|
Association of European Journalists |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
UK Section |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Article from The Irish
Times |
||||||
|
Emerging
threats to freedom of the press By Paul Gillespie Dublin, 17 November 2007 We reproduce this article with the kind permission of The Irish Times WORLD VIEW: For whom is journalism meant to be? For whom is it actually? Is it a business
like any other or does it serve a different, public interest? How can the
public interest be defined and who should do that? How does this relate to democratic
participation and the citizen's right to freedom of expression? Do
contemporary journalistic standards measure up to the invocation and
assertion of these wider freedoms? What are the associated responsibilities? Such large
questions were thrown up in a stimulating discussion last weekend about media
freedom at the annual congress of the Association of European Journalists
held in Dublin. A survey by
its members of the state of play in 20 European states reveals a varied
picture. As its editor
William Horsley says in his introduction: "Although some free and
vigorous media can be said to flourish in all but a handful of the countries
covered, the survey reveals a picture of a profession and an industry beset
by problems of political interference, economic weakness and uneven or
doubtful professional standards." These include the
extreme violence and intimidation seen in Russia, Armenia, Turkey and Spain;
criminal prosecution using secrecy and defamation laws in Hungary, Germany,
the Netherlands, France, Slovakia and Ireland; political interference in
public service broadcasting in Austria, Italy, Poland and Croatia; takeover
of media by big business individuals close to Sarkozy in France; growing exploitation
of journalists through the use of cheap freelances in Belgium; media wars
with those in power in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Britain; and a marked
trend towards sensationalism and celebrity reportage which erodes trust in
media and the public belief that journalists can in fact perform the
democratic functions in the public sphere classically ascribed to them. Examples
discussed included the closure, two months before elections, of a popular
journalists' training and networking centre in Moscow on the basis of a
dubious fire hazard report - together with the endemic self-censorship and
cynicism that pervades journalism there in the face of political power. The
concept of autonomous public service broadcasting is quite foreign to
political authorities and journalists in most parts of central and eastern
Europe, where state ownership is commonly assumed to enable the direct
exercise of political power over television and radio. Often family income is
too low there to pay for fees such as those that fund RTÉ or the BBC. In that sense,
the problem of pluralism varies, being concerned more with removing state
interference in the east, whereas ensuring diversity in the face of
commercial monopoly exercises media in the west. Miklos Haraszti,
media freedom representative of the 46-country Organisation for Security and
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and a veteran Hungarian dissident from
pre-1989 days, told the conference there is a counter-revolution against
media going on in a number of eastern countries. There is a loss of universalism,
yielding to talk about "our new way of democracy", contrasted to
the different democracy in the west. |
|
Universalism can
only be retrieved by a vigorous movement of solidarity by journalists and
others throughout the OSCE, including a willingness of governments and NGOs
to impose conditionality on political relations as a way of safeguarding real
media freedoms. He appealed to the Government to "create a wonderful
example" by dropping the legislation allowing journalists to be jailed
for defamation and criminal libel in Ireland. This would help remove the
excuse of eastern governments to keep such powers. Haraszti is well
informed on Irish media affairs. They figured prominently in the AEJ's
discussions, arising from the recent High Court judgment requiring this
newspaper to tell the Mahon tribunal whether the leaked document revealing
its private investigation into Bertie Ahern's 1993 finances came from the
tribunal. This judgment has now been appealed to the Supreme Court. The issue of how
to define the "public interest" is central in this case, and is an
active issue throughout European media. Outlining his new role to the AEJ
delegates, John Horgan, the new Press Ombudsman, said one of the tasks of the
Irish Press Council, with which he will work, will be to arrive at a better
working definition of the term than journalists can do "on the
hop". Its findings will build up a kind of case law on the subject. This week the
National Newspapers of Ireland code of conduct for newspapers and periodicals
has been distributed. It is based on wide consultations within the industry
here and internationally and offers the following definition: "The
general principle is that the public interest is invoked in relation to a
matter capable of affecting the people at large so that they may legitimately
be interested in receiving and the Press legitimately interested in providing
information about it." Horgan made the
cogent point that better journalistic standards are the best defence of press
freedom. But that prompts the further question of who such freedom is for. It
cannot be simply for the media themselves, but should recognise how they
differ from ordinary corporate entities in providing a public good.
Interestingly, Article 10.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which
guides the OSCE and the European Court, says "everyone has the right to
freedom of expression", including "freedom to hold opinions and to
receive and impart information without interference by public authority and
regardless of frontiers". Another clause qualifies that freedom with
rights, responsibilities and laws necessary in a democratic society,
including "for preventing the disclosure of information received in
confidence." So the defence of the public interest must go beyond the media because they act in its name to ensure the public's right to know. From that perspective journalism's key task can be defined as providing accurate information rapidly and independently to a public seeking to understand a complex and challenging world. An editorial in this newspaper on October 24th put it like this: "The core function of journalism is to provide the raw material of democratic choice, the information on which, in a healthy democracy, facts, arguments, interpretations and value judgments are based." Journalism should be grounded in citizenship practice rather than in its own self-interest if it is to earn public trust. © 2007 The Irish Times |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|