tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/press-freedom-6805/articlesPress freedom – The Conversation2024-03-20T19:55:20Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2261862024-03-20T19:55:20Z2024-03-20T19:55:20ZWhat Article 23 means for the future of Hong Kong and its once vibrant pro-democracy movement<p><em>Lawmakers in Hong Kong <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/19/hong-kong-article-23-security-law/">passed new security legislation</a> on March 19, 2024, handing authorities in the semi-autonomous city-state further power to clamp down on dissent.</em></p>
<p><em>The law, under <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/19/what-is-article-23-hong-kongs-new-draconian-national-security-law">Article 23</a>, has been decades in the making but was resisted for a long time by protesters who feared the legislation’s effect on civil liberties in Hong Kong, a special administrative region in China that has become increasingly under the thumb of Beijing.</em></p>
<p><em>To explain what the adoption of Article 23, which is set to be signed into law on March 23, 2024, means for the future of Hong Kong, The Conversation turned to Michael C. Davis, a <a href="https://jgu.edu.in/jgls/prof-michael-c-davis/">law professor</a> who taught constitutional law and human rights in Hong Kong for more than 30 years, most recently at the University of Hong Kong, and is the author of “<a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/freedom-undone/9781952636448">Freedom Undone: The Assault on Liberal Values in Hong Kong</a>.”</em></p>
<hr>
<iframe id="noa-web-audio-player" style="border: none" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=x84olp&id=https://theconversation.com/what-article-23-means-for-the-future-of-hong-kong-and-its-once-vibrant-pro-democracy-movement-226186&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=D8352A&playColor=D8352A" width="100%" height="110px"></iframe>
<p><em>You can listen to more articles from The Conversation, narrated by Noa, <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/audio-narrated-99682">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<h2>What is the background to Article 23?</h2>
<p>Article 23 has a lengthy backstory. It is an article in the <a href="https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/index/">Basic Law of Hong Kong</a> requiring the Hong Kong government to enact a local ordinance governing national security. The Basic Law itself is effectively the constitution of Hong Kong. Its promulgation by the central government was part of China’s obligation under the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 – the treaty providing for Hong Kong’s return to China. Thirteen years later, in 1997, the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-40426827">territory was transferred to Chinese rule</a> after more than a century under the British. </p>
<p>The Basic Law established a largely liberal constitutional order for post-handover Hong Kong. This included guarantees of the rule of law and basic freedoms, as well as a promise of ultimate universal suffrage. It was formally adopted by China’s National People’s Congress in 1990.</p>
<p>Basic Law Article 23 requires the Hong Kong government to “on its own” enact certain national security laws relating to treason, secession, sedition, subversion or theft of state secrets, and to regulate foreign organizations.</p>
<p>The Hong Kong government first put forward an Article 23 bill in 2003. But due to concerns over the implications for press and organizational freedoms, as well as expanded police powers, the proposed bill <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-68594448">met with widespread opposition</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A uniformed police officer puts his fingers in his ears in front of a sign that has the number 23 crossed out." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583128/original/file-20240320-16-thmm5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Noisy protests help defeat an earlier version of Article 23 in 2003.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/police-officer-puts-his-fingers-in-his-ears-to-protect-news-photo/1258921548?adppopup=true">Peter Parks/AFP via Getty Images)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A group of seven leading lawyers and two legal academics, including myself, challenged the proposed bill in a collection of pamphlets that highlighted its deficiencies under international human rights standards. Meanwhile, <a href="https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3178339/july-1-2003-500000-take-hong-kongs-streets-protest-against">half a million protesters</a> took to the streets of Hong Kong. </p>
<p>In the face of such opposition and the consequent withdrawal of support by a leading pro-goverment party, the bill was withdrawn. </p>
<p>Rather than come forward with a replacement bill that would address human rights concerns, the government opted to let Article 23 languish for two decades.</p>
<p>Then, in 2020, Beijing <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/hong-kong-national-security-law-10-things-you-need-to-know/">imposed a national security law</a> that gave Hong Kong authorities greater power. It led to the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/one-year-hong-kong-arrests-117-people-under-new-security-law-2021-06-30/">arrest and repression of opposition figures</a> in Hong Kong, silencing the once-vibrant democracy movement. </p>
<p>With no effective opposition left and the threat of arrest for anyone who speaks out, the pro-Beijing Hong Kong government decided now was the time to ram through a more extreme version of the bill.</p>
<p>The Hong Kong government, with Beijing’s encouragement, was able to open up a short consultation on the new Article 23 legislative proposal with little or no opposition expressed. </p>
<p>The process was facilitated by a “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/china/hong-kong-patriots-only-election-falls-flat-with-record-low-turnout-2023-12-11">patriots only” electoral system</a> imposed by Beijing in 2021 that has tightened Beijing’s grip over the Hong Kong legislature, leading to unanimous support for the bill.</p>
<h2>How will it affect civil liberties in Hong Kong?</h2>
<p>In tandem with the 2020 Beijing-imposed national security law, the new Article 23 legislation will have a dramatic effect on civil liberties.</p>
<p>The national security law – with its vague provisions on secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion – has already been used along with a colonial-era sedition law to arrest and silence dissent in Hong Kong. Many opposition figures <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/20/world/asia/hong-kong-democracy-leaders.html">are in prison or have fled into exile</a>. And those with dissenting views who remain have largely gone silent. </p>
<p>The draft bill expands on the national security law in key areas: the stealing of state secrets, insurrection, sabotage and external interference in Hong Kong.</p>
<p>It essentially embraces mainland China’s comprehensive national security regime, which has long focused on suppressing internal opposition, targeting numerous areas of local civil life, impacting organizational, press and academic freedoms.</p>
<p>Included in Article 23 is the adoption of the mainland’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/world/asia/china-state-secrets-law.html">broad definition of “state secrets</a>,” which can even include reporting or writing on social and economic development policies. </p>
<p><iframe id="6v2wZ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/6v2wZ/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The legislation expands the potential use of incarceration with both lengthy sentences upon conviction and longer holding of suspects before trial.</p>
<p>Article 23 also intensifies <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/hong-kong-article-23-new-national-security-laws-explained-what-do-they-mean">scrutiny of “foreign influence</a>” – making working with outsiders risky for Hong Kong citizens.</p>
<p>The draft legislation speaks disparagingly of activism under the guises of fighting for or monitoring human rights and is critical of “so-called” nongovernmental organizations.</p>
<p>All of this makes working with or supporting international human rights organizations perilous. </p>
<p>In short, in the space of two decades, Hong Kong’s liberal constitutional order has been transformed into a national security order with weak or no protections for basic freedoms.</p>
<h2>What is the wider context to Article 23?</h2>
<p>To understand this legislation, one must appreciate the Chinese Communist Party’s deep hostility to liberal values and institutions, such as the rule of law, civil liberties, independent courts, a free press and public accountability. Such liberal ideas are viewed as an existential threat to party rule. </p>
<p>This mindset has led to a dramatic expansion of the party’s <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/china-vows-to-safeguard-national-security-with-new-laws-at-conclave-/7520474.html">national security agenda</a> under current leader Xi Jinping. </p>
<p>Beijing has emphasized economic development in recent decades, staking its legitimacy on economic growth – betting that people will care more about their standard of living than about political freedoms. But as <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/15/china-needs-reforms-to-halt-significant-growth-declines-imf-chief.html">growth declines</a>, leaders’ concerns about security and dissent have grown, placing such security even above economic development.</p>
<p>This has led to the comprehensive national security concept now being imposed on Hong Kong. </p>
<p>With Beijing advancing an agenda that casts liberal, democratic ideas as a threat, a liberal Hong Kong on the country’s border became impossible for the Chinese Communist Party to ignore.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A group of protesters shelter under umbrellas" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/583131/original/file-20240320-18-8saqyx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Protestors in Hong Kong use umbrellas as improvised shields in 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/protestors-using-improvise-shield-to-push-toward-police-news-photo/1191713262?adppopup=true">Kwan Wong/NurPhoto via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Widespread <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-48607723">protests in Hong Kong in 2019</a> both exacerbated this concern and offered an opportunity for Beijing to address the perceived threat under the <a href="https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1240540.shtml">claim that protesters were advancing a so-called “color revolution</a>.”</p>
<p>Having long nurtured its loyalist camp to rule Hong Kong, these loyal officials became the instrument of the crackdown.</p>
<h2>What does the lack of protest now say about the pro-democracy movement?</h2>
<p>It tells us that the mainland national security regime imposed on Hong Kong has effectively intimidated the society, especially those with opposition views, into silence. </p>
<p>Hong Kong’s pro-democratic camp had <a href="https://doi.org/10.4000/chinaperspectives.5563">historically enjoyed majority support, at around 60%</a> of the voters in the direct elections that were allowed for half of the legislative seats.</p>
<p>The introduction of loyalists-only elections led to a dramatically reduced turnout.</p>
<p>This and emigration patterns tend to show that the majority of Hong Kong people do not support this new illiberal order.</p>
<p>Be that as it may, with most of their pro-democratic leaders either in jail or exile, they dare not speak out against the new national security regime.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226186/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael C. Davis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the space of two decades, Hong Kong’s liberal constitutional order has been transformed into a security regime that grants citizens few civil libertiesMichael C. Davis, Professor of Law and International Affairs, O.P. Jindal Global UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2247502024-03-18T13:42:37Z2024-03-18T13:42:37ZPress freedom in Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda: what journalists have to say about doing their jobs<p>A majority of the world’s population has experienced a decline in press freedom in recent years, according to <a href="https://www.unesco.org/reports/world-media-trends/2021/en">a UN report</a>. In east Africa, the results are mixed and debatable. </p>
<p>In <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/rwanda/freedom-world/2024">Rwanda</a>, both international press freedom rankings and journalists on the ground say press freedom has increased over the past 10 years. In neighbouring <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/uganda/freedom-world/2024">Uganda</a>, both international rankings and local journalists say media freedom has declined. In <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/kenya/freedom-world/2024">Kenya</a>, rankings reflect declining freedom over the past decade, but reporters acknowledge they have more freedom than their counterparts in Uganda and Rwanda.</p>
<p>In our roles as associate professors in journalism and mass communication, we interviewed and surveyed more than 500 journalists in Rwanda, Uganda and Kenya. We learned that the evolution and current state of press freedom in the region is complex. In our book, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/press-freedom-and-the-crooked-path-toward-democracy-9780197634202?cc=us&lang=en&">Press Freedom and the (Crooked) Path Toward Democracy: Lessons from Journalists in East Africa</a>, we provide an updated state of press freedom in these three countries. </p>
<p>We argue that much of the academic research that classifies global media systems has overlooked the world’s most developing nations, and those that have included developing nations have failed to consider their historical contexts. They have worked from a misguided premise that nations develop in a linear fashion – from non-democracy to democracy – and from a restricted press to a free press. In reality, press freedom and democracy ebb and flow. </p>
<p>We examine the impact of social, political, legal and economic factors on media in Rwanda, Uganda and Kenya to help with understanding media systems outside the western world. </p>
<p>We chose to study these three countries because they represent varying stages of development and democracy building. Rwanda, which experienced a genocide in 1994, is in relatively early (though fast paced) stages of reconstruction. Uganda, which experienced a civil war in the 1980s and unrest in the 1990s but arguably not to the extent of Rwanda’s genocide, can be considered in a middle stage of development. Kenya, which has remained largely peaceful, can be understood as being in a more advanced stage of development.</p>
<h2>Rwanda</h2>
<p>In Rwanda, despite 30 years of economic, social and media progress and development, <a href="https://rsf.org/en/country/rwanda">lingering impacts</a> from the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi permeate the country’s media. <a href="https://cpj.org/reports/2014/12/legacy-of-rwanda-genocide-includes-media-restricti/">Multiple laws</a> limit free expression in the name of genocide prevention, and international press freedom rankings indicate the nation is <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/rwanda/freedom-world/2024">not free</a>. </p>
<p>Yet, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/press-freedom-and-the-crooked-path-toward-democracy-9780197634202?cc=us&lang=en&">we found</a> that many Rwandan journalists believe that they have a great deal of freedom and that outsiders don’t consider the country’s history when evaluating the media. Outsiders, for example, hear that Rwandan journalists cannot criticise the president or high-ranking government officials and immediately think there is no press freedom. But local journalists say they don’t feel oppressed. They feel relatively free to choose their story topics. They don’t want to publish critical stories because they want to foster peace. </p>
<p>Journalists believe their role is to act as unifiers and right the wrongs of their predecessors who exacerbated the genocide. Public trust in the media <a href="https://academic.oup.com/book/49408/chapter-abstract/418504465?redirectedFrom=fulltext">remains high</a>, according to <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1077699021998647">focus groups</a> conducted with members of the general public. In Rwanda, there appears to be a relationship between press freedom and distance from conflict. That is, the more time that passes since the country experienced war, the more press freedom it has. </p>
<p>Prioritising social good over media rights has helped the country unify and develop, but over the long term <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/press-freedom-and-the-crooked-path-toward-democracy-9780197634202?cc=us&lang=en&">we see signs</a> that Rwanda’s linear path towards increasing democracy and press freedom may not continue. Rather, prioritising peace at the cost of press freedom could limit development and reinforce existing <a href="https://theconversation.com/rwanda-paul-kagame-is-a-dictator-who-clings-to-power-but-its-not-just-for-his-own-gain-204834">authoritarian power structures</a>.</p>
<h2>Uganda</h2>
<p>In Uganda, the relationship between press freedom and distance from conflict has been less linear. Some media restrictions have lessened and others have worsened. </p>
<p>Despite a sustained period of peace after conflict with the <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/the-lords-resistance-army-violence-in-the-name-of-god/a-18136620">Lord’s Resistance Army</a> in the northern part of the country that began in the 1980s, <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/uganda/freedom-world/2024">press freedom is not increasing</a> as time passes. Overall, journalists in the country largely agree with the international perception that they’re restricted and that the situation is worsening the longer President Yoweri Museveni remains in power. Journalists in Uganda perceive their press freedom to be lower than journalists in neighbouring countries. They also have a more pessimistic outlook. </p>
<p>Government interference, some of which stems from the <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/05/02/media-minefield/increased-threats-freedom-expression-uganda">conflict</a> and some that’s <a href="https://www.cjr.org/analysis/eron-kiiza-defends-the-press-uganda.php">new</a>, remains pervasive. Worn down by government intimidation and repressive laws, coupled with low pay and lack of necessary equipment, some journalists <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1852097">told us</a> they had turned to unethical behaviour, such as acting as spies in the newsroom. </p>
<h2>Kenya</h2>
<p>Kenya is home to the <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/country/kenya/freedom-world/2024">freest media environment</a>. It’s also the only one in our study that has seen changes in presidential leadership in recent years. But just because a nation regularly holds elections doesn’t mean the path to democratisation and media freedom is smooth. </p>
<p>External measures indicate that Kenya has more press freedom than Uganda and Rwanda, and journalists in the country perceive this to be true. However, data show ups and downs of media freedom that have mirrored varying political administrations and events, including spurts of <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2009/10/un-human-rights-team-issues-report-post-election-violence-kenya">post-election violence</a>. These ebbs and flows are largely due to politicians or powerful members of society who share ideological goals or have financial interests like <a href="https://kenyamedia.reboot.org/">owning major media houses</a> and influencing coverage. </p>
<p>Despite the challenges, journalists attribute Kenya’s state of press freedom to the vast international connections the country and its leaders have. An empowered civil society – which stems from both a space for dissent given by public officials, and the culture and spirit of Kenyans – has promoted the growth of human rights, including media freedoms.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>After a nuanced examination of the factors that affect the media in each of these countries, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/press-freedom-and-the-crooked-path-toward-democracy-9780197634202?cc=us&lang=en&">our book lists</a> a set of factors that affect press freedom and democracy building. </p>
<p>Specifically, we believe each country’s distance from conflict, political benchmarks, international linkages and civil society strength are central to understanding its degree of press freedom, development and democratisation. </p>
<p>While these factors are not the only elements that influence media landscapes, they are a starting point for better understanding and theorising about press freedom environments. </p>
<p>A free and independent press allows the public to hold leaders accountable, make informed decisions and access a diversity of opinions. This makes it important to accurately understand how free varying media landscapes are, and why.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/224750/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Important factors, such as conflict, are central to understanding a country’s degree of press freedom, development and democratisation.Karen McIntyre, Assistant Professor, Journalism and Director of Graduate Studies, Richard T. Robertson School of Media and Culture, Virginia Commonwealth UniversityMeghan Sobel Cohen, Associate Professor, Department of Communication and the Master of Development Practice, Regis UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2214112024-01-19T00:37:04Z2024-01-19T00:37:04ZIsrael now ranks among the world’s leading jailers of journalists. We don’t know why they’re behind bars<p>Israel has emerged as one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists, according to a <a href="https://cpj.org/reports/2024/01/2023-prison-census-jailed-journalist-numbers-near-record-high-israel-imprisonments-spike/">newly released census</a> compiled by the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists.</p>
<p>Each year, the committee releases a snapshot of the number of journalists behind bars as of December 1 2023 was the second highest on record with 320 in detention around the world. </p>
<p>In a small way, that is encouraging news. The figure is down from a high of 363 the previous year.</p>
<p>But a troublingly large number remain locked up, undermining press freedom and often, human rights.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-than-one-journalist-per-day-is-dying-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict-this-has-to-stop-217272">More than one journalist per day is dying in the Israel-Gaza conflict. This has to stop</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>China takes out unenviable top spot</h2>
<p>At the top of the list sits China with 44 in detention, followed by Myanmar (43), Belarus (28), Russia (22), and Vietnam (19). Israel and Iran share sixth place with 17 each. </p>
<p>While the dip in numbers is positive, the statistics expose a few troubling trends. </p>
<p>As well as a straight count, the Committee to Protect Journalists examines the charges the journalists are facing. The advocacy group found that globally, almost two-thirds are behind bars on what they broadly describe as “anti-state charges” – things such as espionage, terrorism, false news and so on. </p>
<p>In other words, governments have come to regard journalism as some sort of existential threat that has to be dealt with using national security legislation. </p>
<p>In some cases, that may be justified. It is impossible to independently assess the legitimacy of each case, but it does point to the way governments increasingly regard information and the media as a part of the battlefield. That places journalists in the dangerous position of sometimes being unwitting combatants in often brutally violent struggles.</p>
<p>China’s top spot is hardly surprising. It has been there – or close to it – for some years. Censorship makes it extremely difficult to make an accurate assessment of the numbers behind bars, but since the crackdown on pro-democracy activists in 2021, journalists from Hong Kong have, for the first time, found themselves locked up. And almost half of China’s total are Uyghurs from Xinjiang, where Beijing has been accused of <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/countries/2022-08-31/22-08-31-final-assesment.pdf">human rights abuses</a> in its ongoing repression of the region’s mostly Muslim ethnic minorities.</p>
<p>The rest of the top four are also familiar, but the two biggest movements are unexpected. </p>
<p>Iran had been the <a href="https://cpj.org/reports/2022/12/number-of-jailed-journalists-spikes-to-new-global-record/#:%7E:text=The%20Committee%20to%20Protect%20Journalists,in%20a%20deteriorating%20media%20landscape.">2022 gold medallist</a> with 62 journalists imprisoned. In the latest census, it dropped to sixth place with just 17. And Israel, which previously had only one behind bars, has climbed to share that place. </p>
<p>That is positive news for Iranian journalists, but awkward for Israel, which repeatedly argues it is the only democracy in the Middle East and the only one that <a href="https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-709045#google_vignette">respects media freedom</a>. It also routinely points to Iran for its long-running assault on critics of the regime. </p>
<p>The journalists Israel had detained were all from the occupied West Bank, all Palestinian, and all arrested after Hamas’s horrific attacks from Gaza on October 7. But we know very little about why they were detained. The journalists’ relatives told the committee that most are under what Israel describes as “administrative detention”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/gaza-war-israeli-government-has-haaretz-newspaper-in-its-sights-as-it-tightens-screws-on-media-freedom-218730">Gaza war: Israeli government has Haaretz newspaper in its sights as it tightens screws on media freedom</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>17 arrests in Israel in less than 2 months</h2>
<p>The benign term “administrative detention” in fact means the journalists have been incarcerated <a href="https://www.btselem.org/topic/administrative_detention">indefinitely, without trial or charge</a>. </p>
<p>It is possible that they were somehow planning attacks or involved with extremism (Israel uses administrative detention to stop people they accuse of planning to commit a future offence) but the evidence used to justify the detention is not disclosed. We don’t even know why they were arrested. </p>
<p>Israel’s place near the top of the Committee to Protect Journalists’ list exposes a difficult paradox. Media freedom is an intrinsic part of a free democracy. A vibrant, awkward and sometimes snarly media is a proven way to keep public debate alive and the political system healthy. </p>
<p>It is often uncomfortable, but you can’t have a strong democratic system without journalists freely and vigorously fulfilling their watchdog role. In fact, a good way to tell if a democracy is sliding is the extent of a government’s crackdown on the media.</p>
<p>This is not to suggest equivalence between Israel and Iran. Israel remains a democracy, and Israeli media is often savagely <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/public-trust-in-government-scrapes-bottom-amid-criticism-for-inadequate-war-response/">critical</a> of its government in ways that would be unthinkable in Tehran. </p>
<p>But if Israel wants to restore confidence in its commitment to democratic norms, at the very least it will need to be transparent about the reasons for arresting 17 journalists in less than two months, and the evidence against them. And if there is no evidence they pose a genuine threat to Israeli security, they must be released immediately. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/at-a-time-when-journalism-needs-to-be-at-its-strongest-an-open-letter-on-the-israel-hamas-war-has-left-the-profession-diminished-218596">At a time when journalism needs to be at its strongest, an open letter on the Israel/Hamas war has left the profession diminished</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221411/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Greste is Professor of Journalism at Macquarie University, and the Executive Director of the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom. He was also a signatory of an open letter calling for balanced coverage in the Gaza/Israel conflict and in 2006, covered Gaza for the BBC. </span></em></p>New statistics show a spike in the amount of journalists jailed in the country. To protect its democracy, Israel needs to be transparent about why members of the media are arrested.Peter Greste, Professor of Journalism and Communications, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2196172023-12-26T20:29:23Z2023-12-26T20:29:23ZNZ report card 2023: near the top of the class in some areas, room for improvement elsewhere<p>End-of-year results aren’t only for school and university students. Countries, too, can be measured for their progress – or lack of it – across numerous categories and subject areas. </p>
<p>This report card provides a snapshot of how New Zealand has fared in 2023. Given the change of government, it will be a useful benchmark for future progress reports. (Somewhat appropriately, the coalition seems keen on standardised testing in education.)</p>
<p>It’s important to remember that this exercise is for fun and debate. International and domestic indices and rankings should be read with a degree of caution – measurements, metrics and numbers from 2023 tell us only so much. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, it’s still possible to trace the nation’s ups and downs. As the year draws to an end, we can use these statistics and rankings to decide whether New Zealand really is the best country in the world – or whether we need to make some additional new year’s resolutions.</p>
<h2>International pass marks</h2>
<p>Overall, the country held its own internationally when it came to democratic values, freedoms and standards. But there was a little slippage.</p>
<p>Despite falling a spot, Transparency International ranked New Zealand <a href="https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022">second-equal</a> (next to Finland) for being relatively corruption-free. </p>
<p>In the Global Peace Index, New Zealand dropped two places, now <a href="https://www.visionofhumanity.org/maps/">fourth-best</a> for safety and security, low domestic and international conflict, and degree of militarisation.</p>
<p>The country held its ground in two categories. Freedom House underlined New Zealand’s near-perfect score of <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores">99 out of 100</a> for political and civil liberties – but three Scandinavian countries scored a perfect 100. The <a href="https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-gender-gap-report-2023/">Global Gender Gap Report</a> recorded New Zealand as steady, the fourth-most-gender-equal country. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-winston-peters-right-to-call-state-funded-journalism-bribery-or-is-there-a-bigger-threat-to-democracy-218782">Is Winston Peters right to call state-funded journalism ‘bribery’ – or is there a bigger threat to democracy?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Supplementary work by the United Nations Development Programme shows New Zealand making impressive strides in breaking down <a href="https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/2023-06/gsni202302pdf_0.pdf">gender bias</a>.</p>
<p>The Index for Economic Freedom, which covers everything from property rights to financial freedom, again placed New Zealand <a href="https://www.heritage.org/index/">fifth</a>, but our grade average is falling. We also dropped a place in the World Justice Project’s <a href="https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/">Rule of Law Index</a> to eighth.</p>
<p>New Zealanders are about as happy as they were last year, still the tenth-most-cheery nation, according to the <a href="https://worldhappiness.report/">World Happiness Report</a>.</p>
<p>The Human Development Index did not report this year (New Zealand was 13th in 2022). But the <a href="https://www.prosperity.com/rankings">Legatum Prosperity Index</a>, another broad measure covering everything from social capital to living conditions, put New Zealand tenth overall – reflecting a slow decline from seventh in 2011.</p>
<p>The Economist’s <a href="https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/global-liveability-index-2023/">Global Liveability Index</a> has Auckland at equal tenth, with Wellington racing up the charts to 23rd. (Hamilton, my home, is yet to register.)</p>
<p>While New Zealand registered a gradual slide in the Reporters Without Borders <a href="https://rsf.org/en/index">Press Freedom Index</a>, at 13th position it still ranks highly by comparison with other nations.</p>
<h2>Could do better</h2>
<p>New Zealand has seen some progress around assessment of terror risk. While the national terror threat level has remained at “<a href="https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/national-security/counter-terrorism#:%7E:text=New%2520Zealand's%2520current%2520national%2520terrorism,Zealanders%2520both%2520here%2520and%2520overseas.">low</a>”, the <a href="https://www.visionofhumanity.org/maps/global-terrorism-index/#/">Global Terrorism Index</a> ranked the country 46th – lower than the US, UK and Russia, but higher than Australia at 69th.</p>
<p>The country’s previous drop to 31st in the <a href="https://www.imd.org/centers/wcc/world-competitiveness-center/rankings/world-competitiveness-ranking/">Global Competitiveness Report</a> has stabilised, staying the same in 2023. </p>
<p>On the <a href="https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/Home">Global Innovation Index</a>, we came in 27th out of 132 economies – three spots worse than last year. <a href="https://kof.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/media/press-releases/2022/12/globalisation-index.html#:%7E:text=The%2520KOF%2520Globalisation%2520Index%2520measures,a%2520long%2520period%2520of%2520time.">The Globalisation Index</a>, which looks at economic, social and political contexts, ranks New Zealand only 42nd.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop28-the-climate-summits-first-health-day-points-to-what-needs-to-change-in-nz-218809">COP28: the climate summit’s first Health Day points to what needs to change in NZ</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But the country’s response to climate change is still considered “highly insufficient” by the <a href="https://climateactiontracker.org/">Climate Action Tracker</a>, which measures progress on meeting agreed global warming targets. The <a href="https://ccpi.org/">Climate Change Performance Index</a> is a little more generous, pegging New Zealand at 34th, still down one spot on last year.</p>
<p>New Zealand’s overseas development assistance – low as a percentage of GDP compared to other <a href="https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/official-development-assistance.htm">OECD countries</a> – had mixed reviews. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://odi.org/en/insights/principled-aid-index-2023-in-a-weaponised-world-smart-development-power-is-not-dead/">Principled Aid Index</a> – which looks at the purposes of aid for global co-operation, public spiritedness and addressing critical development goals – ranks New Zealand a lowly 22 out of 29. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.cgdev.org/cdi#/">Commitment to Development Index</a>, which measures aid as well as other policies (from health to trade) of 40 of the world’s most powerful countries, has New Zealand in 19th place.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nicola-willis-warns-of-fiscal-snakes-and-snails-her-first-mini-budget-will-be-a-test-of-nzs-no-surprises-finance-rules-218920">Nicola Willis warns of fiscal ‘snakes and snails’ – her first mini-budget will be a test of NZ’s no-surprises finance rules</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Decent economic grades</h2>
<p>The economic numbers at home still tell a generally encouraging story:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>unemployment <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/indicators/unemployment-rate/">remains low at 3.9%</a>, still below the <a href="https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/unemployment-rates-oecd-updated-november-2023.htm#:%7E:text=14%2520Nov%25202023%2520%252D%2520The%2520OECD,Figure%25202%2520and%2520Table%25201">OECD average of 4.8%.</a></p></li>
<li><p>median weekly earnings from wages and salaries <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/income-growth-for-wage-and-salary-earners-remains-strong/">continued to rise</a>, by NZ$84 (7.1%) to $1,273 in the year to June</p></li>
<li><p>inflation is rising, but the rate is slowing, <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/annual-inflation-at-5-6-percent/#:%7E:text=New%2520Zealand's%2520consumers%2520price%2520index,to%2520the%2520June%25202023%2520quarter.">falling to 5.6%</a> in the 12 months to September</p></li>
<li><p>and good or bad news according to one’s perspective, annual house price growth appears to be slowly recovering, with the <a href="https://www.qv.co.nz/price-index/">average price now $907,387</a> – still considerably down from the peak at the turn of 2022.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>It’s worth noting, too, that record net migration gain is boosting economic measurements. In the year to October 2023, 245,600 people arrived, with 116,700 departing, for an <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/international-migration-october-2023/">annual net gain</a> of 128,900 people.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-government-hopes-private-investors-will-fund-social-services-the-evidence-isnt-so-optimistic-218512">The government hopes private investors will fund social services – the evidence isn't so optimistic</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Room for social improvement</h2>
<p>In the year to June, <a href="https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/10/new-zealand-s-suicide-rate-increases-for-first-time-in-years.html">recorded suicides increased</a> to 565, or 10.6 people per 100,000. While an increase from 10.2 in 2022, this is still lower than the average rate over the past 14 years.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.corrections.govt.nz/resources/statistics/quarterly_prison_statistics/prison_stats_september_2023">Incarceration rates</a> began to rise again, climbing to 8,893 by the end of September, moving back towards the 10,000 figure from 2020.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/maori-suicide-rates-remain-too-high-involving-whanau-more-in-coronial-inquiries-should-be-a-priority-217254">Māori suicide rates remain too high – involving whānau more in coronial inquiries should be a priority</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Child poverty appears to be <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/child-poverty-statistics-show-no-annual-change-in-the-year-ended-june-2022/">stabilising</a>, with some reports suggesting improvements in longer-term trends. While commendable, this needs to be seen in perspective: one in ten children still live in households experiencing material hardship.</p>
<p>The stock of <a href="https://www.hud.govt.nz/stats-and-insights/the-government-housing-dashboard/public-homes/">public housing</a> continues to increase. As of October, there were 80,211 public houses, an increase of 3,940 from June 2022.</p>
<p>In short, New Zealand retains some bragging rights in important areas and is making modest progress in others, but that’s far from the whole picture. The final verdict has to be: a satisfactory to good effort, but considerable room for improvement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/219617/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexander Gillespie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New Zealand was mostly stable in key international rankings and domestic socio-economic measures. But there are signs of slippage in some areas and not enough progress in others.Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of WaikatoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2187302023-11-28T16:52:44Z2023-11-28T16:52:44ZGaza war: Israeli government has Haaretz newspaper in its sights as it tightens screws on media freedom<p>The Israeli government is putting pressure on the left-leaning newspaper Haaretz to line up in support of the government in its conduct of the war in Gaza. </p>
<p>The communications minister, <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-23/ty-article/israels-communications-minister-threatens-haaretz-suggests-penalizing-its-war-coverage/0000018b-fd0c-de73-a9bb-ffefb9f10000">Shlomo Karhi</a>, has suggested financial penalties be applied to the paper accusing it of “lying, defeatist propaganda” and “sabotaging Israel in wartime”. The proposal aims to <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-23/ty-article/israels-communications-minister-threatens-haaretz-suggests-penalizing-its-war-coverage/0000018b-fd0c-de73-a9bb-ffefb9f10000">cancel state subscriptions to the paper</a> and “forbid the publication of official notices”.</p>
<p>In response, the Israeli Journalists’ Union called the move a “populistic proposal devoid of any feasibility of logic”. Haaretz, which is an independent daily newspaper, has been publishing since 1919, and has frequently been the target of right-wing administrations.</p>
<p>On October 20 the government enacted <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/govt-approves-emergency-regulations-that-could-pave-way-to-closing-al-jazeera-offices/">emergency regulations</a>, enabling it to temporarily shut down foreign media seen as harmful to the country. This legislation allows for the closure and signal blocking of any media for 30 days at a time. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-15/ty-article/.premium/israeli-minister-seeks-to-imprison-citizens-who-harm-national-morale/0000018b-33a7-d0b2-afff-33e788c00000">Haaretz noted</a> on October 15 that an earlier draft of the legislation titled: “Limiting Aid to The Enemy through Communication” included plans for sweeping limitations on domestic as well as foreign media. In the end, the former was not included in the new law.</p>
<p>Karhi’s intention with this legislation was also to shutter the Qatari TV station Al Jazeera. However, the cabinet turned down this specific proposal due to <a href="https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjuttprz6">Qatar’s role</a> in current hostage and prisoner negotiations. On November 13, <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/govt-approves-emergency-regulations-that-could-pave-way-to-closing-al-jazeera-offices/">the Times of Israel</a> reported that the same legislation was used to prevent broadcasts of the Lebanese channel Al-Mayadeen TV inside Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories for “security reasons”. </p>
<p>Israel’s <a href="https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-blocks-pro-iranian-al-mayadeen-tv-websites-e892cb90">defence minister, Yoav Gallant, accused</a> the network of being “a mouthpiece of Hezbollah” and its journalists of “supporting terror while pretending to be reporters”.</p>
<p>One week later on November 21, <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/21/israeli-strike-kills-three-journalists-near-lebanon-border">two of the station’s reporters</a> were killed in an Israeli air strike on southern Lebanon. Correspondent Farah Omar and camera operator Rabih al-Maamari were covering firing between Hezbollah and Israel in Tayr Harfa, a mile from the Israeli border, when they were hit.</p>
<p>On its website, the <a href="https://cpj.org/2023/11/al-mayadeen-tv-reporter-and-videographer-killed-by-israeli-strike-in-south-lebanon/">Committee to Protect Journalists</a>, while labelling Al-Mayadeen “Hezbollah-affiliated,” called for “<a href="https://cpj.org/2023/11/al-mayadeen-tv-reporter-and-videographer-killed-by-israeli-strike-in-south-lebanon/">an independent investigation</a> into the killing of journalists”. It emphasised that “journalists are civilians doing important work during times of crisis and must not be targeted by warring parties”.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://cpj.org/2023/11/journalist-casualties-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict/">CPJ</a> reports that 57 journalists and media workers have been killed since the conflict began. This includes 50 Palestinians, four Israelis and three Lebanese media workers. <a href="https://rsf.org/en/index">Reporters without Borders</a> lists Israel at number 97 in its Freedom of Press rankings of 180 countries, above the Central African Republic and below Albania. It notes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Under Israel’s military censorship, reporting on a variety of security issues requires prior approval by the authorities. In addition to the possibility of civil defamation suits, journalists can also be charged with criminal defamation and ‘insulting a public official’. There is a freedom of information law, but it is sometimes hard to implement.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Mandate-era restrictions</h2>
<p>Limitations on the press were first introduced under the “<a href="https://www.btselem.org/legal_documents/emergency_regulations">Defence (Emergency) Regulations</a>” put in place by the British during the Palestine mandate and repealed when they left in 1948. But following the establishment of the state of Israel, most of the wide-ranging regulations got incorporated into Israeli legislation. </p>
<p>Legacy mandate-era legislation concerned with demolishing houses, detention of individuals and curfews has been in continuous use in the Occupied Territories, according to <a href="https://www.btselem.org/publications/summaries/200411_punitive_house_demolitions">Israeli human rights group B'Tselem</a>.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/gantz-taps-kobi-mandelblit-to-serve-as-next-military-censor/">the Times of Israel</a> in terms of domestic censorship, “any articles in both traditional media and social media” that deal with security and intelligence have to be sent to the chief censor, Brigadier General Kobi Mandelblit, for approval before publication. This is completely in line with <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210102012058/http://nolegalfrontiers.org/military-orders/mil029ed2.html?lang=en">The Defence (Emergency) Regulations</a>, 1945.</p>
<p>The Times <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/minister-suggests-sanctions-on-haaretz-for-false-propaganda-but-action-unlikely/">reported</a> that Haaretz’s journalism has been “largely supportive of the war effort, though highly critical of the government leading it”.</p>
<p>In attacking the newspaper, Shlomo Karhi wrote a letter to cabinet secretary, Yossi Fuchs, in which he quoted from a couple of pieces which were, in fact, opinion columns rather than straight news reports. </p>
<p>One was written by <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-10-09/ty-article-opinion/.premium/israel-cant-imprison-2-million-gazans-without-paying-a-cruel-price/0000018b-1476-d465-abbb-14f6262a0000">Gideon Levy</a> on October 9, under the headline: “Israel Can’t Imprison Two Million Gazans Without Paying a Cruel Price”. In the article Levy opined: “Behind all this lies Israeli arrogance; the idea that we’ll never pay the price and be punished for it. We’ll carry on undisturbed.”</p>
<p>In another column, <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-10-10/ty-article/.premium/arriving-again-at-the-cycle-of-vengeance/0000018b-15d7-d2fc-a59f-d5df4d810000">Amira Hass</a>, was also mentioned as proof of Haaretz’s “defeatist and false propaganda”. Karhi quoted from a piece she wrote on October 10: “In a few days Israelis went through what Palestinians have experienced as a matter of routine for decades, and are still experiencing – military incursions, death, cruelty, slain children, bodies piled up in the road.”</p>
<p>In response to Karhi’s attacks on the newspaper, Haaretz’s publisher, Amos Schocken, accused the government of attempting “to stifle the free press in Israel”. In <a href="https://twitter.com/haaretzcom/status/1727860046246121477/photo/1">a post on X</a> (formerly Twitter) he wrote: “When Netanyahu’s government wants to shut us down, it’s time to read Haaretz.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218730/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colleen Murrell receives funding from Coimisiún na Meán (Ireland's media regulator) to research and write the annual Reuters Digital News Report Ireland (2021-2026)</span></em></p>The Netanyahu government is pressuring Israel’s most prominent left-leaning newspaper over its coverage of the war in Gaza.Colleen Murrell, Full Professor in Journalism, Dublin City UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2185962023-11-28T02:14:47Z2023-11-28T02:14:47ZAt a time when journalism needs to be at its strongest, an open letter on the Israel/Hamas war has left the profession diminished<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/562011/original/file-20231128-19-vlf74t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=30%2C6%2C4059%2C2146&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pov-female-war-journalist-correspondent-wearing-1982400632">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The journalists who signed an <a href="https://form.jotform.com/233177455020046">open letter</a> to Australian media organisations last week calling for ethical reporting on the war in Gaza have succeeded in intensifying the dispute over whether the coverage has been fair. At the same time, they’ve called their own impartiality into question.</p>
<p>At last count, the letter had attracted 270 signatories from journalists at a range of institutions including the ABC, Guardian Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Conversation and Schwartz Media.</p>
<p>At the Herald and The Age, both owned by the Nine company, senior editorial executives, including the papers’ editors, have <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/sydney-morning-herald-says-journalists-who-signed-gaza-petition-now-unable-to-participate-in-any-reporting-related-to-the-war/news-story/6a5acb546faea77a7da974c6cfe29a36">banned those staff</a> who signed the letter from having any role in covering the war.</p>
<p>The ABC’s director of news, Justin Stevens, did not go that far, but <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/journalist-union-meaa-backs-scepticism-campaign-against-israel/news-story/c7932eabaa30edbf1eb5765ed4618b02">warned his staff</a> that if they signed the letter, their ability to cover the story impartially may be brought into question.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/abc-chief-is-right-impartiality-is-paramount-when-reporting-the-israel-gaza-war-218100">ABC chief is right: impartiality is paramount when reporting the Israel-Gaza war</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Addressing journalist deaths</h2>
<p>The signatories to the letter, in addition to the individuals, were the journalists’ section of the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) and its house (branch) committees at the ABC and Guardian Australia. It is not clear exactly under whose auspices the letter was written, but it is clear it has the endorsement of the union. </p>
<p>The letter raises two main issues. </p>
<p>One is that the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) has killed <a href="https://cpj.org/">at least 53</a> journalists in the course of the present conflict and has a history of targeting journalists. </p>
<p>The letter provides links to reputable organisations – Reporters Without Borders, the International Federation of Journalists, the Committee to Protect Journalists – each of which provides substantial detailed evidence making a strong case against the Israeli Defence Force.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1727942697162506380"}"></div></p>
<p>The letter states: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>As reporters, editors, photographers, producers, and other workers in newsrooms around Australia, we are appalled at the slaughter of our colleagues and their families and apparent targeting of journalists by the Israeli government, which constitutes a violation of the Geneva Conventions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That much of it can be defended as an attempt to stand up for press freedom and hold the Israeli forces to account.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-than-one-journalist-per-day-is-dying-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict-this-has-to-stop-217272">More than one journalist per day is dying in the Israel-Gaza conflict. This has to stop</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Clear implications of pro-Israel bias</h2>
<p>However, the letter then goes on to argue in a veiled but unmistakable way that the Australian media’s coverage of the war has been pro-Israel. </p>
<p>This is achieved by a series of what, on the surface, look like journalistic motherhood statements:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We call for […] Australian newsroom leaders to be as clear-eyed in their coverage of the atrocities committed by Israel as they are of those committed by Hamas.</p>
<p>The immense and disproportionate human suffering of the Palestinian population should not be minimised.</p>
<p>Apply as much professional scepticism when prioritising or relying on uncorroborated Israeli government and military sources to shape coverage as is applied to Hamas […] The Israeli government’s version of events should never be reported verbatim without context or fact-checking.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The clear implication is that this is not being done, and that taken together they add up to a pro-Israel bias that needs to be corrected. </p>
<p>That is a highly contestable proposition and it needs evidence, but none is provided.</p>
<p>The letter goes on to urge that “adequate coverage be given to credible allegations of war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing and apartheid”.</p>
<p>The position taken by the ABC on the use of these terms was <a href="https://theconversation.com/abc-chief-is-right-impartiality-is-paramount-when-reporting-the-israel-gaza-war-218100">set out</a> ten days ago by its managing director and editor-in-chief, David Anderson. He said the ABC would report other people’s use of them but would not adopt them for itself.</p>
<p>This is the conventional way for impartiality to be applied when such politically charged language is used. When they are reporting atrocities of the kind perpetrated by both sides in this war, on what authority do journalists take it upon themselves to apply these definitions?</p>
<h2>Messy fall-out amid messy messaging</h2>
<p>A further question concerning impartiality then arises: does signing this letter disqualify a journalist from being involved in covering the war? Does it justify the action taken by the Herald and The Age?</p>
<p>Those two newspapers have traditionally taken a strict line on these issues, and their decision this time is consistent with that tradition. Many years ago, a Herald reporter was taken off the reporting of state politics when he declared his membership of the Labor Party.</p>
<p>The reason given by the editorial executive who made this decision was not that his coverage had been biased but that there would be an apprehension among those who knew of his affiliation that his coverage might be biased.</p>
<p>A strict line on impartiality is fine, if it is applied impartially, but Crikey has <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/11/03/australian-journalists-politicians-trips-israel-palestine/">drawn attention</a> to an uncomfortable fact: that three of the four editorial executives at Nine who imposed the ban have participated in trips to Israel sponsored by pro-Israeli groups.</p>
<p>You might think the handling of these problems by the media industry and the journalism profession couldn’t get much messier, but it could.</p>
<p>On November 11, a group of journalists calling themselves MEAA Members for Palestine <a href="https://overland.org.au/2023/11/meaa-members-in-solidarity-with-palestine/">published a separate letter</a> in Overland magazine, and in this there was nothing veiled about the position they took.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/i-just-find-it-very-hard-to-talk-about-it-without-getting-emotional-top-journalists-reveal-their-trade-secrets-to-leigh-sales-211426">'I just find it very hard to talk about it without getting emotional': top journalists reveal their trade secrets to Leigh Sales</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>They condemned the Australian government’s support for what they called Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza, called on the government to demand that Israel withdraw its forces and stop the bombing in Gaza, and condemned “the silencing and intimidation that our members experience when expressing support for, or reporting on, Palestine”.</p>
<p>They called on the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance to support the Palestinian solidarity movement and join with trade union action across the world to “end all complicity and stop arming Israel”.</p>
<p>As a trade union, the alliance undoubtedly has the right to take sides, even in a war. But doing so is irreconcilable with the professional ethical obligations of its members to report impartially. </p>
<p>The Overland letter and the more restrained open letter to the media organisations might be two separate documents but it would be naïve in the extreme not to think that the first was parent to the second.</p>
<p>The whole episode, including the obvious hypocrisy of the Nine editorial management, has left the profession and the industry diminished at a time when Australian society needs them to be at their strongest.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218596/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Hundreds of Australian journalists signed an open letter to news organisations calling for better coverage of the war. It calls their impartiality into question.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2182342023-11-21T03:26:45Z2023-11-21T03:26:45ZAustralia’s secrecy laws include 875 offences. Reforms are welcome, but don’t go far enough for press freedom<p>In 2019, the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/05/world/australia/journalist-raids.html">New York Times</a> declared that “Australia may well be the world’s most secretive democracy”. </p>
<p>The Times published the piece shortly after the Australian Federal Police raided journalists from <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-05/abc-raided-by-australian-federal-police-afghan-files-stories/11181162">two news organisations</a>, searching for evidence of sources for stories that were embarrassing to the government. </p>
<p>Four years on, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus today released a comprehensive <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/crime/publications/review-secrecy-provisions">review of secrecy laws</a> that acknowledges a woefully complicated mess. </p>
<p>The government’s plan to clean it up is a good first step, but it’s just the tip of a very big iceberg.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/journalists-must-be-protected-in-police-investigations-heres-our-five-point-plan-for-reform-193102">Journalists must be protected in police investigations. Here's our five point plan for reform</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Progress on much-needed change</h2>
<p>To make its case in 2019, The Times pointed to a bewildering array of legal and political obstacles embedded in Australian law that stand in the way of the transparency considered essential to a fully functioning democracy. </p>
<p>In principle, the government seems to agree. </p>
<p>The review points to 875 secrecy offences covering everything from national security to tax laws, and a dysfunctioning system for protecting whistleblowers. </p>
<p>It also recognises the chilling effect on the ability of journalists to work with sources from inside government, and hold it to account. </p>
<p>To fix the problem, the report comes up with 11 recommendations, including reducing the number of offences to a more manageable (but still excessive) 707. </p>
<p>It establishes a set of guiding principles that will help consolidate the law and make it more consistent. </p>
<p>And it says there should be a narrower range of information defined as “secret”, with clear harm to the public interest in any breach of secrecy before a prosecution can take place. </p>
<p>It also calls for specific defences for public-interest journalism to be inserted into key secrecy laws.</p>
<p>All this is laudable, and it starts to untie the Gordian Knot of legislation that created the culture of secrecy the Times was concerned about, but it is simply not enough. </p>
<h2>A patchwork quilt of laws</h2>
<p>The enormous number of secrecy offences currently on the books points to the central problem. Whenever lawmakers have spotted a hole in the law, they’ve stuck a patch over it. </p>
<p>That is understandable, particularly in a post-September 11 world when national security has become the overriding concern of governments everywhere. </p>
<p>But it has created a confusing, inconsistent and incoherent mess that the attorney-general appears to be trying to fix with yet more patches. </p>
<p>To be fair, some of them are larger and more coherent than the current ones, but it is still insufficient to deal with the fundamental problem. The Australian government remains dangerously secretive.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-time-for-the-government-to-walk-the-talk-on-media-freedom-in-australia-161342">It’s time for the government to walk the talk on media freedom in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Another of the recommendations is a general secrecy offence that says Commonwealth officers can’t can’t disclose anything that would be “prejudicial to the effective working of government”. </p>
<p>A general secrecy offence helps simplify things, but the threshold is worryingly sweeping and runs counter to a recommendation the Australian Law Reform Commission made back in a <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/secrecy-laws-and-open-government-in-australia-alrc-report-112/">2010 report</a> that triggered the review in the first place. </p>
<h2>Dangerous plan for journalism</h2>
<p>The report also makes much of the need to protect public-interest journalism. </p>
<p>Again, it is laudable that the attorney-general recognises the threats to media freedom embedded in the law, and said he’s prepared to tackle them. </p>
<p>But the answers in the report are more of the same: a set of band aids, rather than a comprehensive cure.</p>
<p>Controversially, that includes a commitment to maintain a ministerial directive from the former Attorney-General Christian Porter. </p>
<p>Porter issued his directive in the wake of the 2019 raids, in an attempt to underline the government’s commitment to press freedom. The directive declared that the director of public prosecutions had to seek the attorney-general’s approval before prosecuting a journalist. </p>
<p>One of the fundamental principles of our democracy is a <a href="https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/system-of-government/separation-of-powers-parliament-executive-and-judiciary/#:%7E:text=In%20Australia%2C%20the%20power%20to,group%20having%20all%20the%20power.">clear separation</a> between the political and legal systems. </p>
<p>Yet the directive clearly crosses that line. </p>
<p>As we saw with the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-08/christian-porter-accuser-four-corners/13226794">allegations of sexual assault</a> levelled at Porter, and subsequent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/16/christian-porter-v-abc-can-the-minister-sue-for-defamation-over-article-that-didnt-name-him">legal action</a> against the ABC, the attorney-general is as vulnerable to journalistic investigation as anyone else. Giving him the last word about whether or not to prosecute a journalist is a dangerous, if well-intentioned, step. </p>
<h2>Time for a whole new approach</h2>
<p>The report also declines to reverse the burden of proof when it comes to publishing government secrets in the public interest. </p>
<p>A number of media organisations (including the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom that I work for) have argued there should be a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=ab18c655-f6f8-4e0f-a6cb-b0b40d5a68fc&subId=668253">presumption in favour of publishing</a>, unless the investigators can show a clear harm to the public interest. </p>
<p>In other words, they should have to prove the harm in publishing rather than forcing journalists to show the value in their story. The report released today rejected that idea.</p>
<p>At least when it comes to media freedom, the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom has a far simpler and more comprehensive solution. </p>
<p>Rather than patches, we are proposing a <a href="https://www.journalistsfreedom.com/major-projects/media-freedom-act/">Media Freedom Act</a> that would establish a set of overarching principles in law. </p>
<p>First, it would compel parliament to always consider media freedom when passing new legislation. </p>
<p>And second, the courts would be obliged to interpret existing laws, like secrecy and espionage laws, in ways that are consistent with media freedom. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-a-media-freedom-act-heres-how-it-could-work-125315">Australia needs a Media Freedom Act. Here's how it could work</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>That would include a presumption in favour of protecting a journalist’s sources and in publishing. The police would have to show why the public interest in an investigation is more important than the public interest in the story itself.</p>
<p>That law alone wouldn’t be enough to solve all the problems - there would need to be a lot of amendments to make it work effectively - but it elegantly creates a set of principles and frameworks that protect the underlying objective: to create the kind of transparency necessary for a healthy democracy, without putting national security at risk.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218234/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Greste is a professor of journalism at Macquarie University, and the Executive Director of the not-for-profit advocacy group, the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom. </span></em></p>Today, the government released a review into Australia’s patchwork of a secrecy law system. The proposed changes are a step in the right direction, but there’s so much more work to do.Peter Greste, Professor of Journalism and Communications, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2145082023-10-08T08:11:53Z2023-10-08T08:11:53ZSouth Africa’s surveillance law is changing but citizens’ privacy is still at risk<p>In a ringing judgment for the right to privacy, the South African Constitutional Court <a href="https://www.concourt.org.za/index.php/judgement/383-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-another-v-minister-of-justice-and-correctional-services-and-others-minister-of-police-v-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-others-cct278-19-cct279-19#:%7E:text=The%20Court%20declared%20RICA%20unconstitutional,independent%20judicial%20authorisation%20of%20interception.">declared</a> sections of the country’s main communication surveillance law unconstitutional in February 2021. </p>
<p>The court gave parliament three years to pass a new law remedying the areas of unconstitutionality. The February 2024 deadline for these amendments is looming fast.</p>
<p>The Regulation of Interception of Communication and Provision of Communication Related Information Act (<a href="https://www.gov.za/documents/regulation-interception-communications-and-provision-communication-related-information--13">Rica</a>) was intended in part to protect privacy, combat crime and promote national security. It requires all cellphone sim cards in the country to be registered, and prohibits interception of people’s communications without their consent, except under certain conditions. </p>
<p>But Rica had some weaknesses which have been abused by rogue elements in intelligence. The court case was brought by the <a href="https://amabhungane.org/">amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism</a>, after the state misused Rica to spy on the centre’s managing partner, <a href="https://amabhungane.org/team/sam-sole/">Sam Sole</a>, in an attempt to reveal his sources of information. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.gov.za/about-government/contact-directory/ministers/ministers/justice-and-correctional-services-ministry#:%7E:text=Minister%3A%20Ronald%20Lamola%2C%20Mr,Private%20Bag%20X276%2C%20PRETORIA%2C%200001">justice ministry</a> has produced an <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202308/b28-2023rica.pdf">amendment bill</a> to meet the court’s deadline. </p>
<p>Having researched issues relating to communication surveillance and its oversight for years, my view is that the amendment bill is flawed. It doesn’t provide enough safeguards against the violation of privacy.</p>
<h2>The problem with Rica</h2>
<p>In terms of <a href="https://www.gov.za/documents/regulation-interception-communications-and-provision-communication-related-information--13">Rica</a>, intelligence and law enforcement agencies must apply to a special, retired judge for interception directions (or warrants) to conduct surveillance to solve serious crimes and protect national security. The judge is appointed by the justice minister.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-africas-intelligence-agency-needs-speedy-reform-or-it-must-be-shut-down-200386">South Africa's intelligence agency needs speedy reform - or it must be shut down</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The court <a href="https://www.concourt.org.za/index.php/judgement/383-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-another-v-minister-of-justice-and-correctional-services-and-others-minister-of-police-v-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-others-cct278-19-cct279-19#:%7E:text=The%20Court%20declared%20RICA%20unconstitutional,independent%20judicial%20authorisation%20of%20interception.">found</a> Rica to be unconstitutional on the following five grounds:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>People don’t have to be told that they have been under surveillance. </p></li>
<li><p>The appointment and renewal processes for the Rica judge lack independence.</p></li>
<li><p>The judge only has to hear from one side: those applying for interception warrants.</p></li>
<li><p>Rica does not ensure that intercepted data is safely managed.</p></li>
<li><p>Rica fails to recognise that lawyers and journalists have a professional duty to keep their sources and communications confidential.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>The court <a href="https://www.concourt.org.za/index.php/judgement/383-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-another-v-minister-of-justice-and-correctional-services-and-others-minister-of-police-v-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-others-cct278-19-cct279-19#:%7E:text=The%20Court%20declared%20RICA%20unconstitutional,independent%20judicial%20authorisation%20of%20interception.">prescribed</a> two interim measures while the law was being redrafted. The first was that within 90 days of an interception direction (warrant) having lapsed, those state agencies applying for surveillance need to inform the surveillance subject that they have been spied on. The second is that applicants must also tell the judge if the surveillance subject is a lawyer or journalist.</p>
<h2>Post-surveillance notification</h2>
<p>With the proposed amendments, the justice ministry has <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202308/b28-2023rica.pdf">responded</a> largely by reproducing the court’s first interim measure. However, it has added another clause stating that if notifying someone that they have been surveilled could potentially have a negative impact on national security, then the judge may withhold notification and for such period as may be determined by the judge. </p>
<p>This clause is too broad and does not provide an ultimate deadline for notification. It introduces speculation into the decision-making. That’s because the impact needs merely to be possible. There is no requirement to show a national security threat, merely a possible negative impact.</p>
<h2>Independence of the Rica judge</h2>
<p>The justice ministry has <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202308/b28-2023rica.pdf">inserted</a> a requirement for the Rica judge to be appointed by the justice minister, in consultation with the Chief Justice. This is adequate to the extent that it means that decision does not rest with the executive only. </p>
<p>The ministry has also <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202308/b28-2023rica.pdf">introduced</a> an entirely new position of a review judge, to automatically review the decisions of the Rica judge. It would have been better to build automatic review into the process once surveillance subjects have been notified. That might make the review process more robust as the subject may provide details that shed new light on the Rica judge’s decisions. If the judge’s decision to grant the warrant was misplaced, this could lead to the original decision being overturned or intercepted material being destroyed.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-africas-intelligence-watchdog-is-failing-civil-society-how-to-restore-its-credibility-195121">South Africa's intelligence watchdog is failing civil society. How to restore its credibility</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, given the load of several hundred cases a year, one judge may not be enough, either at the decision stage or the review stage. Consideration should be given to establishing a panel of judges.</p>
<h2>Hearing both sides</h2>
<p>It is possible that the review judge was introduced to respond to the problem of hearing only from the applicant (the “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ex_parte">ex parte</a>” problem). If that is the case, then it is not an adequate response. Both judges will still be making decisions based on the same one-sided secret evidence.</p>
<p>Rather, as <a href="https://amabhungane.org/">amaBhungane</a> argued in the Constitutional Court case, the bill could include a new position of a <a href="https://www.anchoredinlaw.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Founding-Affidavit-Sam-Sole.pdf">public advocate</a>, to defend the interests of the surveillance subjects.</p>
<p>The public advocate could be granted <a href="https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/monograph-detail?docid=b-9781849468466&pdfid=9781849468466.ch-008.pdf&tocid=b-9781849468466-chapter8">security</a> clearance, in line with <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jols.12186">well-recognised</a> processes involving “cleared counsel”.</p>
<p>Such lawyers have clearance to access the secret evidence the state is relying on. They are on the same footing as the agency applying for surveillance. They will be able to interrogate the case beyond what is provided for in the application.</p>
<p>As has been <a href="https://intelwatch.org.za/2023/05/30/reforming-communication-surveillance-in-south-africa-in-the-wake-of-amabhungane/">argued recently</a>, the public advocate could represent the interests of surveillance subjects who decide to take decisions on review following post-surveillance notification.</p>
<h2>Confidentiality for lawyers and journalists</h2>
<p>Regarding the need for the applicant to inform the judge that a subject is a journalist or lawyer, the ministry has <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202308/b28-2023rica.pdf">left out</a> an important safeguard from the interim measure provided by Constitutional Court’s judgment. It required the judge to grant the warrant only if necessary, which means that the warrant must be an investigative method of last resort. </p>
<p>On the management of surveillance data, the court <a href="https://www.concourt.org.za/index.php/judgement/383-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-another-v-minister-of-justice-and-correctional-services-and-others-minister-of-police-v-amabhungane-centre-for-investigative-journalism-npc-and-others-cct278-19-cct279-19#:%7E:text=The%20Court%20declared%20RICA%20unconstitutional,independent%20judicial%20authorisation%20of%20interception.">required</a> more details in the law on how and where surveillance data must be accessed, stored and destroyed. The justice ministry has failed to provide such detail.</p>
<h2>Metadata surveillance</h2>
<p>The amendment bill is silent on possibly the most serious surveillance <a href="https://www.mediaanddemocracy.com/uploads/1/6/5/7/16577624/cops_and_call_records_web_masterset_26_march.pdf">issue</a>, relating to the state’s <a href="https://intelwatch.org.za/2023/05/30/rica-reform-205-loophole/">massive and underregulated</a> surveillance of <a href="https://www.mediaanddemocracy.com/uploads/1/6/5/7/16577624/cops_and_call_records_web_masterset_26_march.pdf">data about a person’s communication</a>, or metadata. Rica <a href="https://www.gov.za/documents/regulation-interception-communications-and-provision-communication-related-information--13">allows</a> the state to use procedures other than those provided for in the act to access metadata.</p>
<p>For example, the state has preferred to use <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201502/act-5-1991.pdf">section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act</a> as it contains much lower privacy standards than Rica. It is thus open to abuse.</p>
<p>One solution is to make Rica the only law governing access to metadata, but retain the procedure whereby the ordinary courts can grant warrants, rather than restricting decision-making to the Rica judge only, to ensure speedy decision-making. </p>
<h2>Missed opportunity</h2>
<p>The justice ministry had more than enough time for the <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2017-05-10-op-ed-big-brother-is-watching-your-phone-call-records/">review of Rica</a>, section 205 and the entire surveillance setup to assess whether they were still fit for purpose. </p>
<p>The failure is an indictment on the ministry’s leadership of the review process. It missed the opportunity to address the <a href="https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201903/high-level-review-panel-state-security-agency.pdf">growing</a> <a href="http://www.saflii.org/images/state-capture-commission-report-part-5-vol1.pdf">concerns</a> about unaccountable state spying.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214508/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane Duncan receives funding from Luminate and the British Academy. She is a director of Intelwatch. </span></em></p>The justice ministry had more than enough time to make the law constitutional. Failure to do so is an indictment on its leadership in the process.Jane Duncan, Professor of Digital Society, University of GlasgowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2109102023-10-04T14:04:09Z2023-10-04T14:04:09ZHow Europe’s authoritarian populists maintain the illusion of a free press<p>Authoritarian leaders might be good at damaging democracy, but unless they are pure dictators they often still need to worry about winning elections. In the last few years, Europe has seen the rise of a number of authoritarian populists who rely on winning mass support among ordinary people – as opposed to just rigging the vote.</p>
<p>In some cases they win with the help of successful or popular policies. In Hungary, for example – despite <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/hungary-orban-reelection-manipulated-election-by-balint-magyar-and-balint-madlovics-2022-04">some suggestion of vote rigging</a> in April 2022’s election – to a considerable extent <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/orban-victory-in-hungary-reflects-popular-economic-policies-by-dorottya-szikra-and-mitchell-a-orenstein-2022-04">Viktor Orbán’s</a> victory can be attributed to voter support for his government’s popular economic and social programme.</p>
<p>Yet right-wing populist authoritarians also win elections even if their record in power is less positive. In Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has presided over <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/895080/turkey-inflation-rate/">record inflation</a> of more than 50% and a youth unemployment rate of <a href="https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/TUR/turkey/youth-unemployment-rate#:%7E:text=Youth%20unemployment%20refers%20to%20the,a%202.31%25%20decline%20from%202020.">close to 20%</a> and yet he won 52% of the votes in the election of May 2023.</p>
<p>It’s similar in many countries presided over by authoritarian populists. And a key reason they can cling on to power is often their careful influence over the news media, which allows them to shape political debate while maintaining the image of a free and democratic press.</p>
<h2>Why media ownership matters</h2>
<p>On paper, a look at news media ownership changes over the past two decades in populist-controlled countries such as Hungary and Turkey suggests a reassuring picture in which some opposition outlets may have disappeared, but others continue to publish in competition with government-affiliated outlets. </p>
<p>Yet a closer look reveals an interesting structural feature of media ownership networks in authoritarian populist countries. Our <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437231179366">latest research</a> in Austria, Hungary, Turkey and Slovenia – all of which have had governments with authoritarian populist tendencies at some point over the past two decades – shows that the structure of media ownership networks is enabling government-affiliated news outlets to dominate the public news discourse.</p>
<p>For instance, in Hungary, the Central European Press and Media Foundation (<a href="https://cmds.ceu.edu/article/2019-08-08/report-establishment-kesma-exacerbates-overall-risk-media-pluralism-hungary">Kesma</a>) is a huge right-wing media conglomerate that controls more than 500 national and local media outlets. Kesma was established in 2018, when most pro-government private media owners transferred their ownership rights to the foundation, which is headed by a board of trustees full of Orbán loyalists closely associated to the ruling party. </p>
<p>There are still opposition media voices in Hungary – especially in the online space. But in reality, public funding and the bulk of advertising <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022/hungary">flows to pro-government media outlets</a>. This puts independent media in a precarious position financially. State broadcasters and Hungary’s main press agency are also heavily controlled and focus squarely on a pro-government agenda.</p>
<p>Indeed, a <a href="https://ipi.media/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Hungary-Conclusions-International-Mission-Final.pdf">fact-finding mission</a> to Hungary in December 2019 by several journalism organisations found that Kesma has become a <a href="https://www.occrp.org/en/37-ccblog/ccblog/17408-they-tried-to-frame-us-new-assault-on-hungarian-journalists-highlights-media-freedom-crisis-in-the-heart-of-europe">crucial tool</a> for the government’s “content coordination throughout the pro-government media empire”.</p>
<p>Similarly, in Turkey, the Dogan Media group – owner of some of Turkey’s largest news outlets including the widely read newspapers Hürriyet and Milliyet and the largest tabloid Posta as well as the TV channel CNN Turk – was piece by piece <a href="https://rsf.org/en/do%C4%9Fan-media-group-sale-completes-government-control-turkish-media">sold to the Demirören Group</a>. The Demirören family are <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2018/09/24/the-total-collapse-of-freedom-pluralism-and-diversity-in-turkeys-mainstream-media/">close allies of Erdoğan and the ruling AKP</a>.</p>
<h2>Love your enemies</h2>
<p>It may seem counter-intuitive but the way media is set up in some authoritarian countries depends, to an extent, on having some sort of opposition media. </p>
<p>You might expect authoritarian populist governments to be more like the old totalitarian regimes which pulled out all the stops to silence any dissenting voices. This was the strategy of both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union under Stalin. </p>
<p>But allowing opposition voices to coexist next to dominant media organisations makes it harder for international press freedom bodies such as Reporters Without Borders or watchdogs such as Amnesty International to criticise a regime for a lack of pluralism. </p>
<p>It’s also convenient for an authoritarian regime to set up an “us versus them” situation, where “they” can be vilified and ridiculed by regime-friendly media. </p>
<p>In Hungary, for instance – in a wider strategy to discredit independent media news – pro-government media outlets have launched smear campaigns against independent media outlets funded by international grants. They are labelled “<a href="https://cpj.org/2023/02/editor-tamas-bodoky-on-threats-to-hungarys-independent-media-funding/">dollar media</a>”, accused of serving foreign interests.</p>
<p>This system of what is known as <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/competitive-authoritarianism/20A51BE2EBAB59B8AAEFD91B8FA3C9D6">“competitive authoritarianism”</a> maintains a semblance of democracy through electoral and market competition, despite the fact that in reality, these are heavily rigged. </p>
<p>Authoritarian populists do not seek to completely exclude dissenting or opposition actors, to the contrary, they rely on their existence, which allows them to be scapegoated and vilified. But in a regime where the power is heavily manipulated to be in favour of the voices that speak the regime’s message, opposition viewpoints are effectively drowned out. </p>
<p>Populist leaders often complain about a “leftist” or “liberal” media bias. This allows them to set up internal enemies as a target for their supporters. </p>
<p>For example, at a press conference in 2019 – from which he had excluded most media outlets that didn’t back his government – Orbán complained that the majority of media outlets were <a href="https://index.hu/belfold/2019/01/10/orban_viktor_sajtotajekoztato_osszefoglalo/">“left-liberal”</a>, adding: “As soon as I get up, I know that today I will also be working against the wind.”</p>
<p>Given the dominance of those news outlets that toe his party line, this is risible. But of course Hungary now has few strong enough dissenting voices for opposition ideas to be heard. So authoritarian populists have every interest in maintaining some level of pluralism – as long as it does not threaten the government’s dominance of the public discourse.</p>
<p>What this means for democracy and those who defend it is that people should be wary of jumping too quickly to conclusions about media pluralism based on measures of media ownership concentration alone. </p>
<p>Depending on the structure of the media ownership network, a populist authoritarian government does not need to concentrate media ownership in the hands of just one state-aligned media group. It’s okay to allow dissident voices to shout in the margins – because, as leaders like Orbán and Erdoğan know only too well – very few people are listening.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210910/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fanni Toth received the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the NORFACE-funded research program “Democratic governance in a turbulent age (Governance)” grant no. 462-19-080 (POPBACK project) supported in Austria by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), project no. I 4820, in Slovenia by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARSS), project no. H5-8288, and in the UK by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gerhard Schnyder recieved the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the NORFACE-funded research program “Democratic governance in a turbulent age (Governance)” grant no. 462-19-080 (POPBACK project) supported in Austria by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), project no. I 4820, in Slovenia by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARSS), project no. H5-8288, and in the UK by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)”</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marlene Radl received the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the NORFACE-funded research program “Democratic governance in a turbulent age (Governance)” grant no. 462-19-080 (POPBACK project) supported in Austria by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), project no. I 4820, in Slovenia by the Slovenian Research Agency (ARSS), project no. H5-8288, and in the UK by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).</span></em></p>Authoritarian populists tolerate opposition media – as long as they only exist at the margins.Fanni Toth, Postdoctoral Research Associate on POPBACK project , Loughborough UniversityGerhard Schnyder, Professor of International Management & Political Economy, Loughborough UniversityMarlene Radl, PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science, Universität WienLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2136632023-09-18T14:54:14Z2023-09-18T14:54:14ZUkraine war: reports suggest that Russia has been deliberately targeting journalists – which is a war crime<p>At least <a href="https://fom.coe.int/en/listejournalistes/tues?idPays=11709594">15 media workers have been killed</a> in Ukraine since Russia began its full-scale war in February 2022. Along with targeting civilians, hospitals, schools, orphanages, residential buildings, communications centres and places of worship, the Russian state has been accused by the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine of <a href="https://nuju.org.ua/list-of-journalists-killed-since-start-of-russia-s-full-scale-aggression-update/">deliberately targeting journalists</a>.</p>
<p>In a conflict such as the war in Ukraine, many journalists risk their lives to report the truth and reveal war crimes committed by both sides. But when journalists themselves are targeted, these war crimes almost always go unpunished. </p>
<p>Research from advocacy group Human Rights Watch has found that a <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/07/15/difficult-profession/media-freedom-under-attack-western-balkans">de facto impunity</a> exists for those responsible due to a lack of effort by many governments to bring killers of journalists to justice.</p>
<p>According to Unesco, the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/observances/end-impunity-crimes-against-journalists">perpetrators go unpunished</a> in nine out of ten cases when journalists are murdered, and this impunity “leads to more killings and is often a symptom of worsening conflict and the breakdown of law and judicial systems”.</p>
<h2>Russia: a dangerous place for journalists</h2>
<p>Threatening, attacking, disappearing and murdering journalists is not a new tactic of war in general. It is certainly not unknown in Russia, where the state is involved in targeting or issuing assassination orders for Russian journalists such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/12/you-may-have-been-poisoned-how-an-independent-russian-journalist-became-a-target">Elena Kostyuchencko</a> for her reporting on the war in Ukraine.</p>
<p>Forty-eight journalists and media workers <a href="https://cpj.org/data/killed/europe/russia/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&motiveUnconfirmed%5B%5D=Unconfirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&type%5B%5D=Media%20Worker&cc_fips%5B%5D=RS&start_year=1999&end_year=2023&group_by=location">have been killed</a> in Russia since Vladimir Putin came to power in 1999. Many of them were killed in <a href="https://cpj.org/reports/2006/11/russia-murders/">contract-style murders</a> without arrests or trials.</p>
<p>This includes Russian war correspondent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/05/ten-years-putin-press-kremlin-grip-russia-media-tightens">Anna Politkovskaya</a> who was assassinated in October 2006 after covering the second Chechen war. Although it remains unclear who ordered her murder, as is the case with many journalist killings in Russia, Politkovskaya exposed corruption in Russia at the highest levels. </p>
<p>She wrote in her 2004 book Putin’s Russia: “If you want to go on working as a journalist, it’s total servility to Putin. Otherwise, it can be death, the bullet, poison, or trial – whatever our special services, Putin’s guard dogs, see fit.”</p>
<p>Since Russia launched its full-scale war in Ukraine, the Kremlin has been at pains to restrict media coverage, passing new laws targeting journalists and freedom of expression. It is now a criminal offence, punishable by imprisonment, to <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/03/05/1084729579/russian-law-bans-journalists-from-calling-ukraine-conflict-a-war-or-an-invasion">call the war anything but a “special military operation”</a>.</p>
<p>In March 2022, Putin signed a law calling for prison sentences of up to 15 years for people who publish “false news” about the Russian military. In July 2022, the Russian president also <a href="https://pressroom.rferl.org/a/31955587.html">signed legislation</a> allowing Russian officials to close down foreign media organisations for what it interprets as “hostile actions against Russian media abroad”.</p>
<p>As part of a crackdown on non-government and international media organisations, Russia has restricted access to, stripped the licensing of, or banned from operating Novaya Gazeta, Radio Echo, BBC Russia, Radio Liberty and Meduza, among others. Most independent media organisations have had to <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/05/russia-media-independence-putin/">cease operations</a>, with their reporters fleeing the country.</p>
<p>One broadcaster, TV Rain, was <a href="https://theconversation.com/russias-disappearing-independent-media-why-they-closed-178590">targeted by the Kremlin</a> back in 2021 and declared a “foreign agent”. Advertisers shunned it and it was forced to go online only. Then, in March 2022, when the new media laws came into force, Russian authorities suspended it over its war coverage. As a result, TV Rain was forced to <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-dozhd-dutch-broadcast-license/32216931.html">operate in exile</a>.</p>
<h2>A dangerous (but vital) occupation</h2>
<p>Less than a week into the full-scale invasion, a Sky News television crew was <a href="https://europeanjournalists.org/blog/2022/03/07/ukraine-swiss-journalist-and-british-news-crew-targeted-by-russian-forces/">ambushed and shot at</a> by Russian troops, despite the crew identifying themselves as journalists. Swiss photojournalist Guillaume Briquet was shot and robbed by Russian soldiers in southern Ukraine on March 6 2022, while driving an armoured car with visible press markings. In both instances, the media workers were able to survive the attacks and live to tell the story. Many were not.</p>
<p>American <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brent-renaud-ukraine-russia-american-journalist-killed/">Brent Renaud</a> was the first international journalist killed in Ukraine. He was travelling with documentary photographer Juan Arredondo in a car driven by a Ukrainian civilian when Russian troops opened fire on the vehicle on March 13 2022. Arredondo was <a href="https://twitter.com/annalisacamilli/status/1502978846500573185">wounded</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1635380294902599680"}"></div></p>
<p>The same day, Ukrainian photojournalist Maks Levin, covering the war for Reuters, and his bodyguard Oleksiy Chernyshov were killed. An <a href="https://rsf.org/en/exclusive-rsf-investigation-death-maks-levin-information-and-evidence-collected-indicates">investigation</a> by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) concluded this was a deliberate execution. The RSF report suggested they may have been killed after being interrogated and tortured.</p>
<p>More recently, Ukrainian journalist Bohdan Bitik <a href="https://europeanjournalists.org/blog/2023/04/27/journalist-bohdan-bitik-shot-dead-in-ukraine/">was killed in April 2023</a> while reporting for La Repubblica near Kherson in the south of Ukraine. He and his colleague Corrado Zunino were targeted by snipers, despite wearing vests clearly identifying them as press.</p>
<h2>Changing norms?</h2>
<p>Based on these cases and more, our research aims to examine the effect of these violations of international law and codified norms.</p>
<p>Journalists are <a href="https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/interview/protection-journalists-interview-270710.htm">protected as civilians</a> under the 1949 <a href="https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-0173.pdf">Geneva conventions</a>, which Russia ratified in 1954. These conventions state that during international armed conflicts, journalists are entitled to all the rights and protections granted to civilians unless they take a direct part in hostilities.</p>
<p>“War correspondent” is a legal term that applies to journalists who travel with forces but are not troops themselves, and who have received authorisation from the armed forces they accompany. They are also considered civilians, but have the additional protection of being treated as prisoners of war if captured (from the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.32_GC-III-EN.pdf">third Geneva convention</a>).</p>
<p>Furthermore, the <a href="https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf">Rome statute</a> of the International Criminal Court (ICC) states that intentionally attacking a civilian not taking direct part in hostilities is a war crime. The ICC cannot prosecute states or organisations, but it can prosecute individuals.</p>
<p>The rules that are supposed to protect journalists are being eroded, and it is becoming more commonplace for journalists to be targeted during war. It is essential – for us all – that the protections afforded to journalists under international law are scrupulously upheld, and those responsible for their deaths are caught and face the consequences.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213663/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kelly Bjorklund is a senior writer and editor for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon J Smith receives funding from the British Academy for research on UK Civilian-Military relations and received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council for research on the Drivers of Military Strategic Reform.</span></em></p>Journalists and media workers are being deliberately targeted by Russian forces in Ukraine.Kelly Bjorklund, PhD Candidate, Staffordshire UniversitySimon J Smith, Associate Professor of Security and International Relations, Staffordshire UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2035802023-04-16T07:18:52Z2023-04-16T07:18:52ZFrom advertising blackmail to physical threats, Kenya’s journalists are under attack – but they must also regain public trust<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520468/original/file-20230412-16-78wq4n.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Journalists take cover during March 2023 protests in Kenya. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Boniface Muthoni/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>In recent months, Kenyan journalists have been <a href="https://nation.africa/kenya/blogs-opinion/editorials/stop-this-unwarranted-affront-to-media-freedom-4167720">harassed</a>, <a href="https://nation.africa/kenya/blogs-opinion/editorials/denounce-this-blatant-attempt-to-muzzle-media-4170448">intimidated</a> and <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/journalists-attacked-as-anti-government-protests-continue-in-kenya-/7030753.html">attacked</a> by government officials, politicians and members of the public. George Ogola, a professor of media industries, explains the impact of these attacks on media freedom in Kenya.</em> </p>
<h2>What are the major emerging threats against media freedom in Kenya?</h2>
<p>Kenya’s media face threats from both state and non-state actors as <a href="https://theconversation.com/moi-and-the-media-how-kenyan-journalism-suffered-under-his-iron-heel-131681">repressive practices of the past</a> reemerge. Government and opposition politicians are actively undermining media freedom in the country. This isn’t entirely new. But the threats have taken a new dimension as they are publicly defended – even boldly justified – by some of the perpetrators. These threats are economic, political and physical.</p>
<p><strong>Economic squeeze.</strong> In what it claimed was a measure of austerity to curb government spending – but which was interpreted as a deliberate attempt to muzzle media criticism – the previous government established a media buying agency, the <a href="https://ict.go.ke/directorate-of-government-advertising-agency-gaa/">Government Advertising Agency</a>. All government advertising is now channelled through this agency. </p>
<p>Critical media were and are now regularly “punished” through the <a href="https://rsf.org/en/government-orders-state-sector-withdraw-advertising-standard-group-media">withdrawal of government advertising</a>. In the run-up to the August 2022 elections, one of President William Ruto’s senior policy men <a href="https://twitter.com/DavidNdii/status/1552249429406744576?s=20">warned the media</a> that they were best advised to look for advertising elsewhere as it would not be business as usual with state advertising.</p>
<p><strong>Political threats.</strong> The <a href="https://theconversation.com/william-ruto-vs-kenyas-media-democracy-is-at-stake-190780">emerging systematic media repression</a> has also taken the form of brazen political threats from within the senior ranks of government. In what seemed like a well-calibrated attack by the ruling coalition, several politicians accused the media of being a “<a href="https://twitter.com/Aaroncheruiyot/status/1632672857040846850?s=20">cartel</a>” which needed to be “crushed”. These alarming sentiments were <a href="https://twitter.com/KIMANIICHUNGWAH/status/1633125734473674752?s=20">shared by the ruling party’s majority leader</a> in parliament. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/william-ruto-vs-kenyas-media-democracy-is-at-stake-190780">William Ruto vs Kenya's media: democracy is at stake</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>More draconian threats have included alleged plans to shut down media houses and the internet. Against the background of <a href="https://theconversation.com/mass-protests-in-kenya-have-a-long-and-rich-history-but-have-been-hijacked-by-the-elites-202979">opposition protests</a> in the country in March 2023, the Kenya Media Sector Working Group claimed the government had intended to <a href="https://nation.africa/kenya/news/journalists-call-out-govt-over-alleged-plan-to-shut-internet-media-over-azimio-protests-4182216">shut down the broadcast media and the internet</a> ahead of a planned demonstration. The president <a href="https://ntvkenya.co.ke/news/ruto-on-plan-to-shut-down-mainstream-media-internet/">denied such plans</a>.
Meanwhile, opposition leader Raila Odinga called on his supporters to <a href="https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2023-03-21-uproar-over-railas-call-for-boycott-of-the-star/">boycott the Star newspaper</a>, a local daily, accusing it of bias. Even though he later withdrew the order, the disregard for the principles of media freedom was apparent.</p>
<p><strong>Physical assaults.</strong> In what seemed like a return to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/daniel-arap-moi-the-making-of-a-kenyan-big-man-127177">repressive 1980s</a> during Kenya’s struggle for political pluralism, journalists were physically assaulted by the police and demonstrators in recent mass protests. Incredibly, the inspector general of police described the risk of assault as part of journalism’s “<a href="https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2023-04-04-it-wasnt-deliberate-koome-tells-media-over-attacks-during-demos/">occupational hazards</a>”. </p>
<h2>What does the law say about media freedom?</h2>
<p>Kenya has a relatively strong legal framework that supports media freedom. This is in addition to instruments like charters, treaties and declarations. </p>
<p>The freedom and independence of all types of media are guaranteed by <a href="https://klrc.go.ke/index.php/constitution-of-kenya/112-chapter-four-the-bill-of-rights/part-2-rights-and-fundamental-freedoms/200-34-freedom-of-the-media">Article 34 of the constitution</a>. <a href="https://klrc.go.ke/index.php/constitution-of-kenya/112-chapter-four-the-bill-of-rights/part-2-rights-and-fundamental-freedoms/199-33-freedom-of-expression">Articles 33</a> and <a href="https://klrc.go.ke/index.php/constitution-of-kenya/112-chapter-four-the-bill-of-rights/part-2-rights-and-fundamental-freedoms/201-35-access-to-information">35</a> further guarantee freedom of expression and access to information, respectively. </p>
<p>Additional legislation includes the <a href="https://mediacouncil.or.ke/sites/default/files/downloads/media-act-2013.pdf">Media Council of Kenya Act (2013)</a>, which established the Media Council of Kenya. The council promotes and protects the freedom and independence of the media. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/AmendmentActs/2013/KenyaInformationandCommunications_Amendment_Act2013.pdf">Kenya Information and Communication (Amendment) Act (2013)</a> established the Communications Authority of Kenya. It licences and regulates postal, information and communications services. The act gives the authority “independence from government, political or commercial interests”.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.eala.org/uploads/The_Treaty_for_the_Establishment_of_the_East_Africa_Community_2006_1999.pdf">East African Community treaty (1999)</a>, <a href="https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights#:%7E:text=Article%2019,media%20and%20regardless%20of%20frontiers">Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a> and the African Union’s <a href="http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/achpr/expressionfreedomdec.html">Declaration of Principles on Human Rights in Africa (2002)</a>, all ratified by Kenya, advocate for media freedom. </p>
<p>Other key advocates for media freedom include the Kenya Union of Journalists, the Kenya Editors Guild and the Media Owners Association. </p>
<h2>Are media outlets free of blame?</h2>
<p>There is a growing public wariness about the performance of the media, which are increasingly being accused of partisanship and poor journalism. </p>
<p>The Kenyan media have always been embedded within the broader contests for political power forced upon them by <a href="https://internews.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/resources/Internews_FactuallyTrue_Legally_Untrue-MediaOwnership_Kenya2013-01.pdf">media ownership structures</a>. Journalists are also wedded to Kenya’s polarising, ethnically inflected politics. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-kenyatta-has-gone-about-stifling-the-free-press-in-kenya-91335">How Kenyatta has gone about stifling the free press in Kenya</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A study of the structural conditions of journalism in Kenya describes the media culture as one that “<a href="http://www.mecodem.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Lohner-Banjac-Neverla-2016_Mapping-structural-conditions-of-journalism-in-Kenya.pdf#page=5">fluctuates from critical to concordant, clientelist reporting</a>”. Coverage can reflect the ethnic loyalties of the writers or media houses. This has eroded public trust in sections of the media. </p>
<p>Further, the media licensing regime has traditionally been transactional. Political support is rewarded with licences and access to state advertising. </p>
<p>Importantly, too, as economic challenges become existential threats to many media organisations, they have been forced to reduce their workforce, weakening gate-keeping processes. </p>
<p>These organisations also have to contend with the speed of social media as competitors. As the focus shifts to speed, quality is undermined. </p>
<p>The professional precarity of journalists afraid to lose their jobs has also made them susceptible to self-censorship and bribery. </p>
<h2>What are the options for the media?</h2>
<p>Continued exposure to advertising blackmail from the government weakens the media’s ability to operate independently. It is, therefore, critical that Kenya’s media find ways of diversifying their revenue streams. </p>
<p>Media organisations must continue to raise awareness about the importance of media freedom. They must push back against attempts to undermine their independence and encroach on their freedoms. </p>
<p>There are also enduring legal threats, such as the misapplication of laws like the <a href="http://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/Acts/ComputerMisuseandCybercrimesActNo5of2018.pdf">Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act</a>, which criminalises the publication of false information. Such laws are routinely abused and must, therefore, be fought. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-is-being-misused-in-kenyas-political-arena-why-its-hard-to-stop-it-177586">Social media is being misused in Kenya's political arena. Why it's hard to stop it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Lastly, the media must continue investing in training and capacity building for journalists. The allure of speed in an attempt to compete with social media may be tempting, but it risks undermining ethical reporting, fact-checking and quality journalism.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/203580/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>George Ogola does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is a growing public wariness about the performance of the media, which are increasingly accused of being partisan.George Ogola, Professor of Media Industries, University of NottinghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2009492023-03-06T15:04:28Z2023-03-06T15:04:28ZReporting Ukraine 90 years ago: the Welsh journalist who helped uncover Stalin’s genocide<p>Ninety years ago, a young Welsh investigative journalist reported on the Soviet Union’s genocide in Ukraine, Stalin’s attempt to stamp down on rising nationalism. <a href="https://www.history.com/news/ukrainian-famine-stalin">The Holodomor</a>, as it became known, was responsible for the deaths of some 4 million Ukrainians through deliberate starvation. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.garethjones.org">Gareth Jones</a>’ eyewitness reports, gathered at significant risk, were initially disbelieved and dismissed at a time when many in the west were supportive of Stalin as a potential ally against the growing Nazi threat in the early 1930s. It was only later, after the journalist was murdered in murky circumstances, that the full scale of what had taken place was recognised. </p>
<p>Jones, a linguist and political advisor before he turned to journalism, has become the subject of a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-o7VoM1jlOs">feature film,</a> several <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-18691109">documentaries</a> and numerous <a href="https://nation.cymru/culture/review-mr-jones-the-man-who-knew-too-much-the-life-death-of-gareth-jones-by-martin-shipton/">biographies.</a> Yet his achievements, which hold lessons for today’s reporters, are still not well known.</p>
<p>Jones was born in Barry, south Wales, in 1905. His mother had worked in Ukraine as a tutor to the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-40345030">Hughes family</a>, Welsh steel industrialists, who had founded what is now the city of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/place/Donetsk-Ukraine#ref197147">Donetsk</a>. </p>
<p>He had a talent for languages and graduated from Aberystwyth University with first class honours in French and then later from Cambridge with another first in French, German and Russian. In 1930, he was hired as a foreign affairs advisor to the MP and former prime minister David Lloyd George while also developing his freelance journalism.</p>
<p>In early 1933, Jones was in Germany covering <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/german_articles/german_articles.htm">Hitler’s rise to power</a>. He was there on the day Hitler was <a href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/adolf-hitler-is-named-chancellor-of-germany">pronounced chancellor</a> and flew with him and Goebbels to Frankfurt where he reported for the <a href="https://www.walesonline.co.uk">Western Mail</a>, a Welsh daily newspaper. </p>
<p>In March 1933, he made a third and final trip to the Soviet Union. He had earlier <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/gareth_jones_diary.htm">reported more explicitly</a> than most on the economic crisis and starvation that was emerging. This time, he went undercover into Ukraine and <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/gareth_jones_diary.htm">kept notes</a> of all he saw:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.garethjones.org/margaret_siriol_colley/The%20exhibition/press_release.htm">I walked along through villages and twelve collective farms</a>. Everywhere was the cry, “There is no bread. We are dying.” This cry came from every part of Russia, from the Volga, Siberia, White Russia, the North Caucasus, and Central Asia. I tramped through the black earth region because that was once the richest farmland in Russia and because the correspondents have been forbidden to go there to see for themselves what is happening.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The report was denounced by the Soviets and also in the New York Times by its Moscow correspondent, Walter Duranty. It was an <a href="https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/mr-jones-film-exposes-the-fake-news-campaign-behind-stalins-ukrainian-genocide/">early example of crying “fake news”</a> to undermine uncomfortable truths. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People lie strewn in a black and white scene. Other people walk past looking at the bodies." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/513619/original/file-20230306-22-it1g4d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=561&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Starved people on a street in Kharkiv, Ukraine in 1933.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Famine_in_the_Soviet_Ukraine_1932_1933.html?id=k0K5AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y">Famine in the Soviet Ukraine, 1932–1933: a memorial exhibition, Widener Library, Harvard University.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jones <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/soviet_articles/jones_replies.htm">rebutted</a> the criticism with a detailed analysis of the famine and its causes – but the mud stuck. He was banned from the Soviet Union and returned to Wales, unable to find work with major newspapers until he <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/margaret_siriol_colley/randolph_hearst1934.htm">met the American press magnate William Randolph Hearst</a>. Hearst had bought St Donat’s castle, a few miles from Jones’ home in Barry and supported him by publishing his articles in full.</p>
<p>The following year, he embarked on a world tour, focusing <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/articles_far_east/contents.htm">on Asia</a>.
He spent time in Japan and then went to China, moving on to Inner Mongolia with a German journalist. The pair were kidnapped by bandits and held hostage. </p>
<p>Jones’ body was found in August 1935. He had <a href="https://www.garethjones.org/articles_far_east/berliner_tageblatt.htm">apparently been shot</a> the day before his 30th birthday. Biographers have pointed to circumstantial evidence that the Soviet secret services, the NKVD, were involved in his kidnap and murder as revenge for his reporting. But there is no concrete proof of this. </p>
<p>Lloyd George paid <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/cambridgeshire/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8357000/8357028.stm">tribute to him</a> in the London Evening Standard newspaper following news of his death:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>That part of the world is a cauldron of conflicting intrigue and one or other interests concerned probably knew that Mr Gareth Jones knew too much of what was going on. He had a passion for finding out what was happening in foreign lands wherever there was trouble, and in pursuit of his investigations he shrank from no risk. I had always been afraid that he would take one risk too many. Nothing escaped his observation, and he allowed no obstacle to turn from his course when he thought that there was some fact, which he could obtain. He had the almost unfailing knack of getting at things that mattered.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Today, as another generation of journalists reports on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Jones’ story holds a number of relevant lessons. Even as we are swamped with digital media, there is no substitute for eyewitness reporting and for reporters taking the risks to see for themselves what is happening. </p>
<p>Attempts to hold power to account will often be meet with denial – including from other media – but cries of “fake news” must be countered with hard evidence. </p>
<p>Reporting can be a dangerous occupation. The press watchdog, Committee to Protect Journalists, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jan/24/more-journalists-killed-latin-america-caribbean-ukraine-2022-cpj">reported</a> that 67 journalists had been killed last year – including 15 in Ukraine after Russia’s invasion in February 2022.</p>
<p>Despite the risks, international reporting is as essential today as it was in the 1930s when Gareth Jones set out to tell the world what he had seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200949/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Sambrook does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Gareth Jones reported on Moscow’s genocide against the Ukrainian people in the 1930s. His story holds lessons and an example for those reporting on the latest conflict.Richard Sambrook, Emeritus Professor of Journalism, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1944162022-11-14T16:14:19Z2022-11-14T16:14:19ZJust Stop Oil: journalist arrests show how the demonisation of protest threatens us all<p>At least <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/09/education-secretary-arrest-lbc-journalist-just-stop-oil-protest">eight journalists</a> have been detained while covering Just Stop Oil protests in recent weeks. Their press credentials ignored, the journalists (including an LBC reporter, a documentary filmmaker and a photographer) were held for hours, fingerprinted and DNA-swabbed. Their phones and cameras were confiscated and – <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/police-arrest-press-just-stop-oil-protests_uk_636a6817e4b06f38ded8c116">in at least one case</a> – a journalist’s home was searched. </p>
<p>Reasons for arrest and detention included “<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11407377/Outrage-police-arrest-reporters-photographers-reporting-M25-chaos.html">conspiracy to commit a public nuisance</a>”, despite journalists taking no part in any aspect of the protests. This flies in the face of the UK <a href="https://www.college.police.uk/app/public-order/communication#media-relations">College of Policing</a>’s policy. The college explicitly briefs its officers against such interference with the media in the pursuit of reporting news, advising that “facilitation of frontline media reporting during dynamic operations should be anticipated and planned for”.</p>
<p>So what explains the detention of reporters at recent protests – and what are the wider implications? <a href="https://www.ukpol.co.uk/hertfordshire-police-2022-statement-on-arrest-of-a-journalist/">Hertfordshire Constabulary</a> initially said the protests were “fluid and fast-moving” and insisted that there were valid grounds to detain journalists “for questioning in order to verify their credentials”. But, following widespread condemnation from government ministers, Hertfordshire <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/09/education-secretary-arrest-lbc-journalist-just-stop-oil-protest">promised an investigation</a> but also implied that not all journalists belong to “legitimate media”, and argued that those covering the protests were “<a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/m25-protests-police-journalists-just-stop-oil-problem-arrests-1963732">part of the problem</a>”. </p>
<p>Such harassment of journalists is clearly wholly unacceptable: but to fully understand these incidents, we need to place them in their wider context.</p>
<h2>Policing the highway to climate hell</h2>
<p>World leaders have stressed the need for urgent action on climate change. The UN secretary general Antonio Guterres warned that the world is on a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/07/cop27-climate-summit-un-secretary-general-antonio-guterres">highway to climate hell</a> without it. The UK prime minister Rishi Sunak said that it is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/07/cop27-sunak-says-it-is-morally-right-for-uk-to-honour-climate-pledges">morally right</a> for the UK to honour its climate pledges at COP27. </p>
<p>Just Stop Oil’s blocking of roads and motorways to draw attention to the lack of action despite widespread political rhetoric has proved highly controversial. There have been claims that road blockades have halted <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/just-stop-oil-block-ambulance-b2200208.html">emergency vehicles</a> and prevented motorists from reaching <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11402293/Just-Stop-Oil-eco-mob-spark-M25-rush-hour-chaos-scale-gantries-second-day.html">appointments</a> or <a href="https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2022-11-09/ill-never-forgive-man-missed-his-fathers-funeral-due-to-protests-on-m25">funerals</a>. The chaos has led some drivers to take the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/29/just-stop-oil-activists-dragged-out-of-way-by-motorists-at-london-protests">law into their own hands</a>.</p>
<p>Activists recently occupied motorway gantries on the M25 in England, obliging police to stop traffic while they could be removed. Police have a <a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/migrated/opbp_report_on_the_law_on_policing_peaceful_protests_0.pdf">duty to facilitate peaceful protest</a>, but must balance the rights of protesters with those of other citizens. Police action to remove protesters may be necessary and proportionate – but the same cannot be said of the decisions to arrest journalists who were <a href="https://pressgazette.co.uk/three-journalists-locked-up-for-covering-m25-protests-police-force-says-the-arrests-were-justified/">neither blocking traffic</a> nor obstructing a police operation. Preemptively limiting media access is the hallmark of an authoritarian rather than democratic state.</p>
<p>We closely observed police operations during <a href="https://cop26research.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/">COP26</a> and found Police Scotland were accommodating to researchers and proactively engaged with the media. There was little confrontation and no more than a handful of arrests at COP26. But year on there are now serious questions about police responses to climate protests in the UK. Recent arrests need to be understood in light of discourses around protest in the press and parliament. </p>
<h2>A hostile environment for protest</h2>
<p>In 2021, the government was granted an injunction against road blocking by Insulate Britain, resulting in multiple <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/17/nine-insulate-britain-activists-jailed-for-breach-of-road-blockades-injunction">jail terms</a>. Similarly this year, politicians from different parties have supported legislation during 2022 to clamp down on disruptive or noisy protests. The <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/the-public-order-bill">Public Order Bill</a> (which was passed by parliament and is currently being scrutinised by a House of Lords committee) will criminalise locking on and “interfering with key national infrastructure”, and “extend stop and search powers for … protest-related offences”. </p>
<p>The Bill aims “to give police the tools they need to tackle dangerous and highly disruptive tactics, used by a small minority of protesters, to wreak havoc for people going about their daily lives”. At a time when UN chief Guterres says climate crisis presents the world with a choice between <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/cop27-agree-on-climate-action-or-face-a-collective-suicide-pact-un-chiefs-ultimatum-to-world-leaders-12741144">collective action and collective suicide</a>, UK leaders appear to be doubling down on punishing protesters rather than addressing the causes of global heating. </p>
<p>The home secretary, Suella Braverman, rails against the “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2022/oct/18/suella-braverman-blames-guardian-reading-tofu-eating-wokerati-for-disruptive-protests-video">Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati</a>”; the leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer, supports “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/24/keir-starmer-backs-stiff-sentences-for-climate-protesters-who-block-roads">longer sentences</a> for those gluing themselves to roads and motorways”; the press sensationalises “<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11335477/amp/Just-Stop-Oil-target-Harrods-Eco-mob-fling-orange-paint-entrance-world-famous-store.html">eco-zealots” and “eco-mobs</a>”. The result is a hostile environment for protest.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lq99-JB6jdg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk-news/2022/11/09/pm-joins-police-chiefs-in-calling-for-press-freedom-after-just-stop-oil-arrests/">Sunak</a> joined those calling for press freedom in the wake of the arrests, conveniently forgetting the role of his government in demonising environmental activists. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/18/study-crowds-police-crime-bill-less-safe-priti-patel">Stephen Reicher</a>, professor of social psychology at the University of St Andrews, warned that the bill effectively “delegitimates protest in the eyes of the police” by presenting activists – and those surrounding them – as troublemakers to be controlled. As one <a href="https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/charlotte-lynch-lbc-arrested-just-stop-oil/">journalist put it</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I don’t blame the individual officers. It seems they are a symptom of a much wider and hugely alarming problem. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Whatever one thinks about Just Stop Oil, antipathy towards radical environmentalism among politicians and the media is having wider consequences. A 2020 report by Oxford University academics described it as having a “<a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/migrated/opbp_report_on_the_law_on_policing_peaceful_protests_0.pdf">chilling effect</a>” on what both police and the public see as legitimate protest, with serious consequences for democracy.</p>
<p>The harassment and detention of journalists doing their job shows that crackdowns on dissent don’t only impact “eco-zealots”: they threaten everyone.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 10,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/194416/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Eight journalists covering a protest on the M25 motorway were recently detained by police.Hugo Gorringe, Lecturer in Sociology, The University of EdinburghMichael Rosie, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, The University of EdinburghLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1931022022-10-27T23:00:52Z2022-10-27T23:00:52ZJournalists must be protected in police investigations. Here’s our five point plan for reform<p>Australia is now 39th in Reporters Sans Frontiers’ <a href="https://rsf.org/en/country/australia">World Press Freedom Index</a>, a staggering decline of 20 places since 2018. This reflects a fact acknowledged by both the Morrison and Albanese governments: Australia has a press freedom problem. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-raids-on-australian-media-present-a-clear-threat-to-democracy-118334">2019 AFP raids</a> on News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst and the ABC prompted two parliamentary inquiries and as many <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-did-the-high-court-find-in-the-annika-smethurst-v-afp-case-136176">constitutional challenges</a>. Meanwhile, the <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/whistleblowers-on-trial-richard-boyle-and-david-mcbride">prosecutions</a> of whistleblowers David McBride, Witness K and Richard Boyle revealed the potential consequences for those who expose government wrongdoing. </p>
<p>Vast and complex <a href="https://theconversation.com/before-9-11-australia-had-no-counter-terrorism-laws-now-we-have-92-but-are-we-safer-166273">security laws</a>, set against an absence of protections unique in the Western world, have made public interest reporting a risky business for journalists and their sources.</p>
<p>These problems are well known, but we are yet to see actual law reform to support public interest journalism. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1521445500985036801"}"></div></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-a-media-freedom-act-heres-how-it-could-work-125315">Australia needs a Media Freedom Act. Here's how it could work</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A commitment to reform</h2>
<p>Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus recently <a href="https://ministers.ag.gov.au/media-centre/speeches/address-national-press-club-australia-12-10-2022">assured</a> Australians his government was “going to do something” about press freedom reform.</p>
<p>Specifically, it would act on Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/FreedomofthePress">recommendations</a> made in 2020 and <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/FreedomofthePress/Government_Response">accepted</a> by the Morrison government. </p>
<p>A central pillar of the committee’s report were reforms to federal warrant applications. </p>
<p>It recommended only senior judges have the power to grant warrants relating to journalists and media organisations. </p>
<p>It also said the “interests of public interest journalism” should be represented by a government-appointed “public interest advocate”. Otherwise, warrant applications should remain <em>ex parte</em> (meaning without the knowledge or presence of other parties, such as the affected media organisation).</p>
<p>The government has committed to these reforms. But as several overseas examples show, the proposals go nowhere near far enough to address the deficiencies in press freedom in Australia. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/security-committee-recommends-bare-minimum-of-reform-to-protect-press-freedom-145105">Security committee recommends bare minimum of reform to protect press freedom</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Learning from our allies</h2>
<p>Under US law, a blanket protection exists to prevent state access to journalistic materials, subject to strictly limited exemptions. </p>
<p>In New Zealand, as in <a href="https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1977-047#pt.2-div.2B">Queensland</a> and <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ea200880/s126k.html">Victoria</a>, a journalist cannot be forced to show police materials that would identify a confidential source (unless a judge determines the public interest in the administration of justice outweighs the public interests in source confidentiality and press freedom).</p>
<p>In <a href="https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/annualstatutes/2017_22/FullText.html">Canada</a>, only a senior judge may grant police access to information a journalist holds – and only where there is no alternative and access is justified by a robust public interest test. </p>
<p>The most compelling framework is presented by the UK <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/contents">Police and Criminal Evidence Act</a>, which <a href="https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/bills-and-laws/bills-proposed-laws/document/BILL_115952/protection-of-journalists-sources-bill">New Zealand</a> is on the cusp of embracing.</p>
<p>UK police cannot get a warrant to see any journalistic materials such as recordings or documents (unless it is necessary to avoid seriously prejudicing an investigation).</p>
<p>Instead, UK law sets up a special process by which police apply for “production orders”, which the media gets a chance to contest. </p>
<p>Access to journalistic material will only be granted if other methods of getting the material have been tried (or would be futile) and if access is in the public interest.</p>
<p>In recognition of journalists’ ethical obligations to protect their confidential sources, police access to confidential journalistic materials is limited to terrorism investigations. Even then, strict limitations and protections apply. </p>
<p>These considerations are not taken lightly. UK courts have emphasised the high bar police must reach to obtain a production order, and the importance of rights to privacy and press freedom.</p>
<h2>A five point plan</h2>
<p>Australia remains the only liberal democracy lacking a national bill or charter of human rights, with the protections for privacy, speech and press freedom they usually entail. </p>
<p>Something would be better than nothing. But compared to international practice, the Parliamentary Joint Committee recommendations fall short.</p>
<p>Tellingly, Dreyfus and his Labor colleagues on the committee <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/FreedomofthePress/Report/section?id=committees%2freportjnt%2f024411%2f73639">noted</a> the recommendations did “not go far enough” and were “a bare minimum – a starting point – for reform.”</p>
<p>Now Dreyfus is attorney-general and can actually drive reform. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, and Australia could introduce laws shaped by the experience of our closest international partners. </p>
<p>We suggest a five point plan based on comparative research and analysis: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>create a special framework of production orders for controlling state access to <em>all</em> journalistic materials, not just confidential source information.</p></li>
<li><p>have only senior judges determine access to such material.</p></li>
<li><p>create a mechanism by which access can be contested in court prior to being executed.</p></li>
<li><p>ensure substantive protection via a clear public interest test. Investigators should only be able to access journalistic material if there is no reasonable alternative source and the public interest in the investigation of crime outweighs the public interest in press freedom.</p></li>
<li><p>in exceptional circumstances, police may be able to get a warrant (without the knowledge of the media organisation they’re targeting) instead of a production order. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>In these exceptional circumstances referred to in point five, however: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>a public interest advocate should be present to represent the public interest in press freedom</p></li>
<li><p>the warrant should be drafted as narrowly as possible, and </p></li>
<li><p>if a warrant is granted and executed, any seized material should be held by a court so media can challenge police access and, if necessary, for this to be resolved by a court. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Police raids on Australian media have tangible effects on press freedom, but they are not the whole story. Meaningful protections should also:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>safeguard journalists’ sources through privacy law</p></li>
<li><p>enhance whistleblower protections</p></li>
<li><p>limit data surveillance, and</p></li>
<li><p>include journalism-based defences to certain criminal offences.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>With both sides of politics behind press freedom reforms, now is the time to support democracy. Australia must not slip further down in global standings.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/193102/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Ananian-Welsh receives funding UQ Advancement funding.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jason Bosland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia’s press freedom problems have been acknowledged by both the Morrison and Albanese governments. However, we’re yet to see any actual law reform to support public interest journalism.Rebecca Ananian-Welsh, Associate Professor, TC Beirne School of Law, The University of QueenslandJason Bosland, Associate Professor, Melbourne Law School, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1927532022-10-19T14:28:24Z2022-10-19T14:28:24ZDoreen Lawrence and Prince Harry’s lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher underlines need for Leveson Inquiry part two<p>One of the key moments of the 2011 Leveson Inquiry into press standards came when the Daily Mail’s then-editor, Paul Dacre, took to the witness box to accuse Hugh Grant of pursuing “mendacious smears driven by a hatred of the media”. Dacre was responding to Grant’s <a href="https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/hugh-grant-claims-evidence-links-mail-to-hacking/s2/a546816/">allegation</a> that a 2007 Mail on Sunday story could only have been obtained by hacking his voicemails. </p>
<p>The Mail has always vehemently denied any involvement with phone hacking or any other unlawful activities. So it came as a shock when, two weeks ago, a high-profile group including Prince Harry, Elton John, Liz Hurley and Baroness Doreen Lawrence <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/oct/06/doreen-lawrence-prince-harry-and-others-launch-legal-action-against-daily-mail-publisher">announced</a> that they were launching a legal action against the Mail’s publisher, Associated Newspapers. </p>
<p>Their claims of unlawful activity by the papers go well beyond phone hacking to the alleged hiring of private investigators to bug cars and homes. They also include allegations of the accessing of bank accounts and other financial transactions through illicit means, and the payment of police officials, with corrupt links to private investigators, for inside information.</p>
<p>Without doubt, the most eye-catching name among the claimants is that of Doreen Lawrence, the mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence. It was the Mail, at Dacre’s behest, which first splashed the names of Stephen’s alleged killers on its front page. As Guardian commentator Jane Martinson <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/11/allegations-paul-dacre-daily-mail-peerage-travesty-doreen-lawrence">reminded</a> us, it is just five years since Baroness Lawrence sat next to Dacre at a banquet to celebrate his 25 years as Mail editor. </p>
<p>These allegations have been vehemently denied by the publisher. In a <a href="https://pressgazette.co.uk/doreen-lawrence-prince-harry-and-elton-john-allege-criminal-privacy-breaches-by-mail-group/">statement</a> which branded the claims as “unsubstantiated and defamatory”, Associated Newspapers said: “We utterly and unambiguously refute these preposterous smears.”</p>
<p>The legal process will now run its course. Within the next few weeks, these claimants will serve their “particulars of claim”, followed by the publisher’s defence. At this point, there will be more disclosures about the allegations (and the claimants’ evidence) as well as the Mail’s response. In the meantime, Dacre’s long-expected peerage has reportedly <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/former-daily-mail-editor-paul-dacre-is-dropped-from-peerages-list-skfcrh0k9">been delayed</a>.</p>
<p>However these cases develop, this new litigation serves as a reminder that the Leveson Inquiry is unfinished business. While the inquiry was prompted by revelations in July 2011 about News of the World journalists hacking the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, it was set up with an explicit two-part remit. Part one, looking generally at the culture and practices of the press, ended with the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/229039/0779.pdf">Leveson Report</a> in November 2012, and recommendations for a new framework of self-regulation.</p>
<p>But because police investigations into possible criminal behaviour were ongoing (and subsequently resulted in several trials), the first part could not address the details of precisely who authorised, committed or was a party to unlawful activity, nor to what extent any corruption extended to the police. The inquiry’s chair, Sir Brian Leveson, acknowledged that important lines of questioning were not pursued in the full expectation that they would be covered in part two, which had been explicitly promised by the then-prime minister, David Cameron. </p>
<h2>Unfinished business</h2>
<p>In the intervening ten years, Mirror Group has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/feb/05/hugh-grant-wins-damages-from-mirror-phone-hacking-case">admitted</a> that senior editors and executives “actively turned a blind eye” to phone hacking on its newspapers, and have spent several hundred million pounds in settling claims. While Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers (NGN) – publisher of the Sun and the now-defunct News of the World – has refused to make any such admission in relation to the Sun, it too continues to pay out vast sums in settlements and legal fees. </p>
<p>In December 2021, the actress Sienna Miller <a href="https://inforrm.org/2021/12/10/news-group-settle-news-of-the-world-and-sun-hacking-claims-statements-in-open-court/">called</a> her settlement from NGN “tantamount to an admission of liability on the part of the Sun”. Further phone hacking claims against the newspaper were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/oct/11/the-sun-faces-fresh-claims-of-phone-hacking-during-rebekah-brooks-era">announced</a> just last week. </p>
<p>These claims may be historic, but those in senior editorial positions at the time remain influential in the industry. And yet nobody has been held accountable for extensive wrongdoing which – in the words of the Leveson report – “wreaked havoc in the lives of ordinary people”. Against such a murky backdrop of settlements, allegations and continuing claims of unlawful behaviour, any other industry would be facing a clamour for truth and accountability. </p>
<p>Not this time. On the contrary, virtually every UK newspaper has used its editorial columns to reject the case for part two, dismissing it as backward-looking and a irrelevant. In March 2018, the then-culture secretary, Matt Hancock, responded to ferocious press lobbying by <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43240230">confirming</a> that Leveson part two would indeed be shelved. </p>
<p>But these new claims suggest that the second part of Leveson is still relevant. It was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/mar/01/leveson-2-explained-what-was-it-meant-to-achieve">designed to examine</a> – once relevant criminal trials had finished – the relationships between journalists and the police, as well as between publishers and politicians and relevant regulatory bodies (such as the failed Press Complaints Commission) over the decade before the phone hacking scandal broke. </p>
<p>It was also supposed to investigate failures of corporate governance at newspaper groups which seemingly allowed misbehaviour to become routine.</p>
<p>Leveson followed a similar pattern to the Calcutt reports of <a href="https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ilp15&div=31&id=&page=">1990</a> and <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/271963/2135.pdf">1993</a> which produced an equally scathing account of shocking press behaviour in the 1980s. Calcutt’s recommendations were also ignored after intense press lobbying, and the phone-hacking scandal was arguably a direct result of that political cowardice. Leveson part two could put an end to the cycle of press misbehaviour followed by weak and ineffectual political responses.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192753/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Barnett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The second part of the Leveson Inquiry was cancelled in 2018, but there is still unfinished business.Steven Barnett, Professor of Communications, University of WestminsterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1911012022-09-21T16:34:08Z2022-09-21T16:34:08ZMedia deference to the royals must have a limit – just look at how Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson were treated<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485883/original/file-20220921-14-pcat36.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C131%2C1504%2C1154&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">King Edward VIII and Mrs Simpson on holiday in Yugoslavia</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Britain’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/queen-elizabeth-ii-the-politics-of-national-mourning-left-no-space-for-dissenting-voices-190591">period of national mourning</a> following the death of Queen Elizabeth underlined the reverence with which many in the UK regard the royal family. Intense and mainly loyal coverage by broadcasters and newspapers took pains to remind us that some of history’s most deplorable regimes were republics and that monarchs may be more tolerant – the British royals being particularly benign. </p>
<p>In a private capacity, I am proud of my country’s representative democracy and dutiful, apolitical monarchy. But media barons and editors do not have this luxury and must not allow reverence for the sovereign to silence questions. A journalist’s duty is to hold power to account – and reporters must avoid deference. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/anniversaries/december/edward-viii-abdication-speech/#:%7E:text=On%2011%20December%201936%20the,he%20loved%20%2D%20Mrs%20Wallis%20Simpson.">abdication crisis of 1936</a>, caused by King Edward VIII’s insistence on marrying an American divorcee, Wallis Simpson, offers a valuable warning from history. Then, the timidity of powerful proprietors ensured that newspapers failed utterly. </p>
<p>So intense was their reverence for royalty that they kept news of the King’s relationship with Simpson from the British public. Foreign titles reported the King’s relationship for ten months before British newspapers told their readers anything about it.</p>
<p>Following her divorce from her English husband Ernest Simpson on October 27 1936, American editors treated Wallis as an all-American success story. Their titles, only available these days in print archives, were packed with news about the woman Liberty magazine described as “The Yankee at King Edward’s Court”. </p>
<p>In Portland, Oregon, students launched a “Simpson for Queen” campaign. In France, Paris Soir’s edition of Wednesday October 28 declared: “Press and radio in the United States announce Edward VIII’s marriage to An American.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A group of American students with a banner calling for Wallis Simpson to be allowed to be Queen of England." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485908/original/file-20220921-9551-cty8e6.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Student members of the ‘Simpson for Queen Committee’ in Portland, Oregon. It appeared in Time Magazine on November 16 1936.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Time Magazine</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the UK, imported titles that reported the King’s affair were intercepted at ports or censored with scissors by distributors who feared they might be sued. Politicians who discussed the King and Simpson with lobby correspondents found their comments went unreported. </p>
<p>Thus, in November 1936, Communist MP Willie Gallagher told parliamentary journalists: “I see no reason why the King shouldn’t marry Mrs Simpson … Naturally the charmed circle in this country would be upset, but we Communists certainly shouldn’t worry about it. Good luck to him, and good luck to her.” Not a syllable of this appeared in British newspapers, but Time Magazine printed his words in full for American readers.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1964/06/10/archives/lord-beaverbrook-dead-at-85-founder-of-newspaper-empire-member-of.html">Lord Beaverbrook</a>, owner of the market-leading Daily Express, welcomed the King’s request “to protect Wallis from sensational publicity at least in my own country”. He worked to persuade other newspapers to suppress the story. </p>
<p>Geoffrey Dawson, editor of the Times, and C.P. Scott, his counterpart at the Manchester Guardian, visited Downing Street and learned that the prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, believed the electorate would be appalled by a marriage between their King and a divorcee. They resisted any temptation to inform their readers.</p>
<h2>Secret archive</h2>
<p>Throughout 1936, British newspaper proprietors and editors had access to news about Edward and Mrs Simpson. They discussed the relationship with politicians and read about it in newspapers published abroad. Henry Pratt Boorman, editor-proprietor of the Kent Messenger, devoured detailed coverage from French and American titles. </p>
<p>In 2012, Geraldine Allinson, then chairman of the Kent Messenger Group, gave me a brown paper package which had been stored in the executive suite of her company’s headquarters at Larkfield near Maidstone. Bound with string and apparently undisturbed for decades it bore a handwritten label on which was written: “Copies of newspaper dealing with the abdication of Edward VIII and succession of George VI, December 1936.”</p>
<p>Inside were annotated copies of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Literary-Digest">Literary Digest</a> (an influential US weekly published between 1890 and 1938), Time Magazine and Paris Soir. They contain detailed accounts of the King’s relationship with Mrs Simpson, all dated before the British newspapers published the story. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="The duchess of WIndsor (formerly Mrs Wallis SImpson) shakes hands with Adolf Hitler as her husband, the duke of Windsor (formerly KIng Edward VIII) looks o smiling." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485884/original/file-20220921-14-oq5uau.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=580&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bad company: the duke and duchess of Windsor meeting Adolf Hitler in 1937.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This they did in the first week of December 1936, following a meeting between the King and Baldwin, at Buckingham Palace on Thursday December 3. The following day Baldwin told the House of Commons the King had requested legislation that would allow him to marry Simpson without her becoming queen and exclude any children of the marriage from succession to the throne. The cabinet had <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/1936-12-04/debates/4b533569-e887-4366-bb40-34223b204bb6/ConstitutionalPosition#1611">denied his request</a>. </p>
<h2>Breaking silence</h2>
<p>Only now did the British press feel able to discuss the controversy. A group consisting mainly of elite titles including the Times, Daily Telegraph and Manchester Guardian remained fearful that debate would embroil the King in controversy, divide the country and damage British prestige. Popular titles including the News Chronicle, Daily Mail, Daily Mirror and Daily Express gave Edward VIII a sympathetic hearing. The Mirror demanded full democratic debate. </p>
<p>On December 5 the popular left wing title proclaimed “The Nation Insists on Knowing the King’s Full Demands and Conditions. The Country Will Give You a Verdict”. On December 11, Edward VIII abdicated the throne – only a week had passed between the first reports of the King’s relationship in the British press and the King’s abdication.</p>
<p>Subsequent coverage concentrated heavily on promoting the new King George VI and his family, including the freshly minted princesses, Elizabeth and Margaret. The Duke and Duchess of Windsor, as the former king and his wife were styled, moved to France. When, after the second world war broke out in 1939, he was commissioned by NBC to give a radio broadcast calling for peace, the <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/on-demand/0/duke-nazis-british-cover-up-true-story-behind-crowns-marburg/">BBC refused</a> to broadcast it.</p>
<p>Reflecting on the abdication in 1952, the historian George Young observed in his study, Stanley Baldwin, that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The voluntary discretion of the English papers concealed from the public a situation which the people of the United States were watching with excitement, France with amusement, and Canada with some anger and some alarm.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Do such instincts still exist? Can King Charles III expect an easy ride from British journalists? The Guardian’s decade-long struggle to obtain the “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2015/may/13/read-the-prince-charles-black-spider-memos-in-full">black spider memos</a>” the series of opinionated letters and memorandums written by King Charles III, then the Prince of Wales, to British government ministers and politicians, confirmed that an element of dissent endures among republicans.</p>
<p>But that is not enough. For Britain’s unwritten constitution to maintain the ruling partnership of parliament and crown in the 21st century, we need honest scrutiny of the monarchy by its admirers – not just televised ceremonies and deference. His Majesty’s first visit to a new building, homeopathy clinic or green energy project will deserve critical attention.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191101/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Luckhurst has received research funding from News UK and Ireland Ltd. He is a member of the Society of Editors and the Free Speech Union and a member of the Editorial Board of The Conversation UK. His book, Reporting the Second World War - The Press and the People 1939-1945 will be published by Bloomsbury Academic on 9th February 2023</span></em></p>A cautionary tale for the UK press .Tim Luckhurst, Principal of South College, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1883912022-09-01T12:44:13Z2022-09-01T12:44:13ZGorbachev and glasnost: how his fragile legacy of free speech has been destroyed by Putin<p>Mikhail Gorbachev was only Soviet leader for a little over six years, from 1985 to 1991, but they were six years that changed both his country and the world. His policies of perestroika (reconstruction) and glasnost (openness) gave ordinary citizens the opportunity to exercise real political freedoms, including freedom of speech. </p>
<hr>
<iframe id="noa-web-audio-player" style="border: none" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=x84olp&id=https://theconversation.com/gorbachev-and-glasnost-how-his-fragile-legacy-of-free-speech-has-been-destroyed-by-putin-188391&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=D8352A&playColor=D8352A" width="100%" height="110px"></iframe>
<p><em>You can listen to more articles from The Conversation, narrated by Noa, <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/audio-narrated-99682">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>But although Gorbachev’s reforms were dramatic and far-reaching, it was never clear at the time whether they would <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2150758">be successful</a> in changing the Soviet political and economic systems. Progress was often uncertain and subject to reversal. The opposition of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1988/08/07/kremlin-official-warns-of-limits-to-reforms/8ae7e861-643a-4244-b0b3-7c5d1f62b7fd/">powerful people</a> with vested interests in maintaining the status quo was responsible for some delays. At other times the pace of progress was affected by Gorbachev’s own uncertainties about how fast and how far reform should go.</p>
<p>This was the case with glasnost – perhaps the most daring of all of the political changes that Gorbachev introduced. But while he spoke of the importance of trusting ordinary Soviet citizens with information, it was also clear that he intended for information to be <a href="https://www.thecollector.com/gorbachev-era-glasnost-perestroika-fall-of-soviet-union/">used in a targeted way</a> – to draw attention to specific problems identified by the political leadership. Gorbachev needed such publicity to generate the popular support that would help him overcome resistance to reform by conservatives in the communist party.</p>
<p>In fact glasnost failed its first test in April 1986, when the Chernobyl nuclear power station suffered a catastrophic accident. The politburo <a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-20-mn-17231-story.html">delayed authorising</a> the Soviet news media to report the true scale of the disaster, preventing timely countermeasures such as evacuation, and exposing people in Ukraine and Belarus to high levels of radiation. </p>
<p>But by the summer of 1986 Gorbachev renewed his commitment to glasnost by appointing journalists who were in favour of reform to edit newspapers, magazines and literary journals. Gorbachev’s practice of appointing like-minded editors was part of what the eminent scholar of the Soviet Union, Archie Brown, describes in his book <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-gorbachev-factor-9780192880529?cc=gb&lang=en&">The Gorbachev Factor</a> as “guided glasnost”, and it was accompanied by another, intersecting process that Brown terms “glasnost from below”. </p>
<p>For while glasnost was envisioned by Gorbachev as a tool rather than an information free for all, it quickly took on a life of its own. The very journalists who had been appointed by the state used their new positions to <a href="https://cpj.org/2015/04/attacks-on-the-press-death-of-glasnost-russia-attempt-at-openness-failed/">push the boundaries</a> of what was possible. </p>
<p>There was a clear steer from the Kremlin that the personalities and policies of the Brezhnev leadership of the 1970s <a href="https://apnews.com/article/0fbc23bf1800e432ad0b97e42b5ab4b9">could be criticised</a> for creating the conditions for economic stagnation, but what about other periods of Soviet history? Could Stalin be criticised? Could Lenin? What about criticism of Gorbachev and perestroika itself?</p>
<p>The lack of boundaries between the permitted and the forbidden enabled editors to take chances and marked the start of investigative journalism in the Soviet Union. But the very absence of those red lines that created opportunities also meant that there was no real way for the journalists themselves to know exactly when they had crossed into the danger zone. </p>
<h2>Taking risks for free speech</h2>
<p>Everyone involved in trying to make glasnost in Soviet journalism a reality knew there was danger. When I was a student of Brown’s in the late 1980s, I was fortunate enough to hear <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?20107-1/journalism-soviet-union">Vitaly Korotich</a> speak about his experiences editing the <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Ogonyok-New-Journalism-Glasnost/dp/0434595861">weekly magazine Ogonek</a>. Korotich was one of those risk-taking journalists appointed by Gorbachev. </p>
<p>The magazine soon gained a reputation for publishing criticism of the Soviet system. Korotich spoke eloquently about the risks he and other journalists took daily and remarked that he never knew if the state would praise him as a hero or arrest him as a traitor.</p>
<p>Public struggles over the limits of journalistic freedom paved the way for the exercise of freedom of speech by society more broadly. Films were released that dealt with controversial topics, such as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/16/movies/repentance-a-soviet-film-milestone-strongly-denounces-official-evil.html">Repentence</a>, which showed some of the horrors of the repression of the Stalin period. Civil society organisations were created, such as <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59853010">Memorial</a>, founded in 1987 by nuclear physicist and dissident Andrei Sakharov to lead honest investigations into the human rights abuses. </p>
<p>The televised debates of the newly-elected Congress of People’s Deputies in 1989 featured the <a href="https://www.gorby.ru/en/presscenter/publication/show_26700/">open questioning of Gorbachev</a> and other members of the Soviet leadership, especially over the war in Afghanistan. Beginning in the late 1980s there were popular protests calling for independence in Soviet republics including <a href="https://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/lithuanians-campaign-national-independence-1988-1991">Lithuania</a> and <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/georgia-soviet-demonstrations/25324233.html">Georgia</a>. </p>
<p>These demonstrations were <a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-01-14-mn-170-story.html">harshly repressed by the Soviet security forces</a>, who killed many of the protesters. Even at a high point of glasnost, Gorbachev saw limits to freedom of speech, and it was the peoples of non-Russian republics who paid the price. </p>
<p>The trajectory of glasnost revealed a paradox: Gorbachev needed the active participation of society in politics to achieve his reforms, which meant granting certain political freedoms. But once given, political freedoms can be very difficult to control.</p>
<h2>Putin takes back control</h2>
<p>Vladimir Putin wasted little time in reestablishing state control over the political freedoms introduced by Gorbachev as soon as he came to power in 1999 – and reining in Russia’s flourishing independent media was high on the agenda. </p>
<p>Journalists’ access to Chechnya was severely restricted during <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/03/12/1085861999/russias-wars-in-chechnya-offer-a-grim-warning-of-what-could-be-in-ukraine">Russia’s second war in that country</a> (1999-2009), in sharp contrast to the <a href="https://bleedingheartland.com/static/media/2018/12/Belin2002conferencepaper.pdf">coverage of the first war</a> in the mid-1990s, which was extensive and uncensored. </p>
<p>Putin’s campaign to exert greater control over the oligarchs allowed him to deal with the media empires many of them owned. Vladimir Gusinsky <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/russia_independent_ntv_fell_silent/3557594.html">lost the television channel NTV</a> to the state-owned energy company Gazprom in 2001. In 2002 NTV cancelled one of its most popular programmes, Kukly, which was inspired by the British satirical comedy Spitting Image and which depicted Putin as a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZJx9bgwdv0">foul-mouthed baby</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eZJx9bgwdv0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Reporting the news became <a href="https://www.npr.org/2007/02/01/7115600/the-dangers-of-journalism-in-russia">increasingly dangerous</a>. The 2006 murder of investigative journalist <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/oct/15/gender.uk">Anna Politkovskaya</a> was widely attributed to <a href="https://www.europeanforum.net/headlines/five_people_convicted_for_the_murder_of_anna_politkovskaya">the Russian state</a>. </p>
<p>The final blow to Russia’s independent media was the legislation passed earlier this year, making it illegal to <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-fake-news-military-invasion-independent-media/31735798.html">distribute “false news”</a> about Russia’s war in Ukraine. News outlets such as the <a href="https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-dozhd-tv-suspending-operations-ukraine/31734451.html">internet TV station Dozhd</a>, the <a href="https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/03/03/russian-liberal-radio-mainstay-ekho-moskvy-closes-after-pulled-off-the-air-a76730">radio station Ekho Moskvy</a> and the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/28/russian-news-outlet-novaya-gazeta-to-close-until-end-of-ukraine-war">newspaper Novaya Gazeta</a> – which was founded in part by a donation from Gorbachev himself – all closed their operations in Russia.</p>
<p>Sadly, in the space of a generation, Russia has journeyed from state censorship to free speech and back again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188391/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Mathers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Glasnost was hailed as one of the Soviet leader’s great achievements. But it was a fragile freedom and soon overturned by Vladimir Putin.Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1888322022-08-22T15:44:23Z2022-08-22T15:44:23ZUhuru Kenyatta and Kenya’s media: a bitter-sweet affair that didn’t end happily<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479408/original/file-20220816-19-s6r1xw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Kenya's journalists have had a tumultuous relationship with Uhuru Kenyatta's government. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Simon Maina/AFP via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Uhuru Kenyatta’s regime came into power in 2013. It was the first to implement most of the provisions of Kenya’s <a href="http://kenyalaw.org/lex/actview.xql?actid=Const2010">2010 constitution</a>. The media were eager to see how the government, led by Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto, would adhere to <a href="https://www.klrc.go.ke/index.php/constitution-of-kenya/112-chapter-four-the-bill-of-rights/part-2-rights-and-fundamental-freedoms/200-34-freedom-of-the-media#:%7E:text=Freedom%20of%20the%20media,-Chapter%20Four%20%2D%20The&text=(1)%20Freedom%20and%20independence%20of,in%20Article%2033%20(2).&text=(b)%20penalise%20any%20person%20for,any%20broadcast%2C%20publication%20or%20dissemination">article 34</a> of the constitution, which deals with the freedom of the press. The two politicians had promised to expand media freedoms once in power. </p>
<p>The relationship between the media and Kenyatta’s regime went through six stages that defined the president’s nine years in office between 2013 and 2022.</p>
<p>It shifted from <em>“karibuni chai”</em> (welcome to tea) to <em>“nyinyi mzime hiyo mavitu yenu na muende”</em> (all of you switch off your thingies (cameras) and leave). </p>
<h2>1. Courting the media</h2>
<p>Uhuru Kenyatta took over from Mwai Kibaki to become the fourth president of Kenya on 9 April 2013. His relationship with the media started off well. The president warmly welcomed journalists to State House before he and Ruto hosted a <a href="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/ktnnews/video/2000067681/-president-and-his-deputy-hold-media-breakfast-at-statehouse">breakfast with top editors</a> on 12 July 2013. It was the first time State House was hosting such an event. </p>
<p>Kenyatta called it an opportunity to build relations between the media and the state. Critics saw it as a way of arm-twisting the press to get it on the side of the government. </p>
<h2>2. Rebranding the presidential press</h2>
<p>The media breakfast was soon followed by another move touted as an effort to streamline the State House-media relationship. In July 2013, the Presidential Press Service, which mostly covered the head of state’s movements, was <a href="https://nation.africa/kenya/news/politics/uhuru-unveils-new-media-unit-assures-of-press-freedom-875244">rebranded</a> into the Presidential Strategic Communication Unit. Its mandate was expanded to communicating government policy and branding state events. </p>
<p>The rebrand implied that strategic communication – which is the purposeful use of communication to fulfil a set mission – would be prioritised. The presidential press unit would, therefore, be used to convey news from State House to journalists, and ensure the ruling party’s agenda was achieved. </p>
<h2>3. Divorcing the media</h2>
<p>The cordial start to the relationship between the media and Kenyatta’s regime didn’t last. Soon there were signs that the Jubilee government had taken a road it couldn’t walk comfortably. </p>
<p>Following the October 2013 terrorist attack at the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-africa-29247163">Westgate mall</a>, journalists were thrown out of parliament on allegations of misrepresenting facts. This followed media reports that <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2013/12/22/westgate-questions-and-kenyas-misled-media">soldiers had looted shops</a> during the siege at the mall. In December, parliament <a href="https://cpj.org/2013/12/kenya-parliament-passes-draconian-media-laws/">passed a law</a> that imposed heavy penalties on journalists and media houses found guilty of code of ethics violations. These violations were to be determined by a state agency. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-kenyatta-has-gone-about-stifling-the-free-press-in-kenya-91335">How Kenyatta has gone about stifling the free press in Kenya</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In 2015, when the media became critical of Kenyatta’s relationship with his deputy Ruto, the president dismissed these reports <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE5CsBKEZKs">saying</a> <em>“gazeti ni ya kufunga nyama”</em> (newspapers are for wrapping meat). </p>
<p>And at a police service conference in February 2018, Kenyatta <a href="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/entertainment/news/article/2001268312/pack-up-and-go-kenyatta-matiangi-tell-off-journalists">told</a> journalists to switch off their cameras and leave. </p>
<p>A month earlier, David Mugonyi, the then deputy president’s spokesman, <a href="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/ureport/article/2001265277/dp-ruto-s-spokesman-threatening-message-to-nmg-journalist-over-story">threatened</a> a journalist, Justus Wanga, with dismissal from his job. This was provoked by Wanga’s newspaper article carried under the title “Cabinet seats that split Uhuru, Ruto”.</p>
<h2>4. Redirecting advertising revenue</h2>
<p>To the chagrin of the media, the government <a href="https://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/tea/news/east-africa/kenya-bans-state-advertising-in-private-media-1362418">withdrew advertising revenue</a> from mainstream media in 2017. </p>
<p>The Kenyatta and Ruto regime established a state-run pullout and website, <a href="https://www.mygov.go.ke/index.php">MyGov</a>, which carried all advertising from government agencies. This was <a href="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/counties/article/2000169804/new-agency-to-handle-all-state-media-advertising">coordinated</a> through a newly established body, the Government Advertising Agency. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-african-governments-use-advertising-as-a-weapon-against-media-freedom-75702">How African governments use advertising as a weapon against media freedom</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government’s decision redirected about US$20 million in advertising that initially went directly to media houses annually. This accounted for an estimated 30% of total media advertising revenue. The formation of the agency coincided with rising tensions between the media and the government.</p>
<p>Though the move was <a href="https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2019-05-04-media-calls-for-a-rethink-on-state-advertising-agency/">initially criticised</a>, it challenged media houses to think of other ways of generating income. This included tapping into reader revenue and exploiting technology to support daily operations. This, ideally, would have helped free media houses from the government’s use of advertising as a weapon to manipulate coverage. </p>
<h2>5. Snubbing the 2017 presidential debate</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/12/kenya-elections-televised-presidential-debate">2013 presidential debate</a> was the first of its kind for Kenyan media. All presidential candidates were in attendance. It gave journalists an unprecedented opportunity to interrogate them on issues of national leadership. </p>
<p>However, in 2017, <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/7/6/kenyas-uhuru-kenyatta-pulls-out-of-election-debates">Kenyatta snubbed</a> the presidential debate. This was <a href="https://www.voaafrica.com/a/odinga-snubs-kenya-presidential-debate/6675753.html">replicated</a> in 2022 when Raila Odinga, who contested the presidency under the Azimio coalition chaired by Kenyatta, disparaged the debate.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/political-debates-in-kenya-are-they-useful-or-empty-media-spectacles-183262">Political debates in Kenya: are they useful or empty media spectacles?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>These decisions seemed to undermine the media’s relevance in Kenya. <a href="https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/michael-ndonye/article/2001447570/it-will-be-political-indiscipline-to-avoid-the-presidential-debate">In my opinion</a>, snubbing the debate was political indiscipline. It’s not just voters and the media who needed to hear from leaders, but all Kenyans. </p>
<h2>6. Unable to hide</h2>
<p>Despite the tense relationship he had with the media, Kenyatta still found it important to seek its help when he felt cornered. Twice, he sought out journalists to address his home turf, the <a href="https://www.lemonde.fr/en/le-monde-africa/article/2022/08/12/kenyan-presidential-election-mount-kenya-voters-can-swing-the-outcome_5993373_124.html">important</a> central Kenya voting bloc.</p>
<p>Two days to the 9 August 2022 elections, Kenyatta spoke with journalists from vernacular media platforms, urging people from central Kenya to vote for Odinga. Ruto allies <a href="https://www.pd.co.ke/august-9/kenya-kwanza-protests-uhurus-kenya-143236/">protested</a> the move. During this interview at State House, Kenyatta appealed for the region’s vote for his preferred successor, Odinga.</p>
<p>The relationship between Kenyatta and the media has been bitter-sweet. However, the media and state are not expected to be bedfellows. It is journalists’ responsibility to hold those in power accountable. That is why it’s a red flag whenever regimes purport to work with the media.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188832/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Ndonye does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The relationship between the state and media soured just months into the Kenyatta regime.Michael Ndonye, Senior Lecturer, HOD-Mass Communication, Kabarak UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1766442022-02-09T08:50:42Z2022-02-09T08:50:42ZGlobal effort to defend journalism needs a reset – here’s how to do better<p>Media freedom is increasingly under threat around the world from a combination of economic and political factors. For some years now, digital technology has undermined the business model that has traditionally sustained journalism. That – and an <a href="https://www.ifj.org/what/press-freedom/media-concentration.html">increasing concentration of media ownership</a> in many countries – means there are <a href="https://www.niemanlab.org/2020/01/journalists-get-left-behind-in-the-industrys-decline/">less jobs</a> and less outlets available for journalists to work in.</p>
<p>Then there is the very real danger in which many journalists are forced to work. In December 2021, a <a href="https://rsf.org/en/news/number-journalists-arbitrary-detention-surges-20-488-including-60-women">record</a> 488 journalists and media workers were in prison globally. And 46 journalists <a href="https://cpj.org/data/killed/?status=Killed&motiveConfirmed%5B%5D=Confirmed&type%5B%5D=Journalist&start_year=1992&end_year=2022&group_by=year">were killed</a> while doing their jobs in 2021 – nearly one a week. Although this represents a 20-year low, it highlights the continuing challenge facing media freedom.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/2021-a-grim-year-for-journalists-and-free-speech-in-an-increasingly-turbulent-and-authoritarian-world-174020">2021: a grim year for journalists and free speech in an increasingly turbulent and authoritarian world</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This week, 50 foreign ministers are meeting at the third <a href="https://mfctallinn.humanrightsestonia.ee/">Global Media Freedom Conference</a> in Estonia to renew and strengthen their commitments to advocating for media freedom. These 50 states comprise the <a href="https://mediafreedomcoalition.org/">Media Freedom Coalition</a> (MFC) – an intergovernmental partnership established in 2019 by the UK and Canada.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Map of th world with 50 countries which support the Media Freedom Coalition shaded in." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=296&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=296&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=296&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=372&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=372&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444847/original/file-20220207-13-1kc7z85.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=372&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Alliance: the 50 states that make up the Media Freedom Coalition.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Media Freedom Coalition</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But what impact, if any, is the coalition having on the physical, legal, and economic threats that journalists face? Our <a href="https://fpc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Reset-Required-Evaluation-Report-2022.pdf">two-year evaluation</a> of the Media Freedom Coalition – published this week – shows that the MFC still has a long way to go before it can claim to be helping to reverse the global decline in media freedom.</p>
<h2>Naming and shaming</h2>
<p>The Media Freedom Coalition has so far published 24 joint <a href="https://mediafreedomcoalition.org/activities/joint-statements/all">statements</a> publicly condemning those who violate media freedom, such as the authorities in Belarus, China, Egypt, Myanmar, the Philippines, Russia, Uganda and Yemen.</p>
<p>For example, the coalition recently published a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/closure-of-media-outlets-in-hong-kong-media-freedom-coalition-statement">statement</a> expressing “deep concern at the Hong Kong and mainland Chinese authorities’ attacks on freedom of the press and their suppression of independent local media in Hong Kong”. These statements are designed to impose a ‘diplomatic price’ on those who violate media freedom by publicly condemning and stigmatising their actions.</p>
<p>But these public statements have often been very poorly publicised. Until very recently, the coalition did not even have its own dedicated website or social media accounts. As one media freedom activist told us, “a statement that nobody sees has no impact”.</p>
<p>Joint statements relating to abuses of media freedom in specific countries were signed, on average, by just 57% of member countries. Some members have been particularly quiet. </p>
<p>Spain (27%) and Belize (27%) are the worst offenders, having both signed fewer joint statements than even Afghanistan (31%) – which surprisingly has not been publicly suspended or expelled from the coalition, despite what Reporters Without Borders (RSF) <a href="https://rsf.org/en/news/taliban-takeover-40-afghan-media-have-closed-80-women-journalists-have-lost-their-jobs">describes</a> as an “extremely fraught” environment for journalists in Afghanistan, since the Taliban takeover.</p>
<p>In fact, the coalition has not yet published any public statements condemning abuses of media freedom by some of its own members – despite clear violations of media freedom in countries such as Afghanistan, Croatia, Slovenia, Sudan and the US. In Sudan, one media worker recently told us: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is no such thing as media freedom in Sudan right now. Sudan is not safe for journalists anymore. Why is the Media Freedom Coalition not talking about this? </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Many coalition members are also failing to lead by example. According to <a href="https://rsf.org/en/ranking">RSF’s World Press Freedom Index</a>, three times as many MFC states went down in the rankings in 2021, than improved their positions. This suggests that media freedom is in decline even within some states that support it. </p>
<p>The amounts of funding allocated to supporting media freedom under the coalition have been relatively very small. Only 28% of MFC members have made a financial contribution to the UNESCO-administered <a href="https://en.unesco.org/global-media-defence-fund">Global Media Defence Fund</a> which aims to bolster journalists’ legal protection and support investigative journalism.</p>
<p>Overall, the report’s lead author, <a href="http://marysophiamyers.org/">Dr Mary Myers</a> argues that, “Partly because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the actions of the MFC have not been as rapid, bold or visible as was initially promised.”</p>
<h2>How to defend media freedom – better</h2>
<p>But despite these limitations, there is reason for optimism. The coalition has recognised many of these issues itself. It has a new secretariat, executive group members and online presence.</p>
<p>The coalition also has some early successes it can build on. Several states have made positive improvements domestically, as a direct result of joining the MFC. For instance, in July 2020, Sierra Leone <a href="https://cpj.org/2020/10/cpj-welcomes-repeal-of-criminal-libel-in-sierra-leone-urges-further-reform/">repealed</a> its criminal libel law, removing the threat of imprisonment to suppress journalism. </p>
<p>In our <a href="https://fpc.org.uk/publications/reset-required-evaluating-the-media-freedom-coalition-after-its-first-two-years/">report</a>, we identify concrete ways the MFC can continue to improve its efforts to defend media freedom. These include implementing a proactive communications strategy, improving the volume, visibility and support for its public statements and strengthening the minimum requirement for membership to include contributing to the UNESCO Global Media Defence Fund.</p>
<p>Perhaps most importantly, the coalition should explain when and how it will be implementing the “toolkit” of concrete measures designed by its independent advisory body, the <a href="https://www.ibanet.org/IBAHRIsecretariat#:%7E:text=The%20High%20Level%20Panel%20of,of%20the%20Media%20Freedom%20Coalition.&text=The%20High%20Level%20Panel's%20Secretariat,%2C%20technical%2C%20and%20legal%20assistance.">High-Level Panel</a> of Legal Experts on Media Freedom. These include practical suggestions such as strengthening consular support to journalists at risk, and providing emergency entry visas for journalists needing to flee oppressive countries.</p>
<p>The former deputy chair of the panel, Amal Clooney, recently <a href="https://www.justsecurity.org/77636/dont-let-the-autocrats-win-how-biden-can-use-the-democracy-summit-to-build-back-media-freedoms/">urged</a> coalition members to adopt such measures, saying: “It is time for states that claim they defend democracy to start acting like it.” </p>
<p>We couldn’t agree more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176644/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Martin Scott receives funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council. The Foreign Policy Centre has supported the report’s publication through its Unsafe for Scrutiny project, which is funded by the Justice for Journalists Foundation. However, it did not participate in, or contribute to, the evaluation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mel Bunce receives funding from the AHRC. The Foreign Policy Centre has supported the report’s publication through its Unsafe for Scrutiny project, which is funded by the Justice for Journalists Foundation. However, it did not participate in, or contribute to, the evaluation.</span></em></p>A group of 50 governments is meeting in Estonia to discuss ways to protect journalists. But are their voices being heard?Martin Scott, Senior Lecturer in Media and International Development, University of East AngliaMel Bunce, Head of the Journalism Department, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1740202021-12-23T10:45:25Z2021-12-23T10:45:25Z2021: a grim year for journalists and free speech in an increasingly turbulent and authoritarian world<p>Hundreds of journalists killed or arrested, rising numbers of female media workers targeted, floods of misinformation and hate speech and ineffectual or hostile governments unable or unwilling to protect the public’s right to know. The 2021 <a href="https://rsf.org/en/ranking">press freedom index</a> released recently by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) makes for grim reading. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://rsf.org/en/news/number-journalists-arbitrary-detention-surges-20-488-including-60-women">report reveals</a> that 488 journalists were detained in 2021 – an increase of 20% compared to the previous year – while a total of 46 were killed and 65 held hostage. Of those detained, 60 were women (33% higher than 2020). As you might expect, it tends to be autocratic regimes with dismal records for freedom of speech and human rights which crop up once again as the worst offenders. </p>
<p>The latest report notes an upturn in repression against journalists in Belarus – where opposition politicians and commentators have been targeted in the government crackdown since the August 2020 election – as well in Myanmar, where the military coup of February has been followed by a crackdown on free expression. In China, where the Communist party continues to tighten its grip, and Hong Kong, where the Beijing-backed regime is using the draconian national security law to punish dissidents, it gets ever more perilous to oppose the increasingly authoritarian regime of Xi Jinping.</p>
<p>These findings linking authoritarian governments to human rights abuses are not surprising given the tendency of such governments to use local and global crises – such a COVID at present – to clamp down on press freedom under the guise of national interest and security.</p>
<h2>Bullying, hate speech and censorship</h2>
<p>Journalists are facing increasing threats for doing their jobs – whether that is physical intimidation, hate speech directed against them or online trolling. Some European countries have used the law to prevent the dissemination of information that political actors see as threatening their hold on power and legitimacy. We’ve seen that <a href="https://rsf.org/en/spain">in Spain</a>, for example, where parties on both sides of politics have gone out of their way to stigmatise the media and hamper the free flow of information, even banning some journalists from press conferences. </p>
<p>Such practices, which include interference in the daily work of media outlets, as well as implicit and explicit threats to journalists doing their job, are well documented in the 2021 report by the <a href="https://www.onefreepresscoalition.com/news">One Free Press Coalition</a> which mapped such acts in a variety of European countries since 2014. Elsewhere, including in Iran, Syria, Mexico, Sudan and Guatemala, intimidation is creating a climate of fear among media professionals. This prevents the free circulation of information, opinions and ideas. It also allows for the wider circulation of fake news and misinformation. </p>
<p>What is of concern is the risk that such acts of intimidation against journalists and the media can become normalised – even in western democracies. </p>
<p>In response to the alarming rise in attacks against journalists worldwide, the United Nations designated November 2 each year as the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/observances/end-impunity-crimes-against-journalists">International Day to End Impunity for Crimes Against Journalists</a>. The designation is symbolic – but a serious engagement with ending impunity for crimes against journalists can form the basis for a legal framework that can guarantee freedom of expression and access to information and ensure journalists carry out their jobs. </p>
<h2>Profession under threat</h2>
<p>Throughout history, people practising journalism have faced intimidation and attacks for a variety of reasons, whether it is governments worried about exposure or partisan and private interests worried about their profits. But what the increasing number of attacks suggests is that journalism is becoming more and more a contested domain and space for struggle over information, ideology and politics. </p>
<p>These attacks violate human rights: both of journalists and the societies they serve which are being deprived of their right to information – something that should be at the heart of all free public debate and the democratic process. They underscore the need for adequate legal protection for journalists that goes beyond rights to communicate and free speech recognised in particularly in Article 19 of the <a href="http://www.claiminghumanrights.org/udhr_article_19.html">Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a>. </p>
<p>Article 19 recognises everyone’s right to freedom of opinion and expression and provides the basis for the function of journalism, conducted by individuals, to be protected – independently of broader institutional press or media rights. In international law, freedom to express opinions and ideas is considered essential at both an individual level, insofar as it contributes to the full development of a person, and also as a foundation stone of democratic society. </p>
<p>International human rights law requires states to respect and protect the lives of all within their jurisdiction from attacks and threats of attacks and to provide an effective remedy where this has not been the case. But so far there is no international framework dedicated to the protection of journalists from physical attack or ending impunity for crimes against journalists. If journalists are deliberately targeted and threatened while those who attack them go unpunished, the media cannot be free and democracy will continue to be threatened.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174020/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dina Matar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Journalists and media workers around the world are increasingly being targeted, especially in countries where authoritarian regimes hold power.Dina Matar, Professor, Political Communication and Arab Media, SOAS, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1711222021-11-04T14:31:33Z2021-11-04T14:31:33ZWhy the handling of a false South African news report about 10 babies has set off alarm bells<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430195/original/file-20211104-19-14hcg0o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Iqbal Survé, executive chairman of the Independent newspaper group.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dirco/Flickr</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South African newspaper proprietor Dr <a href="https://www.independentmedia.co.za/our-people/dr-iqbal-surve/">Iqbal Survé</a> has long pushed the boundaries of credibility, but recently he crossed the line into full fantasy. Should South Africans pay any attention to Survé? And what is to be done with a rogue publisher?</p>
<p>These are the questions South Africans – particularly journalists – are asking after the owner of Sekunjalo Independent Newspaper’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hzT5B0RI5s">recent media briefing</a>.</p>
<p>Survé acquired Independent Newspapers, one of the country’s biggest and most respected newspaper groups, <a href="https://mg.co.za/article/2013-08-21-sekunjalo-finalises-inmsa-purchase/">eight years ago</a>. But under his leadership, the titles have been reduced <a href="https://techcentral.co.za/south-africas-newspaper-industry-is-on-its-last-legs-2/173071/">to shadows of themselves</a>. </p>
<p>Survé called the briefing to reveal the outcome of investigations into the story his newspapers ran in June claiming that a Tshwane women had <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/news/exclusive-gauteng-woman-gives-birth-to-10-children-breaks-guinness-world-record-5ba8c9e2-5cc6-49b3-8cc9-1e179fd535cd">given birth to decuplets</a>. He had promised his briefing would be “explosive” and it would implicate a number of senior people.</p>
<p>The story, written by Pretoria News editor Piet Rampedi, went viral around the world with the claim that the woman had broken all medical records by giving birth to 10 babies. The report fell apart when the newspaper could provide no evidence to back up the claim and it turned out that no-one –- not even Rampedi, or the babies’ father -– had seen them. </p>
<p>All the hospitals in the area <a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">denied knowledge of the births</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">False story about decuplets was a low point for journalism: how to fix the damage</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Rampedi <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/independent-media-demands-health-department-come-clean-about-tembisa-decuplets-stands-by-piet-rampedi-c3dbed32-a1ae-40cf-8168-0cd9a063ec9c">stood his ground</a>, though, and Survé backed him, though he instituted a total of four different investigations: by an independent advocate, his <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-10-29-revealed-independent-medias-internal-report-on-piet-rampedis-decuplets-story-found-it-was-a-hoax-and-demanded-an-apology/">internal ombudsman</a>, his editorial team and his investigative team.</p>
<p>At the briefing, it became clear why he needed multiple investigations: it was to allow him to treat the four reports like a smorgasbord from which he could pick and choose. He ignored <a href="https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/fact-check-what-really-happened-to-the-tembisa-10-why-independent-medias-claims-just-dont-hold-up-20211028">Advocate Michael Donan’s independent investigation</a> which said that the report was irresponsible and Rampedi should face disciplinary action. </p>
<p>He also ignored his own ombudsmans’ report, which called the story <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-10-29-revealed-independent-medias-internal-report-on-piet-rampedis-decuplets-story-found-it-was-a-hoax-and-demanded-an-apology/">a “hoax”</a>.</p>
<p>Instead he went on a rambling account in which he said two of the babies had died and the others had been “trafficked” in a conspiracy involving doctors, nurses, hospitals and social workers. He produced no evidence, but said the proof would emerge in a 10-part documentary series his team were producing over the coming weeks. </p>
<p>At the centre of the conspiracy was an unnamed “Nigerian doctor” who could no longer be found.</p>
<p>If this was not the owner of what was once the country’s largest newspaper group, nobody would pay any attention to such delusion. But all of his newspaper titles echoed his account, at least <a href="https://www.enca.com/news/tembisa-10-independent-media-says-sithole-asked-give-babies-adoption">one television channel</a> carried his media briefing live and it trended on social media. Anyone who pointed out that his claims had no credibility was mocked as racist or uncaring of trafficking victims.</p>
<p>Why does any of this matter?</p>
<p>As a media practitioner and commentator for over four decades, I am of the view that Survé is systematically destroying what used to be a serious, credible set of newspapers. </p>
<h2>The destruction of a media house</h2>
<p>There are 16 titles in the Independent Group. All have seen an <a href="https://techcentral.co.za/south-africas-newspaper-industry-is-on-its-last-legs-2/173071/">almost total collapse</a> of their circulation since Survé bought out the group in 2013. </p>
<p>Most newspapers across the world have lost readers, but few have shrunk as dramatically as each of his titles: the Pretoria News only sells under 1,900 copies a day, down from 30,000; the Cape Argus is under 8,000 from a peak of nearly 80,000; the Cape Times under 9,000 from over 50,000; the Daily News 7,600; and the flagship The Star is below 15,000 when it was 220,000.</p>
<p>What used to be serious metropolitan voices are now at the scale of school news sheets.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/journalism-makes-blunders-but-still-feeds-democracy-an-insiders-view-146364">Journalism makes blunders but still feeds democracy: an insider's view</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This is tragic enough, but it is clear that Survé is also undermining the credibility of journalists and news outlets in general at a time when the industry is already in deep financial pain, and struggling to rebuild its standing. </p>
<p>He is fuelling a popular cynicism towards the media, creating a situation – as we have seen elsewhere – ripe for malicious malinformation and dangerous populism.</p>
<p>Two factors seem to allow him to keep going. The first is the <a href="https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/pic-looks-on-while-surve-inc-burns-through-state-pensioners-billions-20210127">Public Investment Corporation</a>, which invests state pensions and appears unable to stop him abusing what’s left of the 4.2 billion Rand (about US$276 million) they <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-01-22-pic-announces-blatant-violations-in-r4-3-billion-ayo-investment/">gave</a> to his <a href="https://ayotsl.com/">Ayo Technologies</a> group or to call in their rights as shareholders. He has them tied up in legal technicalities. </p>
<p>The second is that some major retail advertisers, short of regional outlets in which to promote their wares, continue to prop up these newspapers, despite their lack of audience.</p>
<p>The news media industry itself can only stand by and watch in dismay. The <a href="https://sanef.org.za/sanef-notes-report-about-reckless-irresponsible-journalism-at-pretoria-news-following-publication-of-decuplets/">South African National Editors Forum</a> pleaded with him to return to the voluntary self-regulatory industry framework, the Press Ombudsman and Council.</p>
<p>But he elected to <a href="https://www.sekunjalo.com/sekunjalo-in-the-news/independent-media-launches-ombud-office/">set up his own</a>, effectively making himself unaccountable and free to run rogue when it serves his purposes.</p>
<p>He has <a href="https://www.ru.ac.za/perspective/2013archive/thefiringofcapetimeseditorasignofthingstocome.html">driven out from his newsrooms</a> anyone who might be likely to stand up to him, and surrounded himself with sycophants and dependants. </p>
<p>A worrying development is the <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2021-10-28-listen-gauteng-government-to-sue-independent-media-over-thembisa-10-claims/">Gauteng provincial government</a> instructing lawyers to sue him for defaming their health workers in his media briefing when he suggested doctors and nurses were involved in trafficking.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-threats-to-media-freedom-come-from-unexpected-directions-148265">New threats to media freedom come from unexpected directions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One can understand the frustration of not being able to take the matter to the Press Council. But using state resources to sue media is a worrying, often-abused process that sets a bad precedent.</p>
<p>Freedom of speech supporters were unhappy when <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2011-06-14-another-zuma-vs-zapiro-cartoon-battle-another-outrage-in-the-wall/">President Jacob Zuma sued</a> renowned South African cartoonist Zapiro. Journalist often protest against large corporates using their resources to bully their critics through malicious court action that is costly to defend. This is a wrongful use of state resources. Other ways should be found to deal with the rogue.</p>
<p>Government suing journalists and media houses provides a tool to harass and intimidate the media, and will have a chilling effect on critical reporting.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171122/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anton Harber is a member of the SA National Editors' Forum (Sanef) and executive director of the Campaign for Free Expression.</span></em></p>Using state resources to sue media for spreading fake news is not the answer, and sets a bad precedent.Anton Harber, Caxton Professor of Journalism, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1695792021-10-08T20:19:21Z2021-10-08T20:19:21ZNobel Peace Prize for journalists serves as reminder that freedom of the press is under threat from strongmen and social media<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425559/original/file-20211008-19-knb6u1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C24%2C4157%2C2636&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">When the reporter becomes the story.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/NobelPeacePrize/f29a9d63868c4e1a8b1c38b42ad63e54/photo?Query=nobel&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=11047&currentItemNo=61">AP Photo/Bullit Marquez</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Thirty-two years ago next month, I was in Germany reporting on the fall of the Berlin Wall, an event then heralded as a triumph of Western democratic liberalism and even “<a href="https://apnews.com/article/syria-berlin-china-russia-islamic-state-group-5b8e1898db6246a9a8a82f66f35b8250">the end of history</a>.”</p>
<p>But democracy isn’t doing so well across the globe now. Nothing underscores how far we have come from that moment of irrational exuberance than the powerful warning the Nobel Prize Committee felt compelled to issue on Oct. 8, 2021 in awarding its coveted Peace Prize to two reporters.</p>
<p>“They are representative for all journalists,” Berit Reiss-Andersen, the chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said <a href="https://youtu.be/7xRsj4oBixs">in announcing the award</a> to Maria Ressa and Dmitry Muratov, “in a world in which democracy and freedom of the press face increasingly adverse conditions.” </p>
<p>The honor for Muratov, the co-founder of Russia’s <a href="https://novayagazeta.ru/">Novaya Gazeta</a>, and Ressa, the CEO of the Philippine news site <a href="https://www.rappler.com/">Rappler</a>, is enormously important. In part that’s because of the protection that global attention may afford two journalists under imminent and relentless threat from the strongmen who run their respective countries. “The world is watching,” Reiss-Andersen pointedly noted <a href="https://youtu.be/Gg9J2qaOfJU">in an interview</a> after making the announcement.</p>
<p>Equally important is the larger message the committee wanted to deliver. “Without media, you cannot have a strong democracy,” Reiss-Andersen said.</p>
<h2>Global political threats</h2>
<p>The two laureates’ cases highlight an emergency for civil society: Muratov, editor of what the Nobel Prize Committee described as “the most independent paper in Russia today,” has seen <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211008-muratov-and-novaya-gazeta-russia-s-independent-media-stalwarts">six of his colleagues slain</a> for their work criticizing Russian leader Vladimir Putin. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Dmitry Muratov cowers from streams of champagne fly out of bottles held by well-wishers." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/425564/original/file-20211008-23-s6ibc6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Dmitry Muratov celebrates his Nobel Prize win.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/APTOPIXRussiaNobelPeacePrize/403f8c620b2a44e2a899300b93192614/photo?Query=Dmitry%20AND%20Muratov&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=76&currentItemNo=12">AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Ressa, a former CNN reporter, <a href="https://www.manilatimes.net/2020/08/26/latest-stories/breakingnews/ca-affirms-travel-ban-on-maria-ressa/759648">is under a de facto travel ban</a> because <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/01/06/953902894/philippine-journalist-says-rodrigo-dutertes-presidency-is-based-on-fear-violence">the government of Rodrigo Duterte, in an obvious attempt to bankrupt Rappler, has filed so many legal cases</a> against the website that Ressa must go from judge to judge to ask permission any time she wants to leave the country. </p>
<p>Inevitably, Ressa told me recently, one of them says “no.” Maybe that will change now that she has a date in Oslo. But Ressa probably knows better than to hold her breath. </p>
<p>Last year, when I – a long-time journalist turned professor of journalism – helped organize a group of fellow Princeton alumni to sign a letter of support for Ressa, <a href="https://www.rappler.com/nation/princeton-alumni-trump-convince-duterte-maria-ressa-rappler">more than 400 responded</a>. They included members of Congress and state legislatures and former diplomats who served presidents of both parties. One of them was former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who died several months later, making a show of solidarity with Maria Ressa one of his last public acts. This show of support is a sign of what’s at stake.</p>
<p>Three decades after the downfall of totalitarian regimes in Eastern Europe, forces of darkness and intolerance are on the march. Journalists are the canaries down the noxious mine shaft. <a href="https://cpj.org/">Attacks on them are becoming more brazen</a>: whether it is the grisly <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45812399">dismemberment of Saudi dissident and writer Jamal Khashoggi</a>, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/belarusian-dissident-arrested-plane-grounding-appears-resurface-online-2021-07-07/">grounding of a commercial airplane to snatch a Belarusian journalist</a> or the infamous graffiti “<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol-riot-men-posing-with-murder-the-media-claim-reporters-2021-1">Murder the Media</a>” scrawled onto a door of the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 insurrection.</p>
<p>This irrational hatred of purveyors of facts knows no ideology. Former <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2017/02/21/trumps-troubling-relationship-with-the-press/">U.S. President Donald Trump’s disdain for the press</a> is at least equaled by that of leftist Nicaraguan leader Daniel Ortega, whose response to his critics in the media has been to, well, <a href="https://cpj.org/2021/06/nicaraguan-police-detain-journalist-miguel-mendoza-for-alleged-treason/">lock ‘em up</a>. </p>
<h2>Digital menace</h2>
<p>What makes today’s threats to free expression especially insidious is that they don’t come just from the usual suspects – thuggish government censors. </p>
<p>They are amplified and weaponized by social media networks that claim the privilege of free speech protection while they allow themselves to be <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebooks-algorithms-fueled-massive-foreign-propaganda-campaigns-during-the-2020-election-heres-how-algorithms-can-manipulate-you-168229">hijacked by slanderers and propagandists</a>. </p>
<p>No one has done more to expose the complicity of these platforms in the attack on democracy than Ressa, a tech enthusiast who built her publication’s website to interface with Facebook and now <a href="https://restofworld.org/2020/the-journalist-vs-facebook/">accuses the company of endangering her own freedom</a> with its laissez-faire approach to the slander being propagated on its site.</p>
<p>“Freedom of expression is full of paradoxes,” the Nobel Committee’s Reiss-Andersen observed, in an interview after awarding the Peace Prize. She made it clear that the award to Ressa and Muratov was intended to tackle those paradoxes too.</p>
<p>Asked why the Peace Prize went to two individual journalists – rather than to one of the press freedom organizations, such as the Committee to Protect Journalists, that have represented Ressa, Muratov and so many of their endangered colleagues – Reiss-Anderson said the Nobel Committee deliberately chose working reporters. </p>
<p>Ressa and Muratov represent “a golden standard,” she said, of “journalism of high quality.” In other words, they are fact-finders and truth-seekers, not purveyors of clickbait. </p>
<p>That golden standard is increasingly endangered, in large part because of the digital revolution that shattered the business model for public service journalism. </p>
<p>“Free, independent and fact-based journalism serves to protect against abuse of power,” Reiss-Andersen said in the prize announcement. But it is increasingly being undermined and supplanted by what’s called “content,” served up algorithmically from <a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/apr/20/politifacts-guide-fake-news-websites-and-what-they/">sources that are not transparent</a> in ways that are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/06/opinion/facebook-whistleblower-section-230.html">designed to addict</a> and that drive partisanship, tribalism and division. </p>
<p>This poses a challenge for public policymakers and the democracies they represent. How to regulate digital media and still protect free speech? How to support the labor-intensive work of journalism and still protect its independence? </p>
<p>Answering those questions won’t be easy. But democracy may be at a tipping point. With its recognition of two investigative journalists and the crucial – and dangerous – work they do to support democracy, the Nobel Committee has invited us to begin the debate. </p>
<p><em>Correction: This story has been updated to state the correct place, Oslo, where the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded.</em> </p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: Naomi Schalit, senior politics editor at The Conversation, signed the open letter “In defense of press freedom” organized by author Kathy Kiely in July 2020.</em></p>
<p>[<em>Over 110,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=100Ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169579/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kathy Kiely does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to two courageous journalists who have faced repression and death by doing their work.Kathy Kiely, Professor and Lee Hills Chair of Free Press Studies, University of Missouri-ColumbiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1695602021-10-08T14:53:57Z2021-10-08T14:53:57ZNobel peace prize: how Dmitry Muratov built Russia’s ‘bravest’ newspaper, Novaya Gazeta<p>In 1993, Soviet Union president Mikhail Gorbachev used part of his Nobel peace prize money to help <a href="https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211008-muratov-and-novaya-gazeta-russia-s-independent-media-stalwarts">set up the newspaper</a> Novaya Gazeta, buying the publication its first computers.</p>
<p>Nearly 30 years later, the paper has another Nobel peace prize in its history. Dmitry Muratov, editor-in-chief of Novaya Gazeta, was jointly awarded the prize with Filipina journalist Maria Ressa, “<a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2021/summary/">for their efforts</a> to safeguard freedom of expression, which is a precondition for democracy and lasting peace”.</p>
<p>The prize is a surprising and welcome show of support to Russia’s independent press, which has been under <a href="https://theconversation.com/one-nation-one-voice-press-control-and-propaganda-in-putins-russia-25551">constant pressure</a> during the 21 years of Vladimir Putin’s rule.</p>
<p>Thanks to Gorbachev’s perestroika political reforms and liberation of the press during the 1980s, investigative journalists became national heroes in the late Soviet Union. They revealed the regime’s crimes of the past, tracing them in newly-opened archives, and uncovered corruption among bureaucrats who abused their power to enrich themselves. </p>
<p>It was in this context that Muratov’s career skyrocketed. In 1987, he left his hometown to join Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in Moscow. This newspaper of the young Communists took a critical stance towards the Soviet regime in its final years, and was considered a leading voice of perestroika. </p>
<p>Komsomolskaya Pravda was among the newspapers that stood against the 1991 military coup, led by a conservative bloc of the Communist government, to overthrow Gorbachev. The August coup marked the end of the Soviet Union, which collapsed in December that year, and led to a new era for the press.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1446400172125302784"}"></div></p>
<p>In 1992, Muratov left Komsomolskaya Pravda over a dispute about the paper’s future. Muratov was among those who defended the newspaper as an investigative media outlet, while his competitor Valery Sungorkin sought to turn it into a tabloid to make money. The tabloid view succeeded. </p>
<p>Muratov and a team of colleagues began publishing New Daily Newspaper (Novaya Ezhednevnaya Gazeta), reporting on politics, corruption and war crimes in Chechnya. In 1995, Muratov was appointed editor-in-chief and the newspaper received its current name: Novaya Gazeta (literally New Newspaper). </p>
<h2>Dark days</h2>
<p>In an interview for my forthcoming book, Muratov told me that the editorial team hardly managed to make ends meet in the 1990s. There was no money to pay salaries, everything that the cooperative members received outside of their newspaper duties was invested back into the paper.</p>
<p>In the 2000s, a lifeline of financial support came from Gorbachev and Aleksandr Lebedev, the Russian banker and entrepreneur who bought London’s Evening Standard newspaper in 2009. The two backed Muratov’s wishes to maintain Novaya Gazeta’s leadership as an investigative outlet. </p>
<p>They also became Muratov’s friends, sharing his happiness in times of success, and his grief over the paper’s many <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jun/14/novaya-gazeta-journalists-murdered">losses.</a> Novaya Gazeta has often been called Russia’s <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/risj-review/novaya-gazeta-journalism-murder-and-reporting-truth-russias-bravest-newspaper">“bravest” newspaper</a>, and has one of the highest rates of murdered journalists among Russian media. Between 2000 and 2021, six of Novaya Gazeta’s journalists were killed on duty, notably including <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/world/anna-politkovskaya-anniversary/">Anna Politkovskaya</a> on 7 October 2006 – almost 15 years to the day before Muratov was awarded the Nobel.</p>
<p>In 2009, after a lawyer and journalist working for Novaya Gazeta were <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/europe_moscow-protesters-remember-2009-killings-lawyer-and-journalist/6182827.html">murdered by far-right activists</a>, Muratov created a security protocol to protect journalists who were running dangerous investigations. </p>
<p>It couldn’t have come too soon: as the Russian regime grew more authoritarian, it became more dangerous to report on corruption, human rights violations and murders of Putin’s critics. </p>
<p>Yet Novaya’s reporters revealed the <a href="https://imrussia.org/en/politics/2520-novaya-gazeta%E2%80%99s-investigation-how-boris-nemtsov-was-murdered">extent of the state involvement</a> into the murder of Boris Nemtsov in February 2015. Nemtsov, Putin’s fiercest critic at the time, was shot dead in front of the Kremlin and no high-profile person was found guilty in assisting the crime.</p>
<p>Elena Milashina, Novaya’s top reporter on Chechnya, has documented the murders of LGBT people and reported on the cold-blooded murders of Chechnya’s leader Ramzan Kadyrov’s opponents. She has faced <a href="https://www.voanews.com/a/press-freedom_despite-too-many-threats-count-russian-reporter-elena-milashina-wont-quit/6200363.html">physical attacks and death threats.</a>.</p>
<h2>A brighter future?</h2>
<p>Muratov is a one-of-a-kind character. He is never afraid to speak out and defend journalists and dissenting voices, knowing that he or his editorial team <a href="https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/03/15/russian-investigative-paper-novaya-gazeta-says-targeted-in-chemical-attack-a73246">may be attacked</a>. He is the leader of a network of media that helps Russian journalists in dangerous regions to continue their work under Muratov’s symbolic protection. </p>
<p>He has certainly made hundreds of powerful enemies who would be happy to get rid of him but, at the same time, he has made thousands of friends across all sectors of Russian society, including top politicians, law enforcement officers and the super rich. His friendships with power brokers help him navigate the murky waters of Russian politics without major losses to reputation. This has irritated hardcore members of the Russian opposition and some western observers of Russia, who think he has sold his soul to the Kremlin. </p>
<p>This portrait of Muratov does not fully capture the scope of his important role in Russian media. Muratov uses his influence and connections not to enrich himself, but to sustain the powerhouse last shelter of investigative journalism inside Russia.</p>
<p>The Nobel prize will make Muratov more influential domestically and will earn him more enemies among the elite, who may later claim that he betrayed Russia for foreign funding and awards. Symbolically, this prize will empower all Russian investigative journalists who fight for their lives and profession amid unprecedented attacks from the state.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169560/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ilya Yablokov does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Muratov’s Nobel will be a boon to Russian investigative journalism.Ilya Yablokov, Lecturer in Journalism and Digital Media, Department of Journalism Studies, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1695642021-10-08T14:51:21Z2021-10-08T14:51:21ZMaria Ressa: Nobel prize-winner risks life and liberty to hold Philippines government to account<p>The importance of journalists who take considerable risks to bring people the truth in countries where this involves going up against authoritarian governments has been recognised by the Nobel committee’s decision to <a href="https://theconversation.com/philippines-rodrigo-dutertes-dictatorship-sinks-to-new-depths-with-closure-of-main-broadcaster-138025">award the 2021 peace prize</a> to Maria Ressa of the Philippines and Dmitry Muratov of Russia.</p>
<p>In announcing the award, the Nobel committee called the pair “representatives of all journalists who stand up for this ideal”. They said Ressa had used her online news organisation, Rappler, to “expose abuse of power, use of violence and growing authoritarianism in her native country, the Philippines”.</p>
<p>Rappler, which grew out of a Facebook page launched in 2012 and has become one of the Philippines’ most credible independent news services, has been targeted by President Rodrigo Duterte since his election in 2016. His 2017 state of the union speech alleged that Rappler was in foreign ownership, which would be contrary to the constitution. He also said it peddled “fake news”. </p>
<p>Government investigations followed and, by 2018, Ressa and Rappler were inundated with charges of cybercrime, tax evasion and as much intimidation as the Duterte government could muster. </p>
<p>This harassment took place against a backdrop of presidentially sanctioned murder in the form of Duterte’s “war on drugs” (which the <a href="https://theconversation.com/rodrigo-duterte-why-the-iccs-investigation-will-not-guarantee-a-fairer-or-safer-philippines-163089">International Criminal Court is now investigating</a>) which led to the deaths of over 20,000 people, including journalists around the country. Ressa was not cowed by intimidation and threats. Time magazine named her one of its Person of the Year winners in 2018 alongside other journalists facing oppression around the world. </p>
<p>When she was arrested for the first time, in 2019 at the age of 56, the country’s most prominent journalist was made to spend a night behind bars, a low point for civil society in the Philippines. Ressa and her Rappler colleagues continue to work under the threat of imprisonment. </p>
<p>It remains to be seen if the award of the Nobel peace prize will shield Ressa and Rappler from further targeting, and whether the election, scheduled for May 2022, will bring any relief from government harassment and threats. </p>
<h2>Thorn in Duterte’s side</h2>
<p>Long before Duterte was elected, Ressa was an established figure in Filipino public life. She had been the face of CNN in the Philippines as its bureau chief from 1987-1995 and then as an investigative reporter for CNN, where she focused on terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11 across southeast Asia. </p>
<p>In 2004, she joined major Philippines-based media company ABS-CBN and for six years helped grow it into the major news network in the country (its broadcast operations were <a href="https://theconversation.com/philippines-rodrigo-dutertes-dictatorship-sinks-to-new-depths-with-closure-of-main-broadcaster-138025">shut down by Duterte in 2020</a>). It is with great credit to Ressa that her influence is so strong across the news media landscape in the Philippines where younger journalists continue to follow her advice and example.</p>
<p>This is not the first time Maria Ressa has won a major international award. She received the <a href="https://www.ndi.org/our-stories/2017-democracy-dinner-explores-global-threat-disinformation">2017 Democracy Award</a>, the 2018 <a href="https://www.icfj.org/maria-ressa-accepts-2018-knight-international-journalism-award#:%7E:text=Maria%20Ressa%20Accepts%20the%202018,Award%20%7C%20International%20Center%20for%20Journalists">Knight International Journalism Award</a> and, also in 2018, the <a href="http://www.blog.wan-ifra.org/articles/2018/05/31/2018-golden-pen-of-freedom-awarded-to-maria-ressa-of-the-philippines">World Association of Newspapers’s Golden Pen of Freedom Award</a> and the <a href="https://www.goodnewspilipinas.com/maria-ressa-wins-2018-gwen-ifill-press-freedom-award-in-new-york/">Committee to Protect Journalists’ Gwen Ifill Press Freedom Award</a>. Her trials over recent years have regularly garnered public attention and condemnation from across the world from <a href="https://twitter.com/madeleine/status/1095787071862640648?lang=en">leading figures</a> and <a href="https://rsf.org/en/news/dismay-over-philippine-journalist-maria-ressas-prison-sentence">organisations</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-N9B8bBEli8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Peace Prize premium?</h2>
<p>Despite this, the Duterte government has continued to stifle dissent and attack less prominent journalists in the more remote provinces of the Philippines who continue to investigate corruption and violence under the direct threat of violence and intimidation. Hopefully the Nobel prize will put pressure on presidential candidates in the 2022 election to speak on the issue of press freedom and make it a campaign issue. The award also means that foreign governments calibrating new relations with the next administration have a symbol to rally around. </p>
<p>In 2019, I was a delegate at the UK and Canadian governments’ <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/topical-events/global-conference-for-media-freedom-london-2019">Global Conference for Media Freedom</a> in London. I had the opportunity to briefly meet Maria and her lawyer Amal Clooney. There were a lot of strong sentiments and good words expressed that day from government officials as they listened to stories like those from the Philippines. </p>
<p>The whole event rung hollow when, toward the end of the day, news broke of the murder of radio news anchor <a href="https://cpj.org/data/people/eduardo-dizon/">Eduardo Dizon</a>, a journalist with Brigada News FM in Kidapawan City in the southern Philippines. But by handing this award to brave journalists like Ressa and Muratov, the Nobel committee is proclaiming the value, not only of their work, but of all journalists who take risks to hold power to account.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169564/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>How Maria Ressa grew a Facebook page into the Philippines’ most credible independent news services in the face of government intimidation.Tom Smith, Principal Lecturer in International Relations & Academic Director of the Royal Air Force College Cranwell, University of PortsmouthLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1648932021-07-27T15:24:13Z2021-07-27T15:24:13ZOfficial Secrets Act: UK government has a long history of suppressing journalism to hide its misdeeds<p>The UK government recently put out for consultation <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/legislation-to-counter-state-threats">proposals for toughening the Official Secrets Act</a>, ostensibly to deter foreign spies. </p>
<p>Many lawyers, lawmakers and <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9821595/ALAN-RUSBRIDGER-beggars-belief-government-wants-laws-make-journalists-criminals.html">journalists</a> have argued that laws concerning official data and secrets are <a href="https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/reforms-to-uks-antiquated-spying-laws-published-by-law-commission/">in need of updating</a> to fit a world where espionage and leaks are largely conducted through new technology. But a <a href="https://theconversation.com/official-secrets-act-home-secretarys-planned-reform-will-make-criminals-out-of-journalists-164890">close reading</a> of the new proposals suggests the agenda is as much to deter journalists, whistleblowers and sources from embarrassing government and intelligence agencies.</p>
<p>The words “journalist” and “journalism” appear nowhere in the main text, and “press” only on two occasions, yet the proposals implicitly conflate probing journalism with spying by hostile states. They recommend (some 38 times) prosecuting those who make “unauthorised disclosures”, which would include government sources speaking to journalists, and increasing prison penalties from two years to up to 14 years.</p>
<p>The Home Office, led by Home Secretary Priti Patel, has dismissed the recommendations of the <a href="https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/reforms-to-uks-antiquated-spying-laws-published-by-law-commission/">independent Law Commission</a>, which are supported by <a href="http://www.newsmediauk.org/Latest/nma-official-secrets-act-reform-could-criminalise-public-interest-journalism">journalism and legal organisations</a>, that any reform should include a legal defence for those deemed to be acting in the public interest. This would give some protection to journalists and their sources.</p>
<p>I am an investigative journalist with more than 40 years of experience reporting on national security, and my <a href="https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-spies-spin-and-the-fourth-estate.html">recently published book</a>, Spies, Spin and the Fourth Estate, covers the relationship between journalism and national security. </p>
<p>While it is quite right that foreign spies should be prosecuted, this legislation seems more designed to prevent government embarrassment. There is a wealth of historical evidence that demonstrates the UK government and intelligence services’ ingrained tendency to suppress journalism in an effort to cover up its wrongdoing. Indeed many illegal operations have been exposed only by the collaboration of whistleblowers and journalists. </p>
<h2>Government secrecy</h2>
<p>There has been an Official Secrets Act since 1889, aimed at spies and corrupted civil servants. Lobbied persistently by Vernon Kell of the new Secret Service Bureau (later divided into MI5 and MI6), the UK parliament passed a new, catch-all Official Secrets Act in 1911. It was passed in one day with minimal debate.</p>
<p>Even then, journalists were concerned about the additional powers the act imposed compared with the previous version. The Newspaper Proprietors’ Association at the time <a href="https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-spies-spin-and-the-fourth-estate.html">protested the bill’s</a> “far reaching liabilities … upon the public and the Press”, saying its wide scope “affects anyone and everyone”.</p>
<p>As feared, the legislation was used as much as a tool against journalists and whistleblowers as against foreign spies. </p>
<p>The Scottish journalist and writer Compton Mackenzie had served as an intelligence officer in the eastern Mediterranean. His 1932 memoir Greek Memories contained a number of classified – though insignificant – details, including wartime Foreign Office telegrams and disclosing that the first chief of MI6 was known as “C.”</p>
<p>Mackenzie was charged for communicating to unauthorised persons “information which he had obtained while holding office under His Majesty”. It was thought that, at least in part, the prosecution was instigated to intimidate former prime minister David Lloyd George who was proposing to publish a warts-and-all memoir. </p>
<p>Mackenzie took a plea bargain, but ultimately got his revenge by writing the satirical novel Water on the Brain, which lampooned the SIS disguised under the name MQ9 (E), “The Directorate of Extraordinary Intelligence”.</p>
<p>Mackenzie’s case was just one of a continuing series of prosecutions over the years.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1417512220607586314"}"></div></p>
<p>An even tougher act came in 1989, in reaction to the government’s embarrassment over a series of well-publicised intelligence scandals in the 1980s, including the trial of Falklands war whistleblower <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/06/clive-ponting-obituary">Clive Ponting</a>, the revelation that <a href="https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/anniversaries/august/mi5-vetting">MI5 vetted</a> BBC staff, and the publication of the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/13/newsid_2532000/2532583.stm">Spycatcher memoir</a> by former MI5 agent Peter Wright.</p>
<p>The 1989 act has been used inappropriately. Take the 2018 case of two investigative journalists who were <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/psni-apologises-to-journalists-trevor-birney-and-barry-mccaffrey-1.4306218">arrested in Belfast for the suspected theft</a> of a confidential report, which contained information about a 1994 loyalist massacre in Loughinisland, Northern Ireland, and the failed police investigation into the murders.</p>
<p>The journalists were accused of handling stolen goods, unlawful disclosure of information under the Official Secrets Act and the unlawful obtainment of personal data – what journalists would call a leak – a vital tool in serving the public interest. Police questioned them for 14 hours, and raided their homes and offices in the early hours of the morning – in one case, in front of children. </p>
<p>After a judicial review, Belfast’s high court <a href="https://www.nuj.org.uk/resource/nuj-welcomes-final-settlement-for-no-stone-unturned-journalists.html">quashed the search warrants</a>, finding that the journalists acted in “nothing other than a perfectly appropriate way in doing what the NUJ required of them, which was to protect their sources”. </p>
<h2>Toughening the law again</h2>
<p>Now, the government wants to toughen the law again for the digital age. But the real target is journalists and their sources. Why? Just look at the embarrassment caused by more recent intelligence malfeasance.</p>
<p>Journalists revealed MI6’s collusion with the CIA’s rendition and torture programme in the mid-2000s, which government officials had <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/28/what-did-jack-straw-know-about-the-uks-role-in-torture-and-rendition">previously denied</a>.</p>
<p>The Guardian’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/20/days-believing-spy-chiefs-over">2013 publication</a> of a massive archive of secret intelligence documents leaked by former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed the capability of western nations to maintain a level of surveillance unsuspected by even the most informed observers. </p>
<p>In my view, to allow such a draconian new law as proposed by the Home Office, there would have to be a very robust and independent structure of oversight in place, which currently does not exist. </p>
<p>Taking the examples above, formal accountability bodies had failed to identify both the rendition and torture scandal and GCHQ’s illegal move towards mass surveillance. Parliament’s main intelligence accountability mechanism, the Intelligence Security Committee (ISC), has been, for much of its 25 years, something of a cheerleader for intelligence rather than a guardian of public interest.</p>
<p>Only the short period under Dominic Grieve’s chairmanship from 2015-19 revealed a committee prepared to act robustly – and then it was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/28/criticism-mounts-over-uk-post-9-11-role-in-torture-and-rendition">restricted by government</a>. The committee released a highly critical report on rendition and torture demolishing government denials of involvement, but not until <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/28/uk-role-torture-kidnap-terror-suspects-after-911-revealed">13 years after the events described</a>. </p>
<p>There has been no apology or explanation from the state about the examples above and many other cases. For journalists to accept the new proposals would be a huge leap of faith that the government would use such legislation proportionally and sensibly. </p>
<p>The new legislation would tip the delicate contract between personal freedom and national security towards a more authoritarian stance with a decided chilling effect on journalistic inquiry. There has never been a more important time for rigorous fourth-estate monitoring of the intelligence complex, and many of the proposals in this consultation would be a further deterrent to robust investigative journalism.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/164893/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Lashmar is a member of the Labour Party and the National Union of Journalists.</span></em></p>Proposals to toughen the Official Secrets Act are the latest in a long history of efforts designed to prevent government embarrassment.Paul Lashmar, Reader in Journalism, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.