After 19 months of conflict that has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and drawn accusations of war crimes against Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu is once more preparing to escalate Israel’s offensive in Gaza.
The latest plan puts Israel on course for full occupation of the Palestinian territory and would drive Gazans into ever-narrowing pockets of the shattered strip.
It would lead to more intensive bombing and Israeli forces clearing and holding territory, while destroying what few structures remain in Gaza.
This would be a disaster for 2.2 million Gazans who have already endured unfathomable suffering.
Each new offensive makes it harder not to suspect that the ultimate goal of Netanyahu’s far-right coalition is to ensure Gaza is uninhabitable and drive Palestinians from their land. For two months, Israel has blocked delivery of all aid into the strip.
Child malnutrition rates are rising, the few functioning hospitals are running out of medicine, and warnings of starvation and disease are growing louder. Yet the US and European countries that tout Israel as an ally that shares their values have issued barely a word of condemnation.
They should be ashamed of their silence, and stop enabling Netanyahu to act with impunity.
In brief remarks on Sunday, US President Donald Trump acknowledged Gazans were “starving”, and suggested Washington would help get food into the strip.
But, so far, the US president has only emboldened Netanyahu. Trump returned to the White House promising to end the war in Gaza after his team helped broker a January ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
Under the deal, Hamas agreed to free hostages in phases, while Israel was to withdraw from Gaza and the foes were to reach a permanent ceasefire.
But within weeks of the truce taking hold, Trump announced an outlandish plan for Gaza to be emptied of Palestinians and taken over by the US.
In March, Israel collapsed the ceasefire as it sought to change the terms of the deal, with Washington’s backing. Senior Israeli officials have since said they are implementing Trump’s plan to transfer Palestinians out of Gaza.
On Monday, far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said: “We are finally going to occupy the Gaza Strip.”
Netanyahu insists an expanded offensive is necessary to destroy Hamas and free the 59 remaining hostages. The reality is that the prime minister has never articulated a clear plan since Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack killed 1200 people and triggered the war.
Instead, he repeats his maximalist mantra of “total victory” while seeking to placate his extremist allies to ensure the survival of his governing coalition.
But Israel is also paying a price for his actions. The expanded offensive would imperil the lives of the hostages, further undermine Israel’s tarnished standing and deepen domestic divisions.
Israel has briefed that the expanded operation would not begin until after Trump’s visit to the Gulf next week, saying there is a “window” for Hamas to release hostages in return for a temporary truce.
Arab leaders are infuriated by Netanyahu’s relentless pursuit of conflict in Gaza yet they will fete Trump at lavish ceremonies with promises of multibillion-dollar investments and arms deals.
Trump will put the onus on Hamas when speaking to his Gulf hosts. The group’s murderous October 7 attack is what triggered the Israeli offensive.
Gulf states agree that its continued stranglehold on Gaza is a factor prolonging the war. But they must stand up to Trump and convince him to pressure Netanyahu to end the killing, lift the siege and return to talks.
The global tumult triggered by Trump has already distracted attention from the catastrophe in Gaza. Yet the longer it goes on, the more those who remain silent or cowed from speaking out will be complicit.
The author of the book Eyes of Fire, one of the countless publications on the Rainbow Warrior bombing almost 40 years ago but the only one by somebody actually on board the bombed ship, says he was under no illusions that France was behind the attack.
Eyes of Fire . . . the earlier 30th anniversary edition in 2015. Image: Little Island Press/DR
“You know with the horrible things they were doing at the time with their colonial policies in Kanaky New Caledonia, assassinating independence leaders and so on, and they had a heavy military presence.
“A sort of clamp down in New Caledonia, so it just fitted in with the pattern — an absolute disregard for the Pacific.”
He said it was ironic that four decades on, France had trashed the goodwill that had been evolving with the 1988 Matignon and 1998 Nouméa accords towards independence with harsh new policies that led to the riots in May last year.
Dr Robie’s series of books on the Rainbow Warrior focus on the impact of nuclear testing by both the Americans and the French, in particular, on Pacific peoples and especially the humanitarian voyages to relocate the Rongelap Islanders in the Marshall Islands barely two months before the bombing at Marsden wharf in Auckland on 10 July 1985.
Plantu’s cartoon on the Rainbow Warrior bombers from the slideshow. Image: David Robie/Plantu
“This edition is the most comprehensive work on the sinking of the first Rainbow Warrior, but also speaks to the first humanitarian mission undertaken by Greenpeace,” said publisher Tony Murrow.
“It’s an important work that shows us how we can act in the world and how we must continue to support all life on this unusual planet that is our only home.”
Little Island Press produced an educational microsite as a resource to accompany Eyes of Fire with print, image and video resources.
The book will be launched in association with a nuclear-free Pacific exhibition at Ellen Melville Centre in mid-July.
Samoa has dropped in its media and information freedom world ranking from 22 in 2024 to 44 in 2025 in the latest World Press Freedom Index compiled annually by the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF).
The 2025 World Press Freedom Index released in conjunction with the annual Media Freedom Day on May 3, says despite the vitality of some of its media groups, Samoa’s reputation as a regional model of press freedom has suffered in recent years due to “authoritarian pressure” from the previous prime minister and a political party that held power for four decades until 2021.
Media landscape
The report lists independent media outlets such as the Samoa Observer, “an independent daily founded in 1978, that has symbolised the fight for press freedom.”
It also lists state-owned Savali newspaper “that focuses on providing positive coverage of the government’s activities.”
TV1, is the product of the privatisation of the state-owned Samoa Broadcasting Corporation. The Talamua group operates Samoa FM and other media outlets, while the national radio station 2AP calls itself “the Voice of the Nation.”
Political context
Although Samoa is a parliamentary democracy with free elections, the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) held power for four decades until it was narrowly defeated in the April 2021 general election by Samoa United in Faith (Faʻatuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi, or FAST).
An Oceania quick check list on the 2025 RSF World Press Freedom rankings. While RSF surveys 180 countries each year, only Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, and Tonga are included so far. Image: PMW from RSF
The report says part of the reason for the HRPP’s defeat was its plan to overhaul Samoa’s constitutional and customary law framework, which would have threatened freedom of the press.
Championing media freedom
The Journalists Association of (Western) Samoa (JAWS) is the national media association and is press freedom’s leading champion. JAWS spearheaded a media journalism studies programme based at the National University of Samoa in the effort to train journalists and promote media freedom but the course is not producing the quality journalism students needed as its focus, time and resources have been given the course.
Meanwhile, the media standards continue to slide and there is fear that the standards will drop further in the face of rapid technological changes and misinformation via social media.
A new deal for journalism The 2025 World Press Freedom Index by RSF revealed the dire state of the news economy and how it severely threatens newsrooms’ editorial independence and media pluralism.
In light of this alarming situation, RSF has called on public authorities, private actors and regional institutions to commit to a “New Deal for Journalism” by following 11 key recommendations.
Strengthen media literacy and journalism training
Part of this deal is “supporting reliable information means that everyone should be trained from an early age to recognise trustworthy information and be involved in media education initiatives. University and higher education programmes in journalism must also be supported, on the condition that they are independent.”
Finland (5th) is recognised worldwide for its media education, with media literacy programmes starting in primary school, contributing to greater resilience against disinformation.
To mark the release of the 2025 World Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) partnered with the agency The Good Company to launch a new awareness campaign that puts an ironic twist on the glossy advertising of the tourism industry.
Three out of six countries featured in the exposé are from the Asia Pacific region — but none from the Pacific Islands.
The campaign shines a stark light on the press freedom violations in countries that seem perfect on postcards but are highly dangerous for journalists, says RSF.
Disguised as attractive travel guides, the campaign’s visuals use a cynical, impactful rhetoric to highlight the harsh realities journalists face in destinations renowned for their tourist appeal.
Along with Indonesia, Greece (89th), Cambodia (115), Egypt (170), Mexico (124) and the Philippines (116) are all visited by millions of tourists, yet they rank poorly in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index, reports RSF.
‘Chilling narrative’
“The attention-grabbing visuals juxtapose polished, enticing aesthetics with a chilling narrative of intimidation, censorship, violence, and even death.
“This deliberately unsettling approach by RSF aims to shift the viewer’s perspective, showing what the dreamlike imagery conceals: journalists imprisoned, attacked, or murdered behind idyllic landscapes.”
The RSF Index 2025 teaser. Video: RSF
Indonesia is in the Pacific spotlight because of its Melanesian Papuan provinces bordering Pacific Islands Forum member country Papua New Guinea.
Despite outgoing President Joko Widodo’s 10 years in office and a reformist programme, his era has been marked by a series of broken promises, reports RSF.
“The media oligarchy linked to political interests has grown stronger, leading to increased control over critical media and manipulation of information through online trolls, paid influencers, and partisan outlets,” says the Index report.
“This climate has intensified self-censorship within media organisations and among journalists.
“Since October 2024, Indonesia has been led by a new president, former general Prabowo Subianto — implicated in several human rights violation allegations — and by Joko Widodo’s eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, as vice-president.
“Under this new administration, whose track record on press freedom offers little reassurance, concerns are mounting over the future of independent journalism.”
Fiji leads in Pacific
In the Pacific, Fiji has led the pack among island states by rising four places to 40th overall, making it the leading country in Oceania in 2025 in terms of press freedom.
A quick summary of Oceania rankings in the 2025 RSF World Press Freedom Index. Image: RSF/PMW
Both Timor-Leste, which dropped 19 places to 39th after heading the region last year, and Samoa, which plunged 22 places to 44th, lost their impressive track record.
Of the only other two countries in Oceania surveyed by RSF, Tonga rose one place to 46th and Papua New Guinea jumped 13 places to 78th, a surprising result given the controversy over its plans to regulate the media.
RSF reports that the Fiji Media Association (FMA), which was often critical of the harassment of the media by the previous FijiFirst government, has since the repeal of the Media Act in 2023 “worked hard to restore independent journalism and public trust in the media”.
In March 2024, research published in Journalism Practice journal found that sexual harassment of women journalists was widespread and needed to be addressed to protect media freedom and quality journalism.
In Timor-Leste, “politicians regard the media with some mistrust, which has been evidenced in several proposed laws hostile to press freedom, including one in 2020 under which defaming representatives of the state or Catholic Church would have been punishable by up to three years in prison.
“Journalists’ associations and the Press Council often criticise politicisation of the public broadcaster and news agency.”
On the night of September 4, 2024, Timorese police arrested Antonieta Kartono Martins, a reporter for the news site Diligente Online, while covering a police operation to remove street vendors from a market in Dili, the capital. She was detained for several hours before being released.
Samoan harassment
Previously enjoying a good media freedom reputation, journalists and their families in Samoa were the target of online death threats, prompting the Samoan Alliance of Media Professionals for Development (SAMPOD) to condemn the harassment as “attacks on the fourth estate and democracy”.
In Tonga, RSF reports that journalists are not worried about being in any physical danger when on the job, and they are relatively unaffected by the possibility of prosecution.
“Nevertheless, self-censorship continues beneath the surface in a tight national community.”
In Papua New Guinea, RSF reports journalists are faced with intimidation, direct threats, censorship, lawsuits and bribery attempts, “making it a dangerous profession”.
“And direct interference often threatens the editorial freedom at leading media outlets. This was seen yet again at EMTV in February 2022, when the entire newsroom was fired after walking out” in protest over a management staffing decison.
“There has been ongoing controversy since February 2023 concerning a draft law on media development backed by Communications Minister Timothy Masiu. In January 2024, a 14-day state of emergency was declared in the capital, Port Moresby, following unprecedented protests by police forces and prison wardens.”
This impacted on government and media relations.
Australia and New Zealand
In Australia (29), the media market’s heavy concentration limits the diversity of voices represented in the news, while independent outlets struggle to find a sustainable economic model.
While New Zealand (16) leads in the Asia Pacific region, it is also facing a similar situation to Australia with a narrowing of media plurality, closure or merging of many newspaper titles, and a major retrenchment of journalists in the country raising concerns about democracy.
Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.
Footnote content. The dust had barely settled on the Australian federal election on May 3 before the hagiographers, mythmakers and revisionists got to work. If history is seen as a set of agreed upon facts, there was a rapidly growing consensus that Labor’s imposing victory had been the result of a superb campaign, sparkling in its faultlessness.
This did not quite match pre-election remarks and assessments. The government of Anthony Albanese had been markedly unconvincing, marked by dithering, short sightedness and a lack of conviction. It had, rather inexplicably, made the conservative Coalition led by that cruel, simian looking automaton Peter Dutton, look electable.
Overall, the campaign on the part of both sides of politics was consistently dull and persistently mediocre. Expansive, broad ideas were eschewed in favour of minutiae and objects of bribery: tax matters, cutting fuel excise, forgiving some student debt, improved Medicare services and child care assistance. Issues such as the parlous reliance of Australia upon US security interests, not to mention the criminally daft obligations of the AUKUS security pact, or a detailed, coherent policy on addressing environmental and climate challenges, were kept in storage.
What did become evident in the weeks leading up to the poll was that the Coalition policy palette, which never went beyond blotches of law and order (terrorism, criminal refugees, paedophilia forefront themes), mild bribes for “cost of living relief”; and illusory nuclear energy, failed to appeal. Its campaign lacked the barely modest bite of Labor, largely because it had been eclipsed by such oxygen drawing events as US President Donald Trump’s tariff regime and the death of Pope Francis I.
It had also misread the mood of the electorate in pushing policies with a tangy Trump flavour, notably the proposed removal of 41,000 jobs from the public sector and the establishment of something similar to the US Department of Government Efficiency . (Country Liberal Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price unhelpfully promised to “make Australia great again.”) The Coalition, Dutton admitted after being accused by Labor of being “DOGE-y Dutton”, had “made a mistake” and “got it wrong”. The focus would be, instead, on natural attrition. There were also scrappy sorties on the cultural war front, featuring lashings of undesirable press outlets, such as the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and The Guardian (“hate media”, according to Dutton), and the presence of “wokeism” in schools.
Flimsy soothsayers could also be found, many endorsing a Liberal-Nationals victory. “For the first time in my journalistic career,” beamed Sharri Markson of Sky News Australia on May 1, “I’m going to offer a pre-election editorial, endorsing one side of politics […] A Dutton prime ministership would give our great nation the fresh start we deserve.” With vigorous drumbeating, Markson could only see “our values under threat – from enemies and abroad” – and retaining Anthony Albanese as prime minister was dangerous. With the analytical skill of an unread, hungover undergraduate, the political astrologist found the PM a victim of “far-left ideology”, something “out of step with mainstream Australia.”
With Labor’s victory assured, the fiscal conservatives at the Australian Financial Review proved sniffy, noting that Labor’s record on the economy did not warrant another term “but the Coalition has not made the case to change the government.” More explicit, with hectoring relish, was Australia’s premier shock jock of the press stable, Andrew Bolt. “No, the voters aren’t always right,” he wrote scoldingly in the News Corp yellow press. “This time they were wrong, and this gutless and incoherent Coalition should be ashamed.” Australians were set to “get more” of policies that had “left this country poorer, weaker, more divided and deeper in debt”.
One is reminded of Henry Kissinger’s rebuke of Chilean democracy at the election of the socialist leader Salvador Allende. As one of US foreign policy’s chief malefactors, he refused to accept the proposition that a country could “go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people.” Democracy was only worthy if directed by the appropriate interests.
Senator Price, evidently rattled by the result, returned to the Trumpian well, hoping to draw attention to claims of irregular voting in rural polling booths. The Australian Electoral Commission, she told the ABC, “has been alerted to this over and over and does little with it. I urge the ABC, as a taxpayer funded organisation, to go out and see what is occurring.”
There are other evident patterns that emerged in the vote. The old division between urban, metropolitan areas and rural and country communities has been coloured with sharpness. The Liberal Party, which must win seats in urban Australia, finds itself marginalised before its allies, the Nationals, who have retained their complement in regional and country areas. Party voices and strategists lament that not more was done after the 2022 defeat, with the Liberals refusing to address, among other things, the failure to appeal to female voters or the youth vote.
Disappointing in such stonking majorities is the assumption that minority parties and independents can be ignored, if not with contempt, then with condescending politeness. Labor may well be soaring with the greatest return of seats in its history, but attitudes of the electorate can harden quickly. The move away from the major parties, as a trend, continues, and there is no room for complacency in a new Albanese government.
Entities and individuals that thrived under the previous government with public relations contracts now want to be part of the media or run media organisations, says Fiji Media Association (FMA) secretary Stanley Simpson.
He made the comments yesterday while speaking at a World Press Freedom Day event hosted by the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific.
“We were attacked by fake accounts and a government-funded propaganda machine,” he said.
“It is ironic that those who once spinned and attacked the media as irrelevant — because they said no one reads or watches them anymore — now want to be part of the media or run media organisations.”
“There are entities and individuals that thrived under the previous government with PR contracts while the media struggled and now want to come and join the hard-fought new media landscape.”
Simpson said the Fijian media fraternity would welcome credible news services.
“We have to be wary and careful of entities that pop up overnight and their real agendas.”
“Particularly those previously involved with political propaganda.
“And we are noticing a number of these sites seemingly working with political parties and players in pushing agendas and attacking the media and political opponents.”
President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that his administration is implementing a 100 percent tariff on all films produced in foreign countries, denouncing them as “propaganda” as he aims to wrest further control over information and the media in the U.S. In a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed that the tariff would help revive the “DYING” U.S. film industry. He dubiously declared it a…
The head of Fiji’s prison service has been caught on camera involved in a fist fight that appears to have taken place at the popular O’Reilley’s Bar in the capital of Suva.
Sevuloni Naucukidi, the acting Commissioner of the Fiji Corrections Service (FCS), can be seen in the viral video throwing punches at another man as staff at the establishment scramble to contain the situation.
The 30-second clip of the incident, shared online by The Fiji Times today, had been viewed more than half a million times, with more than 8200 reactions and almost 2000 shares by 1pm (NZT).
Naucukidi was appointed to act as the Fiji prison chief at the end of March after the FCS Commissioner Dr Jalesi Nakarawa was stood down by the Constitutional Offices Commission following allegations of misbehaviour.
Fiji’s Minister for Justice Siromi Turaga (left) and Correction Service acting Commissioner Sevuloni Naucukidi on 30 March 2025. Image: Fiji Corrections Service/RNZ Pacific
Police spokesperson Wame Boutolu told The Fiji Times that no complaint had been filed with police regarding the incident.
The newspaper reported that it was not clear whether the incident took place before or after Naucukidi’s appointment as FCS acting commissioner.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The Fiji Times reported later that Justice Minister Siromi Turaga had said that a “certain level of decorum is expected at all times — particularly when in uniform, whether that be Bula Friday wear or your official work attire”.
He made the comments in relation to the controversial video.
Turaga said preliminary investigations indicated that the footage was from an earlier date.
“We have contacted the owners of the establishment, who have confirmed that the video likely dates back to early March 2025,” he said.
Among the many lessons to be learnt by Australia’s defeated Liberal-National coalition parties from the election is that they should stop getting into bed with News Corporation.
Why would a political party outsource its policy platform and strategy to people with plenty of opinions, but no experience in actually running a government?
The result of the federal election suggests that unlike the coalition, many Australians are ignoring the opinions of News Corp Australia’s leading journalists such as Andrew Bolt and Sharri Markson.
Last Thursday, in her eponymous programme on Sky News Australia, Markson said:
For the first time in my journalistic career I’m going to also offer a pre-election editorial, endorsing one side of politics […] A Dutton prime ministership would give our great nation the fresh start we deserve.
Sharri Markson issues own Dutton endorsement as ACM says ‘Australia is Tanya Plibersek’https://t.co/UYh0xKeXPR
After a vote count that sees the Labor government returned with an increased majority, Bolt wrote a piece for the Herald Sunadmonishing voters:
No, the voters aren’t always right. This time they were wrong, and this gutless and incoherent Coalition should be ashamed. Australians just voted for three more years of a Labor government that’s left this country poorer, weaker, more divided and deeper in debt, and which won only by telling astonishing lies.
That’s staggering. If that’s what voters really like, then this country is going to get more of it, good and hard.
The Australian and most of News’ tabloid newspapers endorsed the coalition in their election eve editorials.
Repudiation of minor culture war
The election result was a repudiation of the minor culture war Peter Dutton reprised during the campaign when he advised voters to steer clear of the ABC and “other hate media”. It may have felt good alluding to “leftie-woke” tropes about the ABC, but it was a tactical error.
The message probably resonated only with rusted-on hardline coalition voters and supporters of right-wing minor parties.
But they were either voting for the coalition, or sending them their preferences, anyway. Instead, attacking the ABC sent a signal to the people the coalition desperately needed to keep onside — the moderates who already felt disappointed by the coalition’s drift to the right and who were considering voting Teal or for another independent.
Attacking just about the most trusted media outlet in the country simply gave those voters another reason to believe the coalition no longer represented their values.
Reporting from the campaign bus is often derided as shallow form of election coverage. Reporters tend to be captive to a party’s agenda and don’t get to look much beyond a leader’s message.
But there was real value in covering Dutton’s daily stunts and doorstops, often in the outer suburbs that his electoral strategy relied on winning over.
What was revealed by having journalists on the bus was the paucity of policy substance. Details about housing affordability and petrol pricing — which voters desperately wanted to hear — were little more than sound bites.
Steered clear of nuclear sites
This was obvious by Dutton’s second visit to a petrol station, and yet there were another 15 to come. The fact that the campaign bus steered clear of the sites for proposed nuclear plants was also telling.
— C h r i s @chrishehim.bsky.social (@ChrisHeHim1) May 4, 2025
The grind of daily coverage helped expose the lateness of policy releases, the paucity of detail and the lack of preparation for the campaign, let alone for government.
On ABC TV’s Insiders, the Nine Newspapers’ political editor, David Crowe, wondered whether the media has been too soft on Dutton, rather than too hard as some coalition supporters might assume.
He reckoned that if the media had asked more difficult questions months ago, Dutton might have been stress-tested and better prepared before the campaign began.
Instead, the coalition went into the election believing it would be enough to attack Labor without presenting a fully considered alternative vision. Similarly, it would suffice to appear on friendly media outlets such as News Corp, and avoid more searching questions from the Canberra press gallery or on the ABC.
Reporters and commentators across the media did a reasonable job of exposing this and holding the opposition to account. The scrutiny also exposed its increasingly desperate tactics late in the campaign, such as turning on Welcome to Country ceremonies.
If many Australians appear more interested in what their prospective political leaders have to say about housing policy or climate change than the endless culture wars being waged by the coalition, that message did not appear to have been heard by Peta Credlin.
The Sky News Australia presenter and former chief-of-staff to prime minister Tony Abbott said during Saturday night’s election coverage “I’d argue we didn’t do enough of a culture war”.
On this World Press Freedom Day, we in the Pacific stand together to defend and promote the right to freedom of expression — now facing new and complex challenges in the age of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
This year’s global theme is “Reporting a Brave New World: The impact of Artificial Intelligence on Press Freedom.”
AI is changing the way we gather, share, and consume information. It offers exciting tools that can help journalists work faster and reach more people, even across our scattered islands.
But AI also brings serious risks. It can be used to spread misinformation, silence voices, and make powerful tech companies the gatekeepers of what people see and hear.
In the Pacific, our media are already working with limited resources. Now we face even greater pressure as AI tools are used without fair recognition or payment to those who create original content.
Our small newsrooms struggle to compete with global platforms that are reshaping the media landscape.
We must not allow AI to weaken media freedom, independence, or diversity in our region.
Respect our Pacific voices
Instead, we must ensure that new technologies serve our people, respect our voices, and support the role of journalism in democracy and development.
Today, PINA calls for stronger regional collaboration to understand and manage the impact of AI. We urge governments, tech companies, and development partners to support Pacific media in building digital skills, protecting press freedom, and ensuring fair use of our content.
Let us ensure that the future of journalism in the Pacific is guided by truth, fairness, and freedom — not by unchecked algorithms.
Happy World Press Freedom to all media workers across the Pacific!
Kalafi Moala is president of the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) and also editor of Talanoa ‘o Tonga. Republished from TOT with permission.
World Press Freedom Day is a poignant reminder that journalists and media workers are essential for a healthy, functioning society — including the Pacific.
Held annually on May 3, World Press Freedom Day prompts governments about the need to respect press freedom, while serving as a day of reflection among media professionals about issues of press freedom and professional ethics.
Just as importantly, World Press Freedom Day is a day of support for media which are targets for the restraint, or abolition, of press freedom.
It is also a day of remembrance for those journalists who lost their lives in the pursuit of a story.
According to Reporters Without Borders, the press freedom situation has worsened in the Asia-Pacific region, where 26 of the 32 countries and territories have seen their scores fall in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index.
The region’s dictatorial governments have been tightening their hold over news and information with increasing vigour.
No country in the Asia-Pacific region is among the Index’s top 15 this year, with Aotearoa New Zealand falling six places to 19. [Editor’s note: these figures are outdated — from last year’s 2024 Index. Go to the 2025 index here).
Although experiencing challenges to the right to information, other regional democracies such as Timor-Leste (20th), Samoa (22nd) and Taiwan (27th) have also retained their roles as press freedom models.
Storytelling a vital art
Storytelling is inherent in Pacific peoples, and it is vital this art is nurtured, and our narrative is heard loud and clear — a priority goal for Pacific Cooperation Broadcasting Limited (PCBL) and Pasifika TV.
Chief executive officer of PCBL Natasha Meleisea says Pacific-led storytelling is critical to regional identity, but like all media around the world, it faces all sorts of challenges and issues.
“Some of those current concerns include the need for journalism to remain independent, as well as the constructive use of technology, notably AI and that it supports the truth and does not undermine it,” Meleisea said.
Forums such as the Pacific Media Summit are critical to addressing, and finding a collective response to the various challenges, she added.
Resilient media sector
Meleisea said some solutions to these issues were being implemented, to provide a resilient and sustainable media sector in the Pacific.
“It is a matter of getting creative, and looking at alternative platforms for content, as well as seeking international funding and building an infrastructure which supports these new goals,” she says.
“There is no doubt journalists and media workers are essential for a healthy, functioning society and when done right, journalism can hold those in power to account, amplify underrepresented stories, bolster democratic ideals, and spread crucial information to the public.
“With press freedom increasingly under threat, we must protect Pacific story sovereignty, and our voice at the table.”
Republished from Pasifika TV strategic communications.
World Press Freedom Day is a poignant reminder that journalists and media workers are essential for a healthy, functioning society — including the Pacific.
Held annually on May 3, World Press Freedom Day prompts governments about the need to respect press freedom, while serving as a day of reflection among media professionals about issues of press freedom and professional ethics.
Just as importantly, World Press Freedom Day is a day of support for media which are targets for the restraint, or abolition, of press freedom.
It is also a day of remembrance for those journalists who lost their lives in the pursuit of a story.
According to Reporters Without Borders, the press freedom situation has worsened in the Asia-Pacific region, where 26 of the 32 countries and territories have seen their scores fall in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index.
The region’s dictatorial governments have been tightening their hold over news and information with increasing vigour.
No country in the Asia-Pacific region is among the Index’s top 15 this year, with Aotearoa New Zealand falling six places to 19. [Editor’s note: these figures are outdated — from last year’s 2024 Index. Go to the 2025 index here).
Although experiencing challenges to the right to information, other regional democracies such as Timor-Leste (20th), Samoa (22nd) and Taiwan (27th) have also retained their roles as press freedom models.
Storytelling a vital art
Storytelling is inherent in Pacific peoples, and it is vital this art is nurtured, and our narrative is heard loud and clear — a priority goal for Pacific Cooperation Broadcasting Limited (PCBL) and Pasifika TV.
Chief executive officer of PCBL Natasha Meleisea says Pacific-led storytelling is critical to regional identity, but like all media around the world, it faces all sorts of challenges and issues.
“Some of those current concerns include the need for journalism to remain independent, as well as the constructive use of technology, notably AI and that it supports the truth and does not undermine it,” Meleisea said.
Forums such as the Pacific Media Summit are critical to addressing, and finding a collective response to the various challenges, she added.
Resilient media sector
Meleisea said some solutions to these issues were being implemented, to provide a resilient and sustainable media sector in the Pacific.
“It is a matter of getting creative, and looking at alternative platforms for content, as well as seeking international funding and building an infrastructure which supports these new goals,” she says.
“There is no doubt journalists and media workers are essential for a healthy, functioning society and when done right, journalism can hold those in power to account, amplify underrepresented stories, bolster democratic ideals, and spread crucial information to the public.
“With press freedom increasingly under threat, we must protect Pacific story sovereignty, and our voice at the table.”
Republished from Pasifika TV strategic communications.
The Christian fascists and oligarchs gleefully handing Donald Trump his sharpie and executive orders are not making war on the deep state, the radical left or to protect us from “antisemites.” They are making war on verifiable fact, the rule of law and the transparency and accountability that is only possible with a free press, the right to dissent, a vibrant culture and a separation of powers, including an independent judiciary.
All of these pillars of an open society, as I detail in my book “Death of the Liberal Class,” were degraded long before Trump. The press, including public broadcasting, academia, the Democratic Party, a corporatized and banal culture, a judiciary that serves the billionaire class and a Congress bought by lobbyists, have been disemboweled.
The corporate efforts to muzzle “60 Minutes,” the prestigious American television news program, have been publicly exposed by courageous members of its own staff. But mainstream U.S. media reports have underplayed one significant factor: the intense pro-Israel views of Shari Redstone, the billionaire heiress who is the controlling shareholder of Paramount, the CBS TV network’s parent company. Her views have mostly gone unreported, even though she is one of the most powerful media moguls in America, and someone who has already sharply criticized her own network’s coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza.
Australia (ranked 29th) and New Zealand (ranked 16th) are cited as positive examples by Reporters Without Borders in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index of commitment to public media development aid, showing support through regional media development such as in the Pacific Islands.
The 2025 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has revealed the dire state of the news economy and how it severely threatens newsrooms’ editorial independence and media pluralism.
In light of this alarming situation, RSF has called on public authorities, private actors and regional institutions to commit to a “New Deal for Journalism” by following 11 key recommendations.
The media’s economic fragility has emerged as one of the foremost threats to press freedom.
According to the findings of the 2025 World Press Freedom Index, the overall conditions for practising journalism are poor (categorised as “difficult” or “very serious”) in half of the world’s countries.
When looking at the economic conditions alone, that figure becomes three-quarters.
Concrete commitments are urgently needed to preserve press freedom, uphold the right to reliable information, and lift the media out of the destructive economic spiral endangering their independence and survival.
That is where a New Deal for Journalism comes in.
The 11 RSF recommendations for a New Deal for Journalism:
1. Protect media pluralism through economic regulation Media outlets are not like other businesses and journalism does not provide services like other industries.
Although most news outlets are private entities, they serve the public interest by ensuring citizens’ access to reliable information, a fundamental pillar of democracy.
Media pluralism must therefore be guaranteed, both at market level and by ensuring individual newsrooms reflect a variety of ideas and viewpoints, regardless of who owns them.
In France (25th), debates around media ownership consolidation — particularly involving the Bolloré Group — have highlighted the risks to media pluralism.
In South Africa (27th), the Competition Commission is considering solutions to mitigate the threats posed by giant online platforms to the pluralism of the digital information space.
RSF 2025 World Press Freedom Index summary. Video: RSF
2. Adopt the JTI as a common standard News outlets, tech giants, and governments should embrace the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI), an international standard for journalism.
More than 2000 media outlets in 119 countries are already engaged in the JTI certification process. Launched by RSF, the JTI acts as a common professional reference that does not judge an outlet’s content but evaluates the processes in its production of information, improving transparency around media ownership and editorial procedures, and promoting trustworthy outlets.
This certification provides a foundation to guide public funding, inform indexing and ranking policies, and enable online platforms and search engines to highlight reliable information while protecting themselves against disinformation campaigns.
3. Establish advertisers’ democratic responsibility Governments should introduce the principle that companies have a responsibility to help uphold democracy, similar to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Advertisers should be the first to adopt this concept as a priority, as their decision to shift their budgets to online platforms — or, worse, websites that fuel disinformation — makes them partially responsible for the economic decline of journalism.
Advertisers should be encouraged to link their advertising investments to criteria on reliability and journalistic ethics. Aligning advertising strategies with the public interest is vital for fostering a healthy media ecosystem and maintaining democracies.
This notion of a democratic responsibility for companies has notably been promoted by the steering committee of the French General Assembly of Information (États généraux de l’information) and may be included in the bill that will be examined in 2025 by the French National Assembly.
4. Regulate the gatekeepers of online information Democratic states must require digital platforms to ensure that reliable sources of information are visible to the public and remunerated.
The European Union’s Copyright Directive and Australia’s (29th) News Media Bargaining Code in — the first legislation regulating Google and Facebook — are two examples of legally requiring major platforms to pay for online journalistic content.
Canada (ranked 21st) has undertaken similar reforms but has faced strong resistance, particularly from Meta, which has retaliated by removing news content from its platforms.
To ensure the economic value generated by online journalistic content is fairly distributed, these types of laws must be broadly adopted and their effective implementation must be guaranteed.
Public authorities must also ensure fair negotiations so that media outlets are not crushed by the current imbalance of power between economically fragile news companies and global tech giants.
Lastly, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has made the need for fair remuneration for content creators all the more urgent, as their work is now used to train or feed AI models. This is simply the latest example of why regulation is necessary to protect journalistic content from new forms of technological exploitation.
To mark World Press Freedom Day, 3 May, Europeans Without Borders (ESF), Cartooning for Peace and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) have joined forces for Caricartoons, a campaign celebrating press freedom. Image: RSF screenshot PMW
5. Introduce a tax on tech giants to fund quality information The goal of introducing such a tax should be to redistribute all or part of the revenue unfairly captured by digital giants to the detriment of the media. The proceeds would be redirected to news media outlets and would finance the production of reliable information.
Several countries have already committed to reforms that tax major digital platforms, but almost none are specifically aimed at supporting the production of quality information from independent sources.
Indonesia (127th) implemented a tax on foreign digital services, while also requiring platforms to remunerate media outlets for the use of their content starting in 2024. France also established a specific tax on digital companies’ revenues in 2019.
6. Use public development aid to combat news deserts and strengthen reliable information from independent sources As crises, conflicts and authoritarian regimes multiply, supporting reliable information from independent sources and countering emerging news deserts has never been more important.
Official Development Assistance (ODA) must incorporate support for independent journalism, recognising that it is indispensable not only for economic development but also for strengthening democratic governance and promoting peace.
At least 1 percent of ODA should be allocated to financing independent media outlets in order to guarantee their sustainability.
At a time when certain support mechanisms — such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) — are under threat, commitments from donor states are more crucial than ever.
Australia (ranked 29th) and New Zealand (ranked 16th) are positive examples of this commitment, showing support through regional media development programmes, notably in the Pacific Islands.
7. Encourage the development of hybrid and other innovative funding models It is essential to develop support mechanisms that combine public funding with private contributions (donations, investments, and loans), such as the IFRUM, a fund proposed by RSF to reconstruct the media in Ukraine (62nd).
To diversify funding sources, states could strengthen tax incentives for investors and broaden the call for donors beyond their own residents and taxpayers.
8. Guarantee transparency and independence in the allocation of media aid Granting public or private subsidies to the media must be based on objective and transparent criteria that are subject to oversight by civil society. Only clear, equitable aid distribution can safeguard editorial independence and protect media outlets from political interference.
One such legislative solution is the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which will come into force in 2025 across all European Union member states. It includes transparency requirements for aid distribution, obliges member states to guarantee the editorial independence of newsrooms, and mandates safeguards against political pressure.
Other countries have also established exemplary frameworks, such as Canada (21st), which has implemented a transparent system combining tax credits and subsidies while ensuring editorial independence.
9. Combat the erosion of public service media Public service media are not state media: they are independent actors, funded by citizens to fulfil a public interest mission. Their role is to guarantee universal access to reliable, diverse information from independent sources, serving social cohesion and democracy.
Financial and political attacks against these outlets — seen in many countries — threaten the public’s access to trustworthy information.
10. Strengthen media literacy and journalism training Supporting reliable information means that everyone should be trained from an early age to recognise trustworthy information and be involved in media education initiatives. University and higher education programmes in journalism must also be supported, on the condition that they are independent.
Finland (5th) is recognised worldwide for its media education, with media literacy programmes starting in primary school, contributing to greater resilience against disinformation.
11. Encourage nations to join and implement international initiatives, such as the Partnership for Information and Democracy The International Partnership for Information and Democracy, which promotes a global communication and information space that is free, pluralistic and reliable, already counts more than fifty signatory countries.
RSF stresses that journalism is a vital common good at a time when democracies are faltering.
This New Deal is a call to collectively rebuild the foundations of a free, trustworthy, and pluralistic public space.
Republished by Pacific Media Watch in collaboration with Reporters Without Borders.
World Media Freedom Day reflections of a protester
Yesterday, World Media Freedom Day, we marched to Television New Zealand in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland to deliver a letter asking them to do better.
Their coverage [of Palestine] has been biased at its best, silent at its worst.
I truly believe that if our media outlets reported fairly, factually and consistently on the reality in Gaza and in all of Palestine that tens of thousands of peoples lives would have been saved and the [Israeli] occupation would have ended already.
Instead, I open my Instagram to a new massacre, a new lifeless child.
I often wonder how we get locked into jobs where we leave our values at the door to keep our own life how (I hope) we wish all lives to be. How we all collectively agree to turn away, to accept absolute substandard and often horrific conditions for others in exchange for our own comforts.
Yesterday I carried my son for half of this [1km] march. He’s too big to be carried but I also know I ask a lot from him to join me in this fight so I meet him in the middle as I can.
Near the end of the march he fell asleep and the saying “dead weight” came to mind as his body became heavier and more difficult to carry.
I thought about the endless images I’ve seen of parents in Gaza carrying their lifeless child and I thought how lucky I am, that my child will wake up.
How small of an effort it is to carry him a few blocks in the hopes that something might change, that one parent might be spared that terrible feeling — dead weight.
Republished from an Instagram post by a Philippine Solidarity Network Aotearoa supporter.
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has paid tribute to all those working the media industry in his message to mark World Press Freedom Day.
He said in his May 3 message thanks to democracy his coalition government had removed the “dark days of oppression and suppressions”.
“Today as we join the rest of the international community in celebrating World Press Freedom Day, let us recommit ourselves to the values and ideals of our fundamental human rights freedom of expression and the freedom of the press,” said Rabuka, a former coup leader.
RNZ Pacific reports Moce was left paralysed and bedridden in 2007 after being assaulted by soldiers shortly after the 2006 military coup.
“Today is also an opportune time to remember those in the media fraternity that made the ultimate sacrifice.”
‘Brave photographer’
“In particular, I pay tribute to my ‘Yaca’ (namesake), the late Sitiveni Moce who died in 2015.
“This brave newspaper photographer was set upon by a mob in Parliament House in 2000, and again by some members of the disciplined forces in 2007 for simply carrying out his job which was to capture history in still photographs.
“His death is a sombre reminder of the fickleness of life, and how we must never ever take our freedoms for granted.”
US media reports on 1 May revealed that US President Donald Trump is expected to remove National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and one of his top deputies, Alex Wong, from their posts, allegedly over the “Signalgate” scandal.
“He could leave imminently, but the move is not final,” POLITICO cited informed sources as saying.
According to US officials who spoke with multiple western media outlets, Waltz and Wong are expected to step down after “losing the trust” of other officials and lacking support within the White House.
“Special envoy Steve Witkoff, a real estate developer and friend of President Donald Trump, is under consideration to replace Waltz as national security advisor,” CNN reported.
Here is the youtube in which Chris Hedges interviewed, on April 30, the journalist Richard Medhurst about Medhurst’s being punished-without-trial and threatened with up to five years of legal imprisonment of him under Section 12(1a) of the UK’s Terrorism Act 2000 because he had reported honestly about the wars in Syria, Lebanon, and Ukraine. Also because he refuses to tell the police whom his unidentified sources are or give them his passwords so that they could then use his computer, mobile phone, and the other devices that they had seized and impounded from his abode in August 2024 in order for police to then deal with those people in the same way they’ve been dealing with him since August last year. The U.S.-UK-Israel empire used their Austrian Government to seize him and charge Medhurst, who is a Christian, as being a member of Hamas, so that Medhurst is now under investigation in both the UK and Austria as aiding terrorists for no other reason than his reporting on Palestine and Lebanon. In addition, his criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza has made him a target who could potentially face up to 14 years imprisonment in the UK and another 10 years in Austria. Of course, he has not been convicted of anything, and he hasn’t even been charged with anything; and, so, actually throughout the U.S.-UK-Israel empire, a person can spend decades in prison without being convicted of anything at all.
This exemplifies that there are many reasons why both journalists and social scientists might be inclined to deceive their audiences. Sometimes a presenter’s employer selected and hired its employees for them to deceive the public in certain ways; but, also, the targeted public is sometimes a specific culture or group of believers who are aiming to have their group’s prejudices confirmed, and who aren’t interested in learning any truth that contradicts what the group believes. On all three sides of that — the employers, the employees, and also the audiences — some audiences – and also some employers – might be disinclined to approve of, or to employ, presenters who report truths that contradict what that group wants to believe. Lying is often required in order to succeed. There are many motivations for ‘news’-media and social ‘scientists’ to mislead or deceive their public. And the public, in such a culture of fear pervading, might be inclined to “go along in order to get along.”
On 19 October 2021, a Trump-supporter, “Liz Harrington” — through whom the former U.S. President Trump was then sending out tweets because of Jack Dorsey’s Twitter having cancelled and removed Trump’s account — issued, from Trump, a tweet, saying: “Isn’t it terrible that a Republican Congressman from Nebraska just got indicted for possibly telling some lies to investigators about campaign contributions, when half of the United States Congress lied about made up scams, and when Mark Zuckerberg, in my opinion a criminal, is allowed to spend $500 million and therefore able to change the course of a Presidential election, and nothing happens to them. Comey lied, Schiff lied, Crooked Hillary lied, McCabe lied, the two lovers, Peter and Lisa, lied. They all lied having to do with Russia, Russia, Russia, because they knew it was a SCAM — and they made up fairy tales about me knowing how badly it would hurt the U.S.A. — and nothing happens to them. Is there no justice in our country?” Perhaps all of what he said there was true — and, if so, then the U.S. Government is corrupt to so extreme an extent as to be entirely untrustworthy (no real democracy at all). In other words (and this has nothing to do with whether or not a person is or was a supporter of Trump): selective ‘justice’ is no real justice, at all; it is merely ‘justice’ that’s based upon at least one lie — and that is, instead, injustice. To apply justice — like to apply science — requires 100% truth, no compromises, no myths. This is the sound (scientific) reason why, in a U.S. trial, a witness is required to say, before testifying, that his/her testimony will be “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” and the testifier can subsequently be charged with having lied-under-oath if anything in that person’s testimony becomes subsequently proven to have been factually false, about what that person had actually seen or heard, and known at the time of that testimony. In science, the demand is 100% truth, and anything less than that is instead mere propaganda. Selective ‘justice’ is no justice, at all. This is true not only nationally but internationally. Any science demands 100% truth. That’s what it strives for. When the Government instead SUPPRESSES truth, it is a police-state.
However, the master-lie — the post-1945 Big Lie that pervades ‘news’-reporting and ‘historical’ accounts — deserves to be identified and exposed first of all. This Big Lie is that the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel, are democracies. None of them actually is. All are rigid aristocracies, or “oligarchies.” Although the U.S., UK, and Israel declare themselves to be democracies, examples of their flouting international laws, and committing national atrocities, abound. On the level of international war crimes, the lie-based invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003 is one well-known example of that. Regarding a merely personal example, Julian Assange was in various forms of imprisonment by UK for over ten years without his ever having been convicted of anything except that in 2012 he was sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for jumping bail (on sexual charges against him that even the alleged accusers themselves denied were true — the Government wanted them to lie in court, but they finally decided not to). And yet he went into solitary confinement (“23 hours a day locked in their cells”) in a super-max British prison, because the U.S. Government wouldn’t stop its demand that he be extradited to the U.S. (and killed here, instead of in Britain). His only ‘crime’ was his publishing only truths, especially truths that cut to the core of exposing the regime’s constant lying. So, this blatant and illegal injustice against an international hero (virtually everywhere except in the United States) is today one prominent disproof of the U.S. and UK lies to the effect that they are democracies. These and many other such examples in ‘the land of the free’, and in America’s and Britain’s ‘democracies’, during the post-1945 period, display the lie. On 26 September 2021, Yahoo News reported (based largely on reporting in Madrid’s El Pais on 5 January 2021) that the Trump Administration felt so embarrassed by some information that had been Wikileaked, they drew up detailed plans to kidnap Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to “rendition” him for possible execution by America. The plans, including “meetings with authorities or approvals signed by the president,” were finally stopped at the National Security Council, as being too risky. “Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred ‘at the highest levels’ of the Trump administration”, even without any legal basis to try him in the United States. So: the Trump Administration prepared an indictment against Assange (to legalize their extradition-request), and the indictment became unsealed or made public on the same day, 11 April 2019, when Ecuador’s Government allowed UK’s Government (assisted by the Israeli and Amrican billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who was Donald Trump’s biggest single campaign donor) to drag Assange out into UK super-max solitary-confinement imprisonment, and this subsequently produced lie-based U.S. & UK tussles over how to prevent Assange from ever again being able to reach the public, either by continuing his solitary confinement, or else by, perhaps, poisoning him, or else convicting him of something and then executing him. On 4 January 2021, a British judge, Vanessa Baraitser, in a 132-page decision, nixed Assange’s defense case: “I reject the defence submissions concerning staying extradition [to U.S.] as an abuse of the process of this court.” That conclusion was reaffirmed on 10 December 2021 in a 27-page ruling by England’s Chief Justice, Ian Burnett, Baron of Maldon. The BBC bannered “Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules”. The lower court judge, and then the Chief Justice, in fact, arbitrarily abused Assange, by accepting at face value the promises by the Trump Administration not to drive Assange to suicide in the American prison-system (which British judges held to be barbaric compared to their own). Earlier, Judge Baraitser’s handling of Assange’s only ‘trial’, which was his extradition hearing (he never had a trial), was an absolute travesty, which would have been expected in Hitler’s courts, and which makes clear that UK’s courts can be just as bad as Nazi courts had been. However, the U.S. regime’s efforts to grab Assange continued on until 25 June 2024, when the Biden Addministration suddenly headlined “WikiLeaks Founder Pleads Guilty and Is Sentenced for Conspiring to Obtain and Disclose Classified National Defense Information”, and announced that they were setting Assange free, because Assange pled guilty (of what had actually been great journalism). The CNN news-report about that huge come-down from the Administration’s prior consistently hard-line policy against Assange indicated that the new, less-right-wing, Government in Australia (Assange being an Australian) was one of many factors that were giving Biden cold feet about the prospect of his feeding Assange to the U.S. intelligence community wolves who were hungry for him and might have made his destruction as bloody as possible. Perhaps Biden knew that the prior Trump Administration’s promises to treat Assange well were actually impossible for the ‘Justice’ Department and America’s spooks to fulfill on, and would thus end up making Biden himself look bad around the world. Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and the overwhelmingly compliant U.S. Congress, all are to blame for that dictatorial regime’s pursuit against this champion of truth-telling; and the same blame applies to the leadership in UK. Blatantly, both America and England lie in order to refer to themselves as being democracies. In fact, America has the world’s highest percentage of its residents in prisons (but recently El Salvador has taken over that title). It’s the world’s #1 police-state — especially because America’s empire covers much of the world. Is this because Americans are worse than the people in other countries, or is it instead because the thousand or so individuals (America’s billionaires) who collectively control the nation’s Government are, themselves, especially psychopathic? America has been scientifically examined more than any other country has, in regards to whether it is an aristocracy, or instead a democracy, and the clear and consistent finding is that it’s an aristocracy. And it clearly is that at the federal level. (Here is a video summarizing the best single study of that, and it finds America to be an aristocracy, because it’s controlled by the richest few; and here is a much more popular video, declaring America to be a democracy, saying that this is so because it’s capitalist and because no capitalist nation can even possibly be a dictatorship. Oh, Hitler’s regime wasn’t capitalist? Hirohito’s wasn’t? Mussolini’s wasn’t? They ALL were. But it is the latter video — the false one — that is the more-popular one.) And even Norway’s aristocracy was part of this scandal against Assange.
However, increasingly in recent times, people around the world have been coming to recognize these realities. Here are some examples of such findings from international pollings:
But, in any case (and even if the public don’t already recognize this fact): we cannot have truth in history, news-reporting, or any of the social-science fields, unless and until the reality that both the U.S. and UK (and, also Israel) are imperialistic dictatorships — aristocracies, instead of democracies — is publicly acknowledged, not hidden and lied-about (such as political ‘scientists’ and ‘journalists’ do), sometimes by philosophical debates about what the terms (“democracy” and “dictatorship”) even mean. That recognition within the social-science fields will be a prerequisite to those fields’ knowing historical truth, today. And knowing historical truth is the basis of all science. But in a police-state the truth is suppressed, instead of made public.
NOTE: except for the first paragraph here, this article was taken from my America’s Empire of Evil book.
About 1000 pro-Palestinian protesters marked World Press Freedom Day — May 3 — today by marching on the public broadcaster Television New Zealand in Auckland, accusing it of 18 months of “biased coverage” on the genocidal Israeli war against Gaza.
They delivered a letter to the management board of TVNZ from Palestine Solidarity Network (PSNA) co-chair John Minto declaring: “The damage [done] to human rights, justice and freedom in the Middle East by Western media such as TVNZ is incalculable.”
The protesters marched on the television headquarters near Sky Tower about 4pm after an hour-long rally in the heart of the city at a precinct dubbed “Palestine Square” in the Britomart transport hub’s Te Komititanga Square.
Several opposition politicians spoke at the rally, calling for a ceasefire in the brutal war on Gaza that has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians with no sign of a let-up.
Labour Party’s disarmament and arms control spokesperson Phil Twyford was among the speakers that included Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson and Ricardo Menéndez March.
All three spoke strongly in support of Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick’s Member’s Bill to sanction Israel for its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
Davidson said the opposition parties were united behind the bill and all they needed were six MPs in the coalition government to “follow their conscience” to support it.
Appeals for pressure
They appealed to the protesters to put pressure on their local MPs to support the humanitarian initiative.
Protesters outside the Television New Zealand headquarters in Auckland today. Image: Asia Pacific Report
In The Hague this week, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) heard evidence from more than 40 countries and global organisations condemning Israel over its actions in deliberately starving the more than 2 million Palestinians by blockading the besieged enclave for more than the past two months.
Only the United States and Hungary spoke in support of Israel.
Mutlaq al-Qahtani, Qatari Ambassador to The Netherlands, also said there were “new trails of tears in the West Bank mirroring Gaza’s fate”.
Israel executing ‘genocidal war’ against Gaza, Qatar tells ICJ. Video: Al Jazeera
Among the speakers in the Auckland rally, one of about 30 similar protests for Palestine across New Zealand this weekend, was coordinator Roger Fowler of the Auckland-based Kia Ora Gaza humanitarian aid organisation, who denounced the overnight drone attack on the Gaza-bound Freedom Flotilla aid ship Conscience in international waters after leaving Malta.
The ship was crippled by the suspected Israel attack, endangering the lives of some 30 human rights activists on board. Fowler said: “That’s 2000 km away from Israel, that’s how desperate they are now to stop the Freedom Flotilla.”
A protester placard declaring “TVNZ, you’re biased reporting is shameful. Where is your integrity?” Image: Asia Pacific Report
He reminded protesters that Marama Davidson and retired trade unionist Mike Treen had been on previous aid protest voyages in past years trying to break the Israeli blockade, but there was no New Zealander on board in the current mission.
Media ‘credibility challenge’
Journalist and Pacific Media Watch convenor Dr David Robie spoke about World Media Freedom Day. He paid a tribute to the sacrifices of 211 Palestinian journalists killed by Israel — many of them targeted — saying Israel’s war on Gaza had become the “greatest credibility challenge for journalists and media of our times”.
Many protesters carried placards declaring slogans such as “TVNZ your biased reporting is shameful. Where is your integrity?”, “Journalists are not targets” and “Caring for the children of Palestine is what it’s about.”
After marching about 1km between Te Komititanga Square and the TVNZ headquarters, the protesters gathered outside the entrance chanting for fairness and balance in the reporting.
“TVNZ lies. For the past 18 months they have been nothing but complicit,” said one Palestinian speaker to a chorus of: “Shame!”
He said: “Every time TVNZ lies, a little boy in Gaza dies.”
Another Palestinian speaker, Nadine, said: “Every time the media lies, a little girl in Gaza dies.”
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) letter to Television New Zealand’s board. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Deputation delivers TVNZ letter
A deputation from the protesters delivered the letter from PSNA’s John Minto addressed to the TVNZ board chair Alastair Carruthers but found the main foyer main entrance closed so the message was left.
Minto’s two-page letter calling for an independent review of TVNZ’s reporting on Palestine and Israel said in part:
“Over the past 18 months of industrial scale killing of Palestinians by the Israeli military in Gaza we have been regularly appalled at the blatantly-biased reporting on the Middle East by Television New Zealand.
“TVNZ’s reporting has been relentlessly and virulently pro-Israel. TVNZ has centred Israeli narratives, Israeli explanations, Israeli justifications and Israeli propaganda points on a daily basis while Palestinian viewpoints are all but absent.
“When they are presented they are given rudimentary coverage at best. More often than not Palestinians are presented as the incoherent victims of Israeli brutality rather than as an occupied people fighting for liberation in a situation described by the International Court of Justice as a “plausible genocide”.
“This pattern of systemic bias and unbalanced reporting is not revealed by TVNZ’s complaints system which focuses on individual stories rather than ingrained patterns of pro-Israel bias.
“Every complaint we have made to TVNZ has, with one minor exception, been rejected by your corporation with the typical refrain that it’s not possible to cover every aspect of an issue in a single story but that over time the balance is made up.
“Our issue is that the bias continues throughout TVNZ’s reporting on a story-by-story, day-by-day basis — the balance is never achieved. The reporting goes ahead just the way the pro-Israel lobby is happy with.”
The rest of the letter detailed many examples of the alleged systematic bias, such as failing to describe Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem and as “Occupied” territory as they are designated under international law, and failing to state the illegality of Israel’s military occupation.
Minto concluded by stating: “It is prolonging Israel’s illegal occupation, its apartheid policies, its ethnic cleansing and theft of Palestinian land. TVNZ is part of the problem – a key part of the problem.”
The letter called for an independent investigation.
Palestinian protesters at TVNZ headquarters while demonstrating against the public broadcaster’s coverage of the Israeli war against Gaza on World Press Freedom Day. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Hong Kong police have arrested the father and brother of wanted U.S.-based activist Anna Kwok, local media reported on Friday.
The police said they arrested two men aged 35 and 68 on Wednesday, suspecting them of violating the national security and crimes ordinances by “attempting to directly or indirectly handle the funds of fugitives.” They didn’t identify the men.
Local media said the police discovered that Kwok’s father, Kwok Yin-sang, traveled overseas to meet her. After returning to Hong Kong he tried to withdraw nearly US$14,000 from his daughter’s life and accident insurance policies, police said.
Kwok’s brother worked at an insurance company, according to the Sing Tao Daily, and may have used his knowledge of the industry to help manage his sister’s finances.
Kwok’s father was denied bail while her brother was released, Reuters reported. The family’s lawyer could not be reached for comment, the news agency said.
Anna Kwok is the executive director of the Washington-based political lobbying group the Hong Kong Democracy Council. Hong Kong authorities offered a HK$1 million (US$128,000) bounty for her capture, accusing her of “colluding with foreign forces” under the national security law, which bans criticism of the authorities.
Kwok’s parents and two brothers were detained in August last year and questioned over whether they had any contact or financial dealings with her.
Kwok wrote on Facebook at the time that her family had never helped her and were probably unaware of the nature of her work. She said the Hong Kong government wanted to silence her by harassing her family, but she would not give up trying to pave the way for Hong Kong’s freedom and self-determination.
Edited by Mike Firn and Mat Pennington.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Cantonese.
The Committee to Protect Journalists and a group of Southeast Asian lawmakers have called for the “active engagement” of the regional bloc ASEAN in protecting press freedom and the formation of an inter-parliamentary alliance to safeguard media rights in the region, which includes some of the worst offenders of press freedom.
As governments escalate efforts to intimidate reporters and control narratives, journalism — and democracy itself — is under threat, said CPJ and the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights, a group of lawmakers working to improve rights in the region. In a joint statement on the eve of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, they also called for stronger protection mechanisms for reporters and the reform of repressive laws that criminalize journalism.
There were at least 52 journalists behind bars in Southeast Asia on December 1, 2024, CPJ’s latest annual globalprison census shows. They were mainly held in Myanmar and Vietnam, while one journalist was being held in the Philippines. The Philippines and Myanmar have also consistentlyranked among the top offenders where murderers of journalists go free.
President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order calling for an end to taxpayer funding for NPR and PBS, an escalation of his dangerous assault on public media that could shutter hundreds of local stations across the country. The president’s order, which he signed behind closed doors, echoes a section of Project 2025, a far-right agenda that called for stripping public…
An 11th-hour blitzkrieg for the Australian election 2025 tomorrow claims the Greens are enabling extremists who “will do anything in their power to establish a worldwide Islamic Caliphate”. Wendy Bacon and Yaakov Aharon investigate the Dark Money election.
SPECIAL REPORT: By Wendy Bacon and Yaakov Aharon
Minority Impact Coalition is a shadowy organisation which appeared on Australia’s political landscape in February of this year.
According to its constitution, its object is to promote “mutual respect and tolerance between groups of people in Australia by actively countering racism and bringing widespread understanding and tolerance amongst all sectors of the community”.
However, it is spreading ignorance, fear and Islamophobia to millions of mostly male Australians living in the outer suburbs and the regions.
Advance is ‘transparent … easy to deal with’ Speaking to an Australian Jewish Association webinar, Roslyn Mendelle, who is of Israeli-American origin and a director of Minority Impact Coalition (MIC), said the rightwing Advance introduced her to the concept of a third party.
“Advance has been nothing but absolutely honest, transparent, direct, and easy to deal with,” Mendelle said.
The electoral laws, which many say are “broken by design”, mean that it will be several months before MIC’s major donors are revealed. Donors making repeated donations below $15,900 are unlisted “dark money”. (This threshold will change to $5000 in 2026).
Who’s paying to undermine Australian democracy? Scam of the week Video: MWM
Coming in second place, are the returns from the Australian Taxation Office.
In NSW, it is targeting Greens candidates everywhere and is also focussed on the Labor-held seat of Gilmore, challenged by Liberal Party candidate Andrew Constance.
Independent journalist Alex McKinnon reported that MIC spokesperson and midwife, Sharon Stoliar, wrote in an open letter:
“When you chant ‘from the river to the sea Palestine will be free’ . . . while wearing NSW Health uniforms, you are representing NSW Health in a call for genocide of Jews. YOU. ARE. SUPPORTING. TERRORISM… I. WILL. REPORT. YOU.”
Its campaign material is authorised by Joshu Turier, a retired boxer and right-wing extremist.
According to Facebook library, MIC’s ads are targeted at men, particularly between ages 35 and 54 in Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales.
In mid-April, the group paid for an ad so extreme that Instagram pulled it, leading to Turier reposting on his own Facebook page again this week. He complained that “It’s beyond troubling when our media platforms remove simple, factual material.”
They are ‘coming for us’ {Editor … oh no!} By Wednesday, the video was back on MIC’s Facebook account. The video says that the Greens are deliberately enabling pro-Palestine student protesters, who
“Don’t actually believe in the concept of a nation. They don’t believe in borders. They don’t believe there is a national identity. They believe in the Islamic brotherhood.”
“. . . It is just the beginning. When antisemitism starts, it’s not going to stop. They are going to come for Christians, for Atheists, for Agnostics.”
MIC is spending big on billboards, campaign trucks, and professional videos targeting at least five electorates. But despite their big spending, they cannot be found on the Australian Electoral Commission transparency register.
According to the transparency advocacy group WhoTargets.Me, MIC has spent more than $50,000 on Google and Meta ads in the last month alone. This doesn’t account for billboards, trucks, labour, or the 200,000 addresses letterboxed in late March.
More investigation shows their donations will all flow through the QJ Collective Ltd (QJC), which also “powers” the Minority Impact Coalition website. QJC is registered as a significant third party with the Australian Electoral Commission.
Clones with ghost offices
Advance director Sandra Bourke and Roslyn Mendelle. Image: QJ Collective, Instagram
MIC and Queensland Jewish Collective are virtually identical. They have always had the same directors — with Azin Naghibi replacing Roslyn’s partner, Hava Mendelle, as both QJC and MIC director in March 2025.
When QJC first came to MWM’snotice last year, it was running a relatively well-funded campaign — although limited to several seats — to “Put the Greens Last” in the Queensland state election.
In September 2024, the group’s website stated that it was “non-partisan and not left or right-wing”, and that its “goal was to support Queenslanders in making informed decisions when voting for our leaders”. MIC is the vehicle for this campaign.
Today, neither the QJC nor MIC makes any such claim. The Collective’s website lists its leading “campaign’” as “exposing the two-faced nature of the Labor party”.
The alarming detail While the two “grassroots” groups share several of their total five different associated addresses, mostly consisting of shared offices, it is not a perfect match.
For both groups, directors Mendelle and Turier list their address as 470 St Pauls Terrace, Fortitude Valley, Queensland. There was no name or company, just an address, however, shared offices run by Jubilee Place are available at that location.
QJC and MIC director Naghibi lists her address on both extracts as 740 St Pauls Terrace, a non-commercial building.
Either Mendelle and Turier are living out of a shared office, or Naghibi is unable to remember the address of the shared office she has little real connection to.
Last year, MWM contacted the owners of QJC’s listed office address at Insolvency Company Accountants in Tewantin, Queensland. At first, the firm said that no one had heard of them. Following that, the firm said that the Collective is a client of the firm, however denied any further connection.
A fresh search this year showed an additional contact address listed by the grassroots Collective — this time 1700 km away — at 1250 Malvern Road, Malvern, Victoria. Again there was no name or company, just an address.
Located at that address is boutique accounting firm Greenberg & Co, which specialises in serving clients who are “high net worth individuals”. MWM contacted senior partner Jay Greenberg who said his role was only one of ‘financial compliance’. He said that he did have personal views on the election but these were not relevant. He declined to discuss further details.
Attack of the clones Better Australia is a third party campaigner that, like QJ Collective in 2024, claims to be bipartisan.
Its communications are authorised by Sophie Calland, an active member of NSW Labor’s Alexandria Branch. Her husband Ofir Birenbaum — from the nearby Rosebery Branch — is also a member of the third party Better Australia.
Co-convenor of Labor Friends of Israel, Eric Roozendaal, and former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s secretary, Yaron Finkelstein, provided further campaign advice at a members meeting.
Patron of Labor Friends of Israel and former Senator Nova Peris teamed up with Better Australia for a campaign video last week.
“When Greens leader Adam Bandt refuses to stand in front of the Australian flag,” Peris said, “I ask, how can you possibly stand for our country?”
Better Australia’s stated goal is to campaign for a major government “regardless of which major party is in office”.
The group urges voters to “put the Greens and Teals last”, warning that a Labor minority government would be chaos. The “non-partisan” third party has made no statements on the Liberal-National Coalition, nor on a minority government with One Nation.
Some Better Australia workers — who wear bright yellow jackets labelled “community advisor” — are paid, and others volunteer.
“Isabella” told MWM that her enlistment as a volunteer for the third party campaigner is “not political” — rather it is all “about Israel”.
Previously Isabella had protested in support of the Israeli hostages and prisoners of war held in Gaza.
Better Australia’s “community advisor” “Isabella” at a Bondi Junction polling booth. Image: Wendy Bacon/MWM
Another campaigner told us he was paid by Better Australia. He spoke little English and declined to say more.
Two schoolgirls campaigning at Rose Bay told MWM that they were paid by their father who had chaired a Better Australia meeting the previous evening. They declined to disclose his name.
Calland addressing her Israeli volunteers. Image: Better Australia/Instagram/MWM
MWM later interviewed this woman who is an Israeli on a working holiday visa. She was supporting the campaign because it fits her political “vision”: the Greens and independent MPs like Allegra Spender must be removed from office because they are “against Israel” and for a “Free Palestine” which would mean the end of “my country”.
Allegra Spender denies these assertions.
Greens leader Adam Bandt remained determinedly optimistic, telling MWM that organisations such as Better Australia and MIC,
“are able to run their disinformation campaigns because Australia has no truth in political advertising laws, which enables them to lie about the priorities of the Greens and crossbench without consequence, as well as huge corporate money flowing into politics.
“In this term of Parliament, Labor failed to progress truth in political advertising laws, and instead did a dirty deal with the Liberals on electoral reforms to try and shut out third parties and independents.”
Labor’s candidate for Wentworth, Savannah Peake, told MWM on Tuesday that she had known Calland for 18 months.
Peake said that while she knew Calland had previously founded Better Council, she had only discovered Calland was authorising Better Australia when she arrived at the booth that morning.
Peake told MWM that she had contacted the NSW Labor Head Office to voice her objections and was confident the issue would be “dealt with swiftly”.
The third party campaign runs contrary to Peake’s preferences, which tells supporters in Wentworth to vote #1 Labor and #2 Allegra Spender. MWM repeatedly tried to follow up with Peake throughout the week to find out what action NSW Labor had taken but received no reply.
Liberal candidate for Wentworth, Ro Knox, complies with Better Australia’s call to put Greens last on her voting preferences.
Many people in NSW Labor know about their fellow members’ involvement in Better Australia. The Minister for Environment and MP for Sydney Tanya Plibersek, state member Ron Hoenig and NSW Labor have all previously refused to answer questions.
A Labor volunteer at a Wentworth pre-poll booth told MWM that he disapproved if a fellow party member was involved with the third party. Two older Labor volunteers were in disbelief, having incorrectly assumed that the anti-Teal posters were authorised by the Trumpet of Patriots party.
Another said he was aware of Calland’s activities but had decided “not to investigate” further.
Better Australia focuses on Richmond By the end of the week, Better Australia had left a trail of “Put the Greens last’ placards across Sydney’s Inner West, one of them outside the Cairo Takeaway cafe where the third party’s organiser Ofir Birenbaum was first exposed.
The third party have extended their polling campaign to the seat of Richmond, on the North coast of NSW where campaign sources are expecting more volunteers on election day.
As parties dash to the finishing line, they are calling for more donations to counter the astroturfers. According to website TheyTargetYou, the major parties alone have spent $11.5 million on Meta and Google ads over the last month.
Better Australia splurged $200,000 on ads targeting digital TV, social media, and the Australian Financial Review. Digital ads will continue in the final three days of the election, exploiting loopholes in the mandated political advertising blackout.
The Australian public has made little progress towards transparency in the current term of government.
Until reforms are made, Silicon Valley tech giants will continue to profit from dodgy ads and astroturfing groups sowing division with each Australian election cycle.
Wendy Bacon is an investigative journalist who was the Professor of Journalism at UTS. She worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is a long-term supporter of a peaceful BDS and the Greens.
Yaakov Aharon is a Jewish-Australian living in Wollongong. He enjoys long walks on Wollongong Beach, unimpeded by Port Kembla smoke fumes and AUKUS submarines. The article was first published by Michael West Media and is republished with permission.
While Aotearoa New Zealand improved three places in the latest RSF World Press Freedom Index — up to 16th — and most other Pacific countries surveyed did well, it was a bad year generally for the Asia-Pacific region.
Fiji (40th — up four places) has done best out of island nations to edge Samoa (44 — slumping 22 places) out of its traditional perch.
In the region overall, press freedom and access to reliable news sources have been “severely compromised” by the predominance of regimes — often authoritarian — that strictly control information, often through economic means, reports RSF.
In many countries, the government has a tight grip on media ownership, allowing them to interfere in outlets’ editorial choices, says the regional report.
“It is highly telling that 20 of the region’s 32 countries and territories saw their economic indicators drop in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index,” said the RSF editors.
Authoritarian regimes’ systematic control
The region harbours some of the most advanced states in terms of media control.
In North Korea (179), the media are nothing more than propaganda tools entirely subordinate to the country’s totalitarian regime.
In China (178) and Vietnam (173), outlets are either state-owned or controlled by groups closely tied to the countries’ respective Communist parties, and the only independent reporting comes from freelance journalists who mainly operate underground.
The independent journalists “work under constant threat and with no financial stability”.
RSF’s World Press Freedom Index commentary. Video: RSF
Meanwhile, foreign outlets can find themselves blacklisted at any given moment.
Growing repression, increasing uncertainty
The crackdown on press freedom is spreading across the region and is increasingly inspired
by the Chinese method of controlling information, reports RSF.
Spotlight on the Asia-Pacific region for media freedom. Image: RSF
Since the 2021 military coup in Myanmar (169), many of the country’s independent outlets have been dismantled. The few that remain are forced to work underground or from exile and can barely continue operations due to the lack of sustainable revenue.
Similarly, crackdowns on press freedom in Cambodia (161) and Hong Kong (140), where the press freedom situation has become “very serious,” have led to newsroom closures, journalists fleeing into exile — often with fragile finances — and pro-government outlets absorbing most media funding.
In Afghanistan (175), at least 12 new media outlets were forced to close in 2024 due to new directives imposed by the Taliban.
In the United States, the decision made in March by President Donald Trump led to the
suspension of Radio Free Asia’s (RFA) shortwave radio programmes in Mandarin, Tibetan
and Lao, and its affiliated BenarNews service, which had been building up Pacific news coverage.
Most US-based staff, including at-risk visa holders, along with staff in Australia, were axed with the budget cuts, potentially turning entire regions into “information blackouts”.
Media concentration and political collusion
In several countries, the concentration of media ownership in the hands of political magnates threatened media plurality, the RSF Asia-Pacific editors said.
In India (151), Indonesia (127) and Malaysia (88 ), a handful of politically connected conglomerates control most media groups.
In Thailand (85), the major media groups maintain close ties with the military or royal elite, who directly influence their content.
Similarly, in Mongolia (102), influential individuals from the business world, who are
often close to those in power, own a dominant share of the media landscape and use it to
promote their political and economic interests.
In Pakistan (158), the authorities threaten independant outlets with the cancellation of government advertising contracts.
Economic pressure even in democracies
Independent outlets in established democracies have also fallen prey to economic pressure.
In Taiwan (24), a rare case of government pressure affected the English-speaking public
broadcaster TaiwanPlus, whose funding was also significantly reduced by Parliament, which
is controlled by opposition parties.
In Australia (29), the media market’s heavy concentration limits the diversity of voices represented in the news, while independent outlets struggle to find a sustainable economic model.
While New Zealand (16) leads in the Asia Pacific region, it is also facing a similar situation to Australia with a narrowing of media plurality, closure or merging of many newspaper titles, and a major retrenchment of journalists in the country raising concerns about democracy.
The closure of Newshub cited by RSF as one of the threats to media freedom in Aotearoa New Zealand. Image: RSF webinar screenshot PMW
Until four years ago, New Zealand had been regularly listed among the top 10 leading countries for press freedom — along with the Scandinavian countries — but last year dropped as far as 19th.
The RSF regional analyses are updated every year and shed light on the trends observed in each year’s Index and provide additional information.
The ranking and press freedom situation of each of the Index’s 180 countries are detailed in the country profiles, which can be consulted on the RSF website.
World Press Freedom is celebrated globally tomorrow – May 3 each year.
Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.
Authoritarian regimes’ systematic control . . . RSF Asia-Pacific bureau advocacy manager Aleksandra Bielakowska presenting the regional report at a webinar in Taipei today. Image: RSF webinar screenshot PMW
After a year and a half of war, nearly 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed by the Israeli army — including at least 43 slain on the job.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has brought multiple complaints before the International Criminal Court (ICC) and continues to tirelessly support Gazan journalists, working to halt the extraordinary bloodshed and the media blackout imposed on the strip.
“Journalists are being targeted and then slandered after their deaths,” RSF director-general Thibaut Bruttin said during a recent RSF demonstration in Paris in solidarity with Gazan journalists.
“I have never before seen a war in which, when a journalist is killed, you are told they are really a ‘terrorist’.”
The journalists gathered together with the main organisations defending French media workers and press freedom on April 16 in front of the steps of the Opéra-Bastille to condemn the news blackout and the fate of Palestinian journalists.
The slaughter of journalists is one of the largest media massacres this century being carried out as part of the Israeli genocide in Gaza.
RSF said there was “every reason to believe that the Israeli army is seeking to establish a total silence about what is happening in Gaza”.
This was being done by preventing the international press from entering the territory freely and by targeting those who, on the ground, continue to bear witness despite the risks.
Mobilisation of journalists in Paris, France, in solidarity with their Gazan colleagues. Video: RSF
Last year, Palestinian journalists covering Gaza were named as laureates of the 2024 UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize, following the recommendation of an International Jury of media professionals.
It is quite possible to take apart virtually any report in the Guardian on Gaza – as I have done with a story in today’s paper – and identify the same kinds of journalistic malpractice.
Further, I could have taken any paragraph in the article and parsed it in much the same way as I do below. But for the sake of brevity, I have selected four paragraphs (each in bold) that illustrate the abysmal state of reporting about Gaza by Britain’s supposedly most serious, liberal newspaper.
Note that these misrepresentations are included in a story that is ostensibly critical of Israel. A new report by the United Nations accuses Israel of physically abusing and torturing its staff, including teachers, doctors, and social workers, and of using others as human shields.
The language and framing used by the Guardian below serve to dilute the impact of the UN report, and thereby give Israel’s behaviour far more legitimacy than it deserves.
“The Palestine Red Crescent Society said on Tuesday that Israel had released a medic held since a deadly and hugely controversial attack by Israeli troops on ambulances in southern Gaza on 23 March.”
“Hugely controversial” is the Guardian’s cowardly way of referring to an indisputable atrocity. Israel murdered 15 paramedics and fire crew members in a three-and-a-half-minute hail of bullets on clearly marked emergency vehicles. Israel then crushed the vehicles, and buried them and the crews’ bodies to hide the evidence.
In what world is that only “controversial”?
“Controversy” implies two sides to an issue. It suggests room for doubt. There is no debate or doubt about what happened, apart from one perpetuated by the Western media. Had Russia done the same to Ukrainian medics, the Guardian would be calling it what it is: a war crime.
War crimes aren’t “controversial”. They are war crimes.
“Israel banned all cooperation with UNRWA’s activities in Gaza and the occupied West Bank earlier this year, and claims the [United Nations] agency has been infiltrated by Hamas, an allegation that has been fiercely contested.”
Again, “fiercely contested” is the Guardian’s weaselly way of giving credence to an obvious Israeli lie. Israel has had many, many months to produce even a sliver of evidence to support its claim that Hamas infiltrated the UN refugee agency, UNRWA – and they have signally failed to do so.
To call the smear an “allegation” and claim it is “contested” is to suggest that someone apart from Israel takes the smear seriously. They don’t. That is why it is a smear.
“Rights groups accuse Israel of using a ‘starvation tactic’ that endangers the whole population, potentially making it a war crime.”
It is not just “rights groups”, and it’s not just an “accusation”. The International Criminal Court has an arrest warrant out for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for crimes against humanity, and one of those crimes is for starving Gaza’s population. Israel’s starvation policy has actually intensified since Israel broke the ceasefire agreement last month. Israeli leaders even proudly admit they are starving the population. So, how is that just an “accusation”?
And starving the population isn’t just “potentially” a war crime. It is a war crime. It is a prime example in international law of “collective punishment” – collectively punishing civilians for the actions of their leaders. And in this case, “punishment” is starving them to death – the gravest kind of collective punishment and the gravest kind of war crime.
“Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has vowed to continue the offensive until all the hostages are returned and Hamas is either destroyed or agrees to disarm and leave the territory.”
Journalists usually use the word “vow” to indicate a positive view of a proposed action. A more neutral word here would be “threatened”. Even the conservative International Court of Justice suspects Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. How does “Netanyahu vowed to continue the genocide until all the hostages are returned” sound? Strange? Outrageous? Then, you understand the point.
Further, why is the Guardian parroting only the most self-serving of Netanyahu’s claims about the aims of Israel’s war crimes (while giving Israel the benefit of the doubt about whether they are war crimes)? There are a whole host of other, far more plausible reasons for Israel destroying all of Gaza’s infrastructure, including its hospitals, and killing and maiming 100,000s of Palestinians, than “getting the hostages back” or “disarming Hamas”.
They include an aim stated by Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders that they wish to “encourage” Palestinians to leave their homeland. The wanton death and destruction spread by Israel seem to be what they all mean by “encouragement”.
The constant drip-drip of skewed language, slanted reporting, and prejudicial framing by the Western media has a purpose. It is intended to erode the reader’s sense of right and wrong, fact and fiction, victim and oppressor.
It is there to disorientate us, leaving us more open to disbelieving what we can see with our own eyes: that there is a genocide going on, and our own leaders are actively assisting it.
By Jayden Lawrence and Steve Macek The 55th anniversary of Earth Day, on April 22, 2025, has come and gone. Once again, the country’s most prominent news outlets have concluded their annual, half-hearted coverage of the environment and environmental justice. International Workers’ Day is approaching on Thursday, May 1, and,…
New polling demonstrates that most voters see President Donald Trump as a dangerous politician and view his leadership style as dictatorial. In Truth Social posts earlier this week, Trump seemed to confirm that point of view, expressing disdain for the press and demanding firings at news companies that published data showcasing voters’ negative views of his presidency 100 days into his second…
And I certainly did not expect Peter Dutton — amid an election campaign, one with citizens heading to the polls on World Press Freedom Day — to come out swinging at the ABC and Guardian Australia, telling his followers to ignore “the hate media”.
I’m not saying Labor is likely to be the great saviour of the free press either.
The ALP has been slow to act on a range of important press freedom issues, including continuing to charge journalism students upwards of $50,000 for the privilege of learning at university how to be a decent watchdog for society.
Labor has increased, slightly, funding for the ABC, and has tried to continue with the Coalition’s plans to force the big tech platforms to pay for news. But that is not enough.
The World Press Freedom Index has been telling us for some time that Australia’s press is in a perilous state. Last year, Australia dropped to 39th out of 190 countries because of what Reporters Without Borders said was a “hyperconcentration of the media combined with growing pressure from the authorities”.
We should know on election day if we’ve fallen even further.
What is happening in America is having a profound impact on journalism (and by extension journalism education) in Australia.
‘Friendly’ influencers
We’ve seen both parties subtly start to sideline the mainstream media by going to “friendly” influencers and podcasters, and avoid the harder questions that come from journalists whose job it is to read and understand the policies being presented.
What Australia really needs — on top of stable and guaranteed funding for independent and reliable public interest journalism, including the ABC and SBS — is a Media Freedom Act.
My colleague Professor Peter Greste has spent years working on the details of such an act, one that would give media in Australia the protection lacking from not having a Bill of Rights safeguarding media and free speech. So far, neither side of government has signed up to publicly support it.
Australia also needs an accompanying Journalism Australia organisation, where ethical and trained journalists committed to the job of watchdog journalism can distinguish themselves from individuals on YouTube and TikTok who may be pushing their own agendas and who aren’t held to the same journalistic code of ethics and standards.
I’m not going to argue that all parts of the Australian news media are working impartially in the best interests of ordinary people. But the good journalists who are need help.
The continuing underfunding of our national broadcasters needs to be resolved. University fees for journalism degrees need to be cut, in recognition of the value of the profession to the fabric of Australian society. We need regulations to force news organisations to disclose when they are using AI to do the job of journalists and broadcasters without human oversight.
And we need more funding for critical news literacy education, not just for school kids but also for adults.
Critical need for public interest journalism
There has never been a more critical need to support public interest journalism. We have all watched in horror as Donald Trump has denied wire services access for minor issues, such as failing to comply with an ungazetted decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.
And mere days ago, 60 Minutes chief Bill Owens resigned citing encroachments on his journalistic independence due to pressure from the president.
The Committee to Protect Journalists is so concerned about what’s occurring in America that it has issued a travel advisory for journalists travelling to the US, citing risks under Trump administration policies.
Those of us who cover politically sensitive issues that the US administration may view as critical or hostile may be stopped and questioned by border agents. That can extend to cardigan-wearing academics attending conferences.
While we don’t have the latest Australian figures from the annual Reuters survey, a new Pew Research Centre study shows a growing gap between how much Americans say they value press freedom and how free they think the press actually is. Two-thirds of Americans believe press freedom is critical. But only a third believe the media is truly free to do its job.
If the press isn’t free in the US (where it is guaranteed in their constitution), how are we in Australia expected to be able to keep the powerful honest?
Every single day, journalists put their lives on the line for journalism. It’s not always as dramatic as those who are covering the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, but those in the media in Australia still front up and do the job across a range of news organisations in some fairly poor conditions.
If you care about democracy at all this election, then please consider wisely who you vote for, and perhaps ask their views on supporting press freedom — which is your right to know.
Alexandra Wake is an associate professor in journalism at RMIT University. She came to the academy after a long career as a journalist and broadcaster. She has worked in Australia, Ireland, the Middle East and across the Asia Pacific. Her research, teaching and practice sits at the nexus of journalism practice, journalism education, equality, diversity and mental health.
@chrishehim.bsky.social 
(@ChrisHeHim1) 
