Why journalism and politics should remain independent
Leveson’s “statutory underpinning” is no way to protect press freedom, says Kirsty Hughes
(more…)
Maria Miller Leveson threat raises fears of politicians interfering in press regulation
Worrying news from Buckingham Palace Road this morning: the Telegraph is reporting that Culture Secretary Maria Miller’s special adviser Joanna Hindley warned its reporters of Miller’s connection to the Leveson report before the newspaper published details of her expenses, notably that Miller’s parents lived in her taxpayer-funded second home.
The paper took the rare step of choosing to disclose details of the conversation in light of concerns over “the potential dangers of politicians being given a role in overseeing the regulation of the press.”
The key passage from their story:
When a reporter approached Mrs Miller’s office last Thursday, her special adviser, Joanna Hindley, pointed out that the Editor of The Telegraph was involved in meetings with the Prime Minister and the Culture Secretary over implementing the recommendations made by Lord Justice Leveson.
“Maria has obviously been having quite a lot of editors’ meetings around Leveson at the moment. So I am just going to kind of flag up that connection for you to think about,” said Miss Hindley.
Miss Hindley also said the reporter should discuss the issue with “people a little higher up your organisation”.
In an email statement, a DCMS spokesperson said:
Mrs Miller’s special adviser raised concerns with a journalist about the nature of an approach to Mrs Miller’s elderly father. Her advisor noted that Mrs Miller was in regular contact with the paper’s editor and would raise her concerns directly with him, which Mrs Miller did subsequently.
However, this is a separate issue to on-going discussions about press regulation. Mrs Miller has made the Government’s position on this clear.
This “flagging up” is worrying, but it’s not the first instance of those in power feeling that they already have right to tell reporters what to print. Remember the Spectator’s Fraser Nelson’s revelation last month, pre-Leveson?
In the last few weeks, I have had an MP and a government minister call asking me to (respectively) discipline a Spectator writer who had annoyed him on Twitter and take down a blog that was ‘over-the-top’.
Meanwhile, Evan Harris of the Hacked Off campaign, which pushes for tougher regulation of the press, has apparently suggested Miller should “recuse herself” from Leveson issues.
Those of us concerned about a post-Leveson environment in which emboldened MPs are able to intimidate the press have been told we’re overreacting. But today’s report proves our point: it is precisely the sort of thing that could prevent journalists from doing their jobs and endangers press freedom and the role of the fourth estate in holding politicians to account. And it does little favours to the argument that the state should have a role in regulating our papers.
Marta Cooper is an editorial researcher at Index. Follow her on Twitter: @martaruco
Journalist killed in anti-Morsi protest
An Egyptian journalist covering Wednesday’s clashes outside the presidential palace in Heliopolis between Islamist supporters and opponents of President Mohamed Morsi has been declared clinically dead after sustaining gunshot wounds to the head.
33-year-old Al Husseini Abou Deif —who worked for the independent Al Fagr newspaper — is the latest journalist to become a victim of the violence while reporting on the protests in Egypt. Another Egyptian journalist was killed while covering the 18-day mass uprising that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak last year. Several journalists, Egyptian and foreign, have also reported assaults, sexual molestation and intimidation while trying to tell the story of Egypt’s turbulent transition.
An witness who was standing next to Abou Deif when he was gunned down said that the journalist was shot at close range while filming anti-Morsi protesters under attack. He added that Abou Deif had been deliberately targeted and that his camera had been seized. Doctors at al Zahraa Hospital, where Abou Deif lay in a coma fighting for his life, also confirmed that the assailant had been less than two metres away from the journalist.
A member of Egypt’s Journalists’ Syndicate, Abou Deif was an outspoken critic of the government and had often participated in rallies protesting media censorship and demanding greater press freedom. He was also an opposition activist and member of the Kefaya movement that opposed the succession of Mubarak’s son Gamal and protested political corruption and stagnation.
The violent clashes outside the Al Ittihadeya Palace erupted on Wednesday afternoon when thousands of Islamist supporters marched to the Palace to express solidarity with President Morsi, under attack since issuing a constitutional declaration two weeks ago which gave him absolute powers. The Islamists have attacked scores of opposition activists camped in tents outside the palace since Tuesday night. Morsi’s opponents had staged their own million-people rally on Tuesday afternoon, protesting the Presidential edict and a draft charter they say will stifle civil liberties and religious freedom. President Morsi had earlier announced that the draft would be put to a popular referendum on 15 December.
Protest outside Presidential Palace in Cairo, 4 December 2012. Mohamed El Dahshan | Demotix
At least six people were killed and 700 were injured in Wednesday’s clashes. Most of the dead were Islamist supporters who succumbed to their wounds after being shot or attacked with knives, a statement by the Interior Ministry said. Two of them were members of the Muslim Brotherhood, from which the president hails. Most of the injuries resulted from Molotov cocktails and fireworks being hurled from both sides. Anti-Islamists accused “Muslim Brotherhood militia” of firing birdshots and using swords to attack them. Denying the accusations, the Islamists insisted they themselves were the victims of such attacks. Riot police that had been absent from the scene at the start of the clashes were deployed hours later and attempted to create a buffer between the two camps.
The attack on Abu Deif followed attacks by security forces on at least two journalists covering last week’s protests demanding President Morsi retract his constitutional declaration. The increased violence against journalists has prompted the Journalists’ Syndicate to issue a statement demanding that police do more to protect reporters covering the civil unrest. In the meantime, Syndicate members are organising a rally on Friday afternoon to denounce state attacks on journalists.
This week, several journalists and talk show hosts took a firm stand against censorship. The strongest statement came from talk show host Hala Fahmy who appeared on her show on Egyptian State Television carrying a white shroud intended to symbolise “the demise of free expression.” The show was immediately taken off the air. Meanwhile, State TV presenter and former presidential candidate Bothaina Kamel is being investigated for going off-script. She told viewers to stay tuned for the “Ikhwani” or “Brotherhood news bulletin” — a jab intended to signal interference by the newly-appointed Islamist Minister of Information in the news editorial content. Khairy Ramadan, a TV talk show who worked for the independent Channel CBC resigned on-air after the station’s managers cancelled a show in which he was to have hosted former presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabbahi.
The impromptu cancellation of the show followed a televised speech minutes earlier by President Morsi, who said that investigations into Wednesday’s clashes had revealed that “thugs” hired by opposition political forces and former regime remnants were responsible for attacks on protesters. He vowed that perpetrators attempting to wreak havoc would be brought to justice. While standing his ground on his controversial edict, which he said was meant to propel Egypt forward, Morsi assured Egyptians it would not shield his decisions from judicial review, nor prevent citizens from holding him to account.
The protesters’ chants of “the people want the downfall of the regime” that filled Tahrir Square immediately after the speech do not auger well for a near-end to the political turmoil. And for journalists covering the unrest,there are as yet no guarantees of their safety.
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.
Banning Lady Gaga — South Africa’s media take a stand
US pop superstar Lady Gaga’s first sojourn to South Africa has raised the hackles of newspaper editors and religious fundamentalists alike.
Local organisers Big Concerts informed the press that, while journalists would be admitted, no press photographers would be allowed at the Johannesburg and Cape Town concerts on 29 November and 3 December. The usual practice is that press photographers take photos during the first three songs, which are then splashed across newspaper pages the next morning.
Announcing a retaliatory blackout on Gaga’s concerts, Alastair Ottor, online editor for Independent Newspapers, described it as:
a growing trend toward individuals and organisations imposing these kinds of restrictions on news media. Sporting bodies in particular have started imposing extreme restrictions on news media because of financial interests and this very often extends beyond what we are allowed to cover to how we are allowed to cover it. As the news industry evolves into a new era, placing restrictions on the use of multimedia, or our own photographs, for example, is not something that we as the media should agree to.
Big Concerts, in a typically obtuse response, pleaded ignorance about the reasons for the ban: “This is just how Live Nation (the global concert organisers) does it. They allow journalists and send (publicity) photos out afterwards,” local newspaper Beeld was told.
The South African National Editors Forum (Sanef) released a statement decrying the decision “as a form of press censorship fundamentally in conflict with the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of media in South Africa”.
Sanef, which represents editors and senior journalists, argued that reporters and photographers are “independent observers” whose coverage the public will only trust if they are not interfered with. “While it is clear that the Lady Gaga tour is just another commercial venture, recent controversy in South Africa regarding a number of religious and other organisations which have protested vigorously against even her very presence in the country, makes her visit a matter of real public interest, and not just ‘of interest’ to her fans.”
Sanef added:
Lady Gaga’s freedom to visit South Africa and to perform regardless of any offence she may cause to those opposed to her shows is in fact protected by the freedom of speech provisions in our constitution.
The organisation expressed concern about “a growing trend by commercial event organisers to try to impose censorship or restrictions on the media”.
However, Sanef omitted to mention that the South African press includes multinational companies with a commercial interest in the ownership and distribution of photos.
Gaga has recently been subjected to international press attention exposing her so-called “weight gain”, which would explain why she would want to control the kinds of images that the media elect to distribute of her.
Gaga’s Cape Town concert featured a performance espousing a feminist objection to the control of women’s bodies, as she was wheeled onto the stage hanging among make-believe animal carcases, shouting: “Do you think I am meat? Meat is precisely what we treat women as.”
Independent Newspapers decided to boycott the concerts by not publishing reviews, even though Gaga attracted some 65,000 people in Johannesburg and 40,000 in Cape Town.
But Mail and Guardian online editor Chris Roper ridiculed that stance: “It’s true! Gaga is worse than a Satanist! She’s also an enemy of democracy who spits on our Constitution, and is possibly the worst threat our fledgling country has faced… Seriously, guys? Because Gaga doesn’t want news photographers to take upskirt shots of her meat dress and no veg, it’s a threat to our Constitution?”
Roper pointed out a similarity between Sanef and fundamentalist Christians who started a Facebook page called South Africa: No to Lady Gaga and Satanists. Both, Roper says, represent “outmoded belief systems reacting with antagonism towards the inevitability of the new world. Sanef still seems to believe that it matters a damn to Gaga whether traditional media covers her concerts, and Christians seem to believe that they can stem the tide of rational secularisation.”
The South African Council of Churches, an umbrella body once known for its anti-apartheid resistance, held a small protest at the offices of the government arts and culture department in Pretoria, demanding that Gaga be denied entry into South Africa. A handful of people also protested in Cape Town, insisting that the “bride of Satan” will bring a curse upon South Africa.