    The OPM declared that it would challenge the decisions with the International Court of Justice (ICC).

    The ICC is the United Nation’s top judicial body whose principle function is to hear and resolve disputes between member nations.

    “The TPNPB [West Papua National Liberation Army] already has lawyers, we will send two of our lawyers [to the ICC] if Indonesia is prepared to include the TPNPB as a terrorist organisation, so we are very much ready to take the issue to the International Court”, said TPNPB-OPM spokesperson Sebby Sambom.

    Journalist and editor Victor Mambor
    Journalist and editor Victor Mambor … “I’m worried about my family and colleagues at Jubi.” Image: APR screenshot

    Threats to balanced media
    Meanwhile, a prominent Papuan journalist, Victor Mambor, has expressed concern about the implications for media people trying to provide balanced coverage of the Papuan conflict.

    Mambor, founding editor of Tabloid Jubi, contributor to The Jakarta Post, and a former Papuan advocate for the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI), is among many media people who have been targeted for their robust reportage of the deteriorating situation in Papua and human rights violations.

    Just last week his vehicle had its windows smashed and it was daubed with spray paint. The attack was featured in Suara Papua, but as he admits this was just the latest of a series of attacks and attempts at intimidating him in his daily journalism.

    Mambor, who visited New Zealand in 2013, told Asia Pacific Report that there had been no progress so far in the investigation into the attack. A police forensics team had checked his car.

    “I am not worried about my safety because if have experienced a lot of terror and intimidation that has let me know how to deal with these actions against me,” he said. “Even worse things have happened to me.

    “But I’m worried about my family and colleagues at Jubi.”

    The recent threats by the Speaker of the Parliament in Jakarta, Bambang Soesatyo, and the latest branding of resistance groups in Papua have created an even more difficult environment for working journalists just at a time when the World Press Freedom Day is coming up on May 3 with a related UNESCO Asia-Pacific media safety seminar in Jakarta today.

    “These developments have an impact on media workers like me or fellow journalists at Jubi who try to maintain a ‘covering both sides’ principle to report on the conflict in Papua,” he said.

    “The terror attack that I experienced explains that. Journalists who report on the Papua conflict with a different perspective other than what the security forces want will be subject to problems and pressure. This is what I’m worried about.

    “However, I am also worried about the continued existence of a single narrative developed by the security forces on the conflict and armed violence in Papua.”

    With thanks to some translations by James Balowski for IndoLeft News.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Branding armed Papuan resistance as ‘terrorists’ angers rights groups, sparks media warning

    By David Robie

    Branding armed Papuan groups as “terrorists” has sparked strong condemnation from human rights groups across Indonesia and in West Papua, some describing the move as desperation and the “worst ever” action by President Joko Widodo’s administration.

    Many warn that this draconian militarist approach to the Papuan independence struggle will lead to further bloodshed and fail to achieve anything.

    Many have called for negotiation to try to seek a way out of the spiralling violence over the past few months.

    Ironically, with the annual World Press Freedom Day being observed on Monday many commentors also warn about the increased dangers for journalists covering the conflict.

    Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy chairperson Hendardi (Indonesians often have a single name) has criticised the government’s move against “armed criminal groups” in Papua, or “KKB)”, as they are known by military authorities.

    The move to designate them as terrorists is seen as a short-cut and an expression of the government’s “desperation” in dealing with the Papuan struggle for independence.

    “The labeling of resistance groups in Papua will not break the long and recurring cycle of violence”, Hendardi said, according to a report in Merdeka by Yunita Amalia.

    Failure of the security forces
    Hendardi said that the failure of security forces to cripple armed groups in Papua had largely been caused by the lack of support and trust by local people.

    This was as well as the difficult and rugged terrain while local resistance groups were very familiar with their mountainous hideouts.

    “The terrorist label and the subsequent [military] operations is Jokowi’s [President Joko Widodo] worst ever policy on Papua,” he claimed.

    Setara Institute chairperson Hendardi … “The labeling of resistance groups in Papua will not break the long and recurring cycle of violence”. Image: CNN Indonesia

    Yesterday, the government declared that the so-called KKB were terrorists, following a string of clashes with security forces that saw the region’s intelligence chief, one police officer and at least five guerrilla fighters killed.

    Coordinating Minister for Security, Politics and Legal Affairs Mahfud MD officially announced that the Papuan KKB had been included in the category of terrorist organisations.

    He cited Law Number 5/2018 on the Eradication of Terrorism as a legal basis.

    “The government considers that organisations and people in Papua that commit widespread violence are categorised as terrorists”, Mahfud told a media conference broadcast on the ministry’s YouTube channel.

    AII Usman Hamid
    Amnesty International Indonesia’s Usman Hamid … “The government should focus on investigating [human rights violation] cases and ending the extrajudicial killings.” Image: Kompas

    Adding to list rights violations
    Amnesty International Indonesia said the move had the potential to add to a long list of human rights violations in the region.

    Amnesty International executive director Usman Hamid believes that branding the armed groups terrorist will not end the problems or human rights violations in Papua.

    “Even if they are so easily labelled terrorist, this will in fact have the potential of adding to the long list of human rights violations in Papua,” Hamid told Kompas.com.

    Based on Amnesty International Indonesia’s records, there were at least 47 cases of extrajudicial killings committed by Indonesian security forces between February 2018 and December 2020 resulting in the death of about 80 people.

    Also, already in 2021 there had been five cases of alleged extrajudicial killings by security forces resulting in the death of seven people, said Hamid.

    “The government should focus on investigating these cases and ending the extrajudicial killings and other human rights violations by law enforcement agencies in Papua and West Papua, rather than focus on the terrorist label,” he said.

    ‘Transparent, just, accountable’ law enforcement
    National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) Deputy Commissioner Amiruddin Al-Rahab said he was disappointed with the government’s decision.

    “Pak Menko [Mr Security Chief] announced that the solution is to add the terrorist label. Speaking frankly I feel disappointed with this”, said Al-Rahab.

    Al-Rahab believes that it is more important to prioritise “transparent, just and accountable” law enforcement as the way to resolve the Papua problem rather than labelling armed groups in Papua as terrorists.

    “It is far more important to prioritise this rather than transforming labels,” he said.

    The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) has also criticised the Indonesian government’s decision, dismissing the “terrorist label” as a colonial creation.

    ULMWP executive director Markus Haluk said that the government often attached “certain labels” on the Papuan nation which were intentionally created.

    “The terms KKB, GPK [security disturbance groups] and so forth are terms created by Indonesian colonialism, the TNI [Indonesian military] and the Polri [Indonesian police]. So, the Papuan people don’t recognise any of these”, Haluk told CNN Indonesia.

    Haluk said that the National Liberation Army (TPN) and the OPM (Free Papua Organisation) were born out of a humanitarian struggle and that they opposed humanitarian crimes and systematic racist politics.

    Veronica Koman
    Indonesian human rights lawyer Veronica Koman with New Zealand journalist David Robie … “Indonesia has just burnt the bridge towards a peaceful resolution.” Image: Bernard Agape/PMC

    Severing attempts for peaceful solution
    Lawyer and human rights activist Veronica Koman condemned the Indonesian government’s move.

    Through her personal Twitter account @VeronicaKoman, she said that the decision would sever attempts to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Papua.

    “Indonesia has just burnt the bridge towards a peaceful resolution,” she wrote in a tweet.

    Koman believes that the label could trigger an escalation in the armed conflict in the “land of the Cenderawasih”, as Papua is known. Not to mention, she said, concerns over possible human rights violations.

    The OPM declared that it would challenge the decisions with the International Court of Justice (ICC).

    The ICC is the United Nation’s top judicial body whose principle function is to hear and resolve disputes between member nations.

    “The TPNPB [West Papua National Liberation Army] already has lawyers, we will send two of our lawyers [to the ICC] if Indonesia is prepared to include the TPNPB as a terrorist organisation, so we are very much ready to take the issue to the International Court”, said TPNPB-OPM spokesperson Sebby Sambom.

    Journalist and editor Victor Mambor
    Journalist and editor Victor Mambor … “I’m worried about my family and colleagues at Jubi.” Image: APR screenshot

    Threats to balanced media
    Meanwhile, a prominent Papuan journalist, Victor Mambor, has expressed concern about the implications for media people trying to provide balanced coverage of the Papuan conflict.

    Mambor, founding editor of Tabloid Jubi, contributor to The Jakarta Post, and a former Papuan advocate for the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI), is among many media people who have been targeted for their robust reportage of the deteriorating situation in Papua and human rights violations.

    Just last week his vehicle had its windows smashed and it was daubed with spray paint. The attack was featured in Suara Papua, but as he admits this was just the latest of a series of attacks and attempts at intimidating him in his daily journalism.

    Mambor, who visited New Zealand in 2013, told Asia Pacific Report that there had been no progress so far in the investigation into the attack. A police forensics team had checked his car.

    “I am not worried about my safety because if have experienced a lot of terror and intimidation that has let me know how to deal with these actions against me,” he said. “Even worse things have happened to me.

    “But I’m worried about my family and colleagues at Jubi.”

    The recent threats by the Speaker of the Parliament in Jakarta, Bambang Soesatyo, and the latest branding of resistance groups in Papua have created an even more difficult environment for working journalists just at a time when the World Press Freedom Day is coming up on May 3 with a related UNESCO Asia-Pacific media safety seminar in Jakarta today.

    “These developments have an impact on media workers like me or fellow journalists at Jubi who try to maintain a ‘covering both sides’ principle to report on the conflict in Papua,” he said.

    “The terror attack that I experienced explains that. Journalists who report on the Papua conflict with a different perspective other than what the security forces want will be subject to problems and pressure. This is what I’m worried about.

    “However, I am also worried about the continued existence of a single narrative developed by the security forces on the conflict and armed violence in Papua.”

    With thanks to some translations by James Balowski for IndoLeft News.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Australian journalists’ union urges new approach to media regulation

    International Federation of Journalists

    Australia’s journalists’ union – the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) – has voted to end its decades long relationship with the Australian Press Council, citing concerns about governance and consistency of rulings at the press regulator.

    Formed in 1976 as an alternative to government intervention, the Australian Press Council has been an important arbiter of media standards, adjudicating complaints from the public about material in newspapers, magazines and online news sites at publishers that belong to the Press Council.

    MEAA’s predecessor, the Australian Journalists’ Association, played a crucial role in establishing the Press Council after more than 20 years of lobbying for self-regulation. Despite not being a publisher itself, MEAA has contributed more than A$100,000 each year to the organisation within recent years.

    The Press Council also draws on media academics and selected public representatives to run its adjudication processes.

    In recent years, MEAA members have become increasingly frustrated by a lack of financial transparency and accountability at the Press Council and the inconsistent manner in which it has adjudicated on complaints, some of which are out of step with community expectations.

    In April, delegates to MEAA’s National Media Section committee, made up of rank-and-file union members, voted to formally quit the Press Council.

    Under the rules of the APC, four years notice must be given to withdraw, which means MEAA will officially leave the organisation in 2025.

    Overwhelming feedback
    The decision to withdraw came after MEAA – which represents more than 5000 journalists and other media workers – consulted with its members, who overwhelmingly gave feedback that the union should leave the Press Council.

    The federal president of MEAA’s Media section, Marcus Strom, said there was a pervasive dissatisfaction among MEAA members about the role played by the regulator.

    He said it had failed to change with the times during more than a decade of media convergence and was not effective in the contemporary industry where there is cross-over between print, digital and broadcast journalism.

    Australia’s broadcast media are regulated by a government agency, the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

    “The Press Council has lost credibility with journalists and even with the publishers who make up its membership. There have been too many cases in recent years where adjudications have been mocked or ignored,” Strom said.

    “Currently our members are more concerned about being hauled over the coals on Media Watch [a weekly national television program that regularly exposes misdemeanours and unethical practices by journalists and publishers] than being called before the Press Council. That’s obviously not an acceptable situation.”

    MEAA Media federal vice-president Karen Percy said readers who made complaints were also frustrated with the response they received from the Press Council, which eroded trust in journalists and the media.

    Credible regulator ‘is critical’
    “In order to maintain integrity in journalism in Australia, a credible regulator – where there are real consequences for breaches – is critical,” Percy said.

    “Unfortunately, the Press Council is no longer fit-for-purpose for the modern, cross-platform media industry.”

    Percy said MEAA’s Journalist Code of Ethics should play a more prominent role in media standards.

    First established in 1944, and updated twice since, the Code of Ethics is the most enduring and best-known set of guidelines for journalists.

    The public are also able to make complaints about union members who breach the code, with a range of sanctions available including termination of membership of MEAA.

    “The industry needs a simpler system of self-regulation that is consistent across all platforms and organisations, upholds the standards of public interest journalism, and serves the needs of members and the public who want ethical practices and accountability,” Percy said.

    “The status quo is serving no-one – not the industry, nor the public.”

    Senate media inquiry
    The decision by MEAA to withdraw from the Press Council coincides with an inquiry into media ownership by the Australian Senate, with the future of media regulation and questions of how to maintain trust in journalism coming under scrutiny by inquiry.

    Strom said many journalists regarded the Press Council as toothless and wanted a more robust regulator to ensure standards of good journalism were maintained.

    “Arbitrations at the Press Council have been inconsistent, slow and are increasingly out of touch with community expectations.

    He said it was time for a broad review of media regulation in Australia. MEAA has publicly stated it would like to see a one-stop-shop regulator to replace the multitude of confusing, inconsistent bodies and processes currently in place.

    “We want our notice to leave the Press Council to spark a serious discussion about media regulation,” he said.

    As part of its decision to withdraw from the Press Council, MEAA will engage with the Press Council and other industry stakeholders to discuss what shape the regulatory environment should take in future.

    As the IFJ’s Australian affiliate, MEAA is the largest and most established union and industry advocate for Australia’s creative professionals.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Australian journalists’ union urges new approach to media regulation

    International Federation of Journalists

    Australia’s journalists’ union – the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) – has voted to end its decades long relationship with the Australian Press Council, citing concerns about governance and consistency of rulings at the press regulator.

    Formed in 1976 as an alternative to government intervention, the Australian Press Council has been an important arbiter of media standards, adjudicating complaints from the public about material in newspapers, magazines and online news sites at publishers that belong to the Press Council.

    MEAA’s predecessor, the Australian Journalists’ Association, played a crucial role in establishing the Press Council after more than 20 years of lobbying for self-regulation. Despite not being a publisher itself, MEAA has contributed more than A$100,000 each year to the organisation within recent years.

    The Press Council also draws on media academics and selected public representatives to run its adjudication processes.

    In recent years, MEAA members have become increasingly frustrated by a lack of financial transparency and accountability at the Press Council and the inconsistent manner in which it has adjudicated on complaints, some of which are out of step with community expectations.

    In April, delegates to MEAA’s National Media Section committee, made up of rank-and-file union members, voted to formally quit the Press Council.

    Under the rules of the APC, four years notice must be given to withdraw, which means MEAA will officially leave the organisation in 2025.

    Overwhelming feedback
    The decision to withdraw came after MEAA – which represents more than 5000 journalists and other media workers – consulted with its members, who overwhelmingly gave feedback that the union should leave the Press Council.

    The federal president of MEAA’s Media section, Marcus Strom, said there was a pervasive dissatisfaction among MEAA members about the role played by the regulator.

    He said it had failed to change with the times during more than a decade of media convergence and was not effective in the contemporary industry where there is cross-over between print, digital and broadcast journalism.

    Australia’s broadcast media are regulated by a government agency, the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

    “The Press Council has lost credibility with journalists and even with the publishers who make up its membership. There have been too many cases in recent years where adjudications have been mocked or ignored,” Strom said.

    “Currently our members are more concerned about being hauled over the coals on Media Watch [a weekly national television program that regularly exposes misdemeanours and unethical practices by journalists and publishers] than being called before the Press Council. That’s obviously not an acceptable situation.”

    MEAA Media federal vice-president Karen Percy said readers who made complaints were also frustrated with the response they received from the Press Council, which eroded trust in journalists and the media.

    Credible regulator ‘is critical’
    “In order to maintain integrity in journalism in Australia, a credible regulator – where there are real consequences for breaches – is critical,” Percy said.

    “Unfortunately, the Press Council is no longer fit-for-purpose for the modern, cross-platform media industry.”

    Percy said MEAA’s Journalist Code of Ethics should play a more prominent role in media standards.

    First established in 1944, and updated twice since, the Code of Ethics is the most enduring and best-known set of guidelines for journalists.

    The public are also able to make complaints about union members who breach the code, with a range of sanctions available including termination of membership of MEAA.

    “The industry needs a simpler system of self-regulation that is consistent across all platforms and organisations, upholds the standards of public interest journalism, and serves the needs of members and the public who want ethical practices and accountability,” Percy said.

    “The status quo is serving no-one – not the industry, nor the public.”

    Senate media inquiry
    The decision by MEAA to withdraw from the Press Council coincides with an inquiry into media ownership by the Australian Senate, with the future of media regulation and questions of how to maintain trust in journalism coming under scrutiny by inquiry.

    Strom said many journalists regarded the Press Council as toothless and wanted a more robust regulator to ensure standards of good journalism were maintained.

    “Arbitrations at the Press Council have been inconsistent, slow and are increasingly out of touch with community expectations.

    He said it was time for a broad review of media regulation in Australia. MEAA has publicly stated it would like to see a one-stop-shop regulator to replace the multitude of confusing, inconsistent bodies and processes currently in place.

    “We want our notice to leave the Press Council to spark a serious discussion about media regulation,” he said.

    As part of its decision to withdraw from the Press Council, MEAA will engage with the Press Council and other industry stakeholders to discuss what shape the regulatory environment should take in future.

    As the IFJ’s Australian affiliate, MEAA is the largest and most established union and industry advocate for Australia’s creative professionals.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Australian journalists’ union urges new approach to media regulation

    International Federation of Journalists

    Australia’s journalists’ union – the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) – has voted to end its decades long relationship with the Australian Press Council, citing concerns about governance and consistency of rulings at the press regulator.

    Formed in 1976 as an alternative to government intervention, the Australian Press Council has been an important arbiter of media standards, adjudicating complaints from the public about material in newspapers, magazines and online news sites at publishers that belong to the Press Council.

    MEAA’s predecessor, the Australian Journalists’ Association, played a crucial role in establishing the Press Council after more than 20 years of lobbying for self-regulation. Despite not being a publisher itself, MEAA has contributed more than A$100,000 each year to the organisation within recent years.

    The Press Council also draws on media academics and selected public representatives to run its adjudication processes.

    In recent years, MEAA members have become increasingly frustrated by a lack of financial transparency and accountability at the Press Council and the inconsistent manner in which it has adjudicated on complaints, some of which are out of step with community expectations.

    In April, delegates to MEAA’s National Media Section committee, made up of rank-and-file union members, voted to formally quit the Press Council.

    Under the rules of the APC, four years notice must be given to withdraw, which means MEAA will officially leave the organisation in 2025.

    Overwhelming feedback
    The decision to withdraw came after MEAA – which represents more than 5000 journalists and other media workers – consulted with its members, who overwhelmingly gave feedback that the union should leave the Press Council.

    The federal president of MEAA’s Media section, Marcus Strom, said there was a pervasive dissatisfaction among MEAA members about the role played by the regulator.

    He said it had failed to change with the times during more than a decade of media convergence and was not effective in the contemporary industry where there is cross-over between print, digital and broadcast journalism.

    Australia’s broadcast media are regulated by a government agency, the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

    “The Press Council has lost credibility with journalists and even with the publishers who make up its membership. There have been too many cases in recent years where adjudications have been mocked or ignored,” Strom said.

    “Currently our members are more concerned about being hauled over the coals on Media Watch [a weekly national television program that regularly exposes misdemeanours and unethical practices by journalists and publishers] than being called before the Press Council. That’s obviously not an acceptable situation.”

    MEAA Media federal vice-president Karen Percy said readers who made complaints were also frustrated with the response they received from the Press Council, which eroded trust in journalists and the media.

    Credible regulator ‘is critical’
    “In order to maintain integrity in journalism in Australia, a credible regulator – where there are real consequences for breaches – is critical,” Percy said.

    “Unfortunately, the Press Council is no longer fit-for-purpose for the modern, cross-platform media industry.”

    Percy said MEAA’s Journalist Code of Ethics should play a more prominent role in media standards.

    First established in 1944, and updated twice since, the Code of Ethics is the most enduring and best-known set of guidelines for journalists.

    The public are also able to make complaints about union members who breach the code, with a range of sanctions available including termination of membership of MEAA.

    “The industry needs a simpler system of self-regulation that is consistent across all platforms and organisations, upholds the standards of public interest journalism, and serves the needs of members and the public who want ethical practices and accountability,” Percy said.

    “The status quo is serving no-one – not the industry, nor the public.”

    Senate media inquiry
    The decision by MEAA to withdraw from the Press Council coincides with an inquiry into media ownership by the Australian Senate, with the future of media regulation and questions of how to maintain trust in journalism coming under scrutiny by inquiry.

    Strom said many journalists regarded the Press Council as toothless and wanted a more robust regulator to ensure standards of good journalism were maintained.

    “Arbitrations at the Press Council have been inconsistent, slow and are increasingly out of touch with community expectations.

    He said it was time for a broad review of media regulation in Australia. MEAA has publicly stated it would like to see a one-stop-shop regulator to replace the multitude of confusing, inconsistent bodies and processes currently in place.

    “We want our notice to leave the Press Council to spark a serious discussion about media regulation,” he said.

    As part of its decision to withdraw from the Press Council, MEAA will engage with the Press Council and other industry stakeholders to discuss what shape the regulatory environment should take in future.

    As the IFJ’s Australian affiliate, MEAA is the largest and most established union and industry advocate for Australia’s creative professionals.

    Print Friendly, PDF & Email

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.