Why should Amazon be our taste and decency police?
The online retailer has been criticised for profiting from ebooks featuring terror and violence. No one should tell us what to read, says Jo Glanville
(more…)
Google Transparency report reveals increasing government censorship
Report reveals an alarming rise in the amount of government requests to remove political content from the internet
Egyptian activists in shock over election results
Egyptians reacted in shock and despair after official results of the first round of Egypt’s first multi-candidate presidential elections were announced on Monday afternoon on Egyptian State TV’s main Arabic news channel. Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate and Ahmed Shafik, a former air force commander and Mubarak’s last prime minister will face each other in the run-off poll (scheduled for 16 and 17 of June) after leading in the first round, Farouk Sultan, Head of the Supreme Presidential Electoral Commission told journalists at a televised press conference on Monday.
Morsi won 5.76 million votes with Shafik following closely behind with 5.5 million votes out of a total of 23.3 million valid votes, Sultan said. Playing down voting irregularities, Sultan insisted these were minor and did not affect the overall results of the poll.
The outcome of the first round of voting provoked a new wave of angry condemnation from analysts and ordinary Egyptians alike. Author Alaa Aswany, an outspoken critic of the military junta tweeted urging Egyptians to boycott the elections en masse. He argued that the second round of the vote was certain to be rigged .
”Foul!” shouted a group of men watching the news conference at a roadside café in the working class district of Boulak.
The run-off pitting Shafik, a “Mubarak regime remnant” against a “colourless” member of the Muslim Brotherhood has been described by many Egyptians as a “nightmare scenario”. The election has polarised the country, with one camp wary of Islamist rule and another concerned about the continuation of the military dictatorship.
“If either of the two candidates becomes president, it would spell the demise of our revolution,” lamented Omar Ahmed, a young activist in a Facebook post.
The reaction to preliminary results of the poll has veered between sarcastic humour and outright indignation. Scores of internet users used social media networks Facebook and Twitter to call for fresh marches to protest the “illegitimacy” of the vote.
“It is no longer a choice between Shafik and Morsi. The choice is now between Canada and Australia,” is a joke widely shared on Facebook. This kind of humour reflects the disillusionment of a public growing increasingly weary of political and economic turmoil in the country. Meanwhile, scores of Egyptians used Facebook and Twitter to call for fresh marches to protest “the illegitimacy of the vote”.
Fifteen months after the mass uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak, many Egyptians feel their revolution has been hijacked by both Islamists and the military generals overseeing the transitional period. The Muslim Brotherhood, which had joined ranks with the young revolutionaries in Tahrir Square demanding “Bread, freedom and social justice” during the 18-day mass uprising has since been accused of pursuing its own interests. Some activists say they have lost trust in the Islamist group after it aligned itself with the military authority to secure seats in parliament. They also accuse the group of reneging on earlier promises not to field a candidate for the Presidency. The Muslim Brotherhood and the ultra-conservative Salafis together won nearly three-quarters of the 508 seats in parliament in last year’s legislative elections.
Claims by the Justice and Freedom Party contender Mohamed Morsi — now the frontrunner in the race — that he represents the revolution have been rebuffed by thousands of protesters who flocked to Tahrir Square on Monday night chanting “No to Shafik ! No to Badie!” (the latter being the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood). Many Egyptians wonder if the loyalty of an Islamist president would lie with the religious movement rather than with the country.
But revolutionary youth leaders who spearheaded the 25 January uprising are now rethinking their position and say they are contemplating throwing their weight behind Morsi. They argue that “Shafik has the blood of the revolution martyrs on his hands.” The change of heart came after complaints about vote rigging filed by their favoured candidate Hamdeen Sabbahi — a die-hard Nasserist — were rejected by the Supreme Presidential Electoral Commission and Sabbahi was declared officially out of the race. The revolutionaries had hoped a probe into Sabbahi’s complaints would tip the scale in his favor at the last minute, allowing him to compete in the run-off. Sabbahi, whose popularity has surged in recent weeks, came in a close third , garnering 4.82 million votes in the first round.
Wael Ghonim, administrator of the “We Are All Khaled Said” Facebook page that was a catalyst for the 25 January Revolution, has said he will support Morsi in the second round if he agrees to form a national salvation government representative of all factions of Egyptian society, including liberals and Copts. Youth leaders from the 6 April movement have also been in consultations with Morsi about the way forward, a sign that the group will support him and not Shafik.
Shafik has been trying to court the young revolutionaries, pledging to “bring the fruits of the revolution” between their hands. He warned the pro-democracy activists that their “revolution was being hijacked by the Islamists who mean to exploit it for their own ends”. His claims however appear to be falling on deaf ears and have provoked the ire of the revolutionary youths. His supporters are mostly those yearning for stability and have faith that only he can put the faltering economy back on track.
But the Tahrir protest — as well as demonstrations in other major cities across the country — reflect the heightened tensions and the growing frustration felt by millions of Egyptians who say they have to choose between two evils and that “neither candidate represents the spirit of their revolution.”
“It’s like having to choose between death by the sword or by hanging. In both cases we die” said 28-year-old Magued Mounir, a protester in Tahrir Square.
“If Shafik is president, then it’s back to square one…as if the revolution never happened. He is an extension of the old autocratic regime. And voting in an Islamist President would mean giving up our dream of a secular, modern Egypt,” said Yasmine Roshdy, another activist who was chanting against both candidates.
“We are trapped between a rock and a hard place,” said another protester who added that he had voted for Sabbahi in the first round.
In a repeat scenario of earlier protests, unidentified attackers stormed the square at midnight Monday attempting to break up the demonstration. A few hours earlier, Shafik’s Cairo campaign headquarters in Dokki was ransacked and set ablaze. Many Egyptians fear that the violence may be the start of worse unrest to come.
Journalist Shahira Amin resigned from her post as deputy head of state-run Nile TV in February 2011. Read why she resigned from the “propaganda machine” here.
Press under attack in Sudan
“The press in Sudan is going through the most intense crackdown,” said Adil Color, a writer and editor at Al-Midan newspaper, the mouthpiece of the Sudanese Communist Party (SCP). “If we publish an issue [of the newspaper] that is critical and includes topics the government is uncomfortable with — such as the conflicts in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan — they punish us by confiscating our next issue.”
Al-Midan’s print run has been confiscated on four different occasions in the last month, most recently on 24 April, but the newspaper remains defiant. For many years it has had to be distributed underground when the SCP was a banned in Sudan. The tabloid’s byline now reads “daily newspaper, but temporarily published on Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday”.
In a recent contribution to the Committee to Protect Journalists’ Blog, a Sudanese journalist and activist, Abdelgadir Mohamed Abdelgadir, claimed that the National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) confiscates independent newspapers as a way of censoring the press.
This strategy, believes Abdelgadir “focuses on economic impoverishment — leaving newspapers more vulnerable than ever.” Most newspapers in Sudan generate income from newspaper sales and advertisements, but independent newspapers that publish daring reports like Al-Midan and Al-Ayam depend on selling the few thousand copies they print, being unable to afford large print runs.
“Al-Midan does not get any advertisements from government companies like other newspapers, and private companies fear repercussions, so they also do not approach us for advertising,” said Color.
The “vulnerability” referred to in CPJ’s blogpost is best seen when editor-in-chiefs are pressured into making decisions for the benefit of the newspaper and the dozens of employees . When the Al-Jareeda newspaper was confiscated on 27 and 29 March because it wouldn’t stop publishing the daily columns by Zuhair Al-Siraj, a Canada-based Sudanese columnist who is critical of the government in his writings, the financial losses forced the newspaper’s management to cancel the column.
“Newspapers are not really given a choice, they can continue publishing as long as they do not allow certain journalists to write,” said Salih Mahmoud, a lawyer who is part of the newly-established Sudanese Council to Defend Rights (SCDR).
Starting this Tuesday, another writer, Heydar Al-Mokashy, will not be able to write for a week.
Mahmoud points out that the topics the state considers red lines are usually national issues that touch upon the future of the country. The booby-trapped subjects include: the wars in Blue Nile, Southern Kordofan and Darfur, and human-rights abuses but the list of banned topics grows every day.
Alawia Mukhtar, a journalist at the Al-Sahafa newspaper was moved from the patch she used to cover, South Sudan, after the paper’s management began receiving text messages from the NISS demanding it remove and/or halt the publication of any news about South Sudan.
“I cannot write about South Sudan because I can’t publish the opinions of sources from there, ” says a frustrated Mukhtar, who claims she has been accused of being part of the banned political party, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North Sudan Faction, (SPLM-N) because her writings introduced her to many SPLM-N sources.
Recently, the speaker of parliament and a well-known Sudanese official both said that any journalist who interviews a source from a rebel movement is betraying his nation. Sudan’s Vice-President, Ali Osman Mohamed Taha, has spoken about a fifth column that is under scrutiny in light of the current clashes between Sudan and South Sudan, accused of spreading rumours that there is a lack of petroleum and other needs as war looms. Mukhtar thinks they are referring to journalists and that this is a direct threat.
From her perspective, Muktar feels trapped in a world where a text message sent to her boss, the editor-in-chief, can deem a story she worked on for hours “unpublishable”, but at least she is still able to see her byline in print.
Mujahid Abdullah has worked as a journalist since he graduated from university. From 2005, he was published in four different newspapers and was a well-known name until he was banned from writing in all print newspapers in Sudan. Abdullah says: “The ban came about 20 days ago, I feel like I was confiscated along with my pen, I’m waiting to be returned to the newsstand.”
Abdullah’s last job was writing for Alwan, a newspaper that was suspended for about 2 months from January to March this year. “I feel like my civil and constitutional rights and my right to make a living were taken away from me,” he adds.
The decision to ban him from writing was delivered orally, as are many NISS decisions. When newspapers are forced to kill stories or an edition is confiscated the message is normally delivered by an NISS officer talking directly to the editor-in-chief or in a short and succinct phone call.
In theory, the NISS does not have the power to confiscate newspapers, or to ban a newspapers and journalist or in fact, carry out any act against the press. If it believes that a certain journalist of newspaper is impacting national security, the security apparatus should file a complaint at the Press and Publications Council, the only body responsible for all print media.
“When we asked the Press and Publication Council about our case, they said the NISS does not tell us when they carry out such things,” says Adil Color.
Reem Abbas is a Sudanese freelance journalist. She has been published in Inter-Press Service (IPS), IRIN news, the Women International Perspective, (the WIP), Menassat and daily Sudanese newspapers. She tweets at @ReemShawkat