A Declaration Fit for the New World of Information

I remain astonished that so few journalists understand the difference between freedom of expression and media freedom. It's one of the reasons that there's so much confusion and uncertainty among scribblers high and low, electronic and otherwise, about how to cope with the information chaos of the Internet.

So let's have a simple run through the basics. Freedom of expression is the right to say what you want, how you want and when you want. It's an entirely selfish exercise. You can be as opinionated, indecent, untruthful and as biased as you like.

There are no rules (apart from the law of the land which forbids anyone expressing themselves in a way that endangers others. You know the sort of theing -- child porn, shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre, inciting people to violence and hatred). That is the glory of the Internet. It is the fountain of a great global conversation in which everyone with access to a computer and a provider can join.

The mass of the Internet, unruly and unregulated, provides more scope for free expression than we have ever had in history. Great. But it's not journalism.

Media freedom and journalism are something different. They are not selfish. They are not without responsibility and rules. They organise expression in a framework of values that obliges those involved to have respect for others.

This framework of values is based on four key obligations:

Number one: tell the truth. Journalists do not lie. They should give all the facts they have at their disposal. They should not hide or suppress evidence or be deceptive in the way they handle it. Journalists will not always be able to tell the full truth, but they should tell their stories in a way that reveals the truth as best they know it.

Number two: be independent. Journalists are not propagandists. They are not in the pockets of politicians, or advertisers, or corporate bosses, or social causes. Independence from vested interests and telling stories from an independent perspective is the only way to assure a degree of impartiality and distance in reporting.

Number three: do no harm. Journalists and media must always be aware of the damage the words and images they use can do to people. They must consider the impact of their story-telling on the people affected. They must ask, who will suffer if we use this story? What will be the consequences of publishing this picture? Does publication serve public good and does the public interest in this information trump the damage that may be caused?

Number four: be accountable. Journalists and media must justify their actions. If they make mistakes they have to correct them. They have to be ready to own up to weakness and failure. They have to be transparent in their operations. They have to ethical in their methods. Accountability and honest dealing is not just for reporters. It is an ethical value that applies from the boardroom to the basement.

These obligations and duties form the core of the mission of journalism. They are what makes media freedom different from freedom of expression and they illustrate why media freedom is important for democracy. Without access to reliable information people know less about the world around them. Importantly, they are unable to understand the events around them and unable to hold their political leaders or other powerful people and institutions to account.

The problem is that in our over-connected world we are under-informed. That's why we need to build an information system that allows for more media freedom and not just the exponential growth of free expression.

With this in mind European journalists' leaders met in Varna, Bulgaria, yesterday and adopted a challenging declaration about the future of European media. It's a good read. Have a look:

Journalism in the Vanguard of Change

Declaration of the European Federation of Journalists
16-17 May 2009, Varna, Bulgaria


The dramatic restructuring of the media economy across the world and particularly in Europe poses serious questions for all in journalism and the media industry.

The technology that allows people to create and share content is undercutting media that serve their communities. As blogs and social networks shine a light on new parts of the world, in other parts traditional media, particularly newspapers, are turning the lights out.

Media markets are collapsing. The flight of advertising to the Internet and a new generation of users who have less time for newspapers and traditional television have caused panic in an industry which is cutting jobs and slashing editorial costs at the expense of quality journalism and weakening democratic pluralism.

Over the past months, the decline of journalism and media in Europe, caused by
employers desperate to squeeze even more profits out of the media sector, has been dramatically accelerating as a result of the recent economic downturn. However, the media crisis we are witnessing in Europe has been years in the making and predates the recent recession.

The crisis is having a dramatic impact on media coverage of the political, social and democratic life of Europe. The balance between private sector media and publicly-funded outlets, broadcasting in particular, which has traditionally provided pluralist and diverse information services to European citizens is seriously disturbed.

There is no longer any certainty that media pluralism can be assured. The private sector is no longer able to guarantee the provision of information services that have been central to preserving and enhancing standards of democracy in Europe.

At the same time, the public broadcasting landscape is in a crisis of its own, and is still subject to undue political pressures. In the heartlands of European media both public and private media are equally under extraordinary pressure.

This is not a short-term crisis. The extent of the collapse of traditional media in the United States has already caused enormous shock both to media practitioners and public bodies. And there is little doubt, sooner rather than later, that Europe, too, will face the consequences of market restructuring.

This change is inexorable and offers potential for the creation of more open, more engaged and more informed communities, but this will only happen if there is protection for the professional, public purposes of journalism – to stimulate, educate and inform public debate, and to call to account those who exercise power in society. Journalism provides the mechanism for scrutiny and a check on corruption and it keeps societies open.

In response to this challenging environment the European Federation of Journalists believes that the future of journalism must be brought into the heart of debate at national and international level about the key role media across Europe play in building democracy based upon stability, social justice and fairness.

Journalists and their unions are determined to defend the working conditions, professional standards and union rights that are the lifeblood of democratic media. We believe that journalism and media professionalism which is the creative heart of European media must be protected, nourished and encouraged to develop.

With this in mind the EFJ is calling for a continental campaign to revive commitments to public service values in media and quality journalism, through the Ethical Journalism Initiative and according to the following principles:

1 The EFJ remains implacably opposed to all forms of censorship and self-censorship that are barriers to progress. Democracy cannot function if governments fail to create the legal and regulatory conditions that allow journalists to work freely.

2 Journalism needs to be reliable and credible and that requires investment in jobs and the work that journalists do and the elimination of precarious social and working conditions. The right of all journalists – permanent staff or freelance – to work in decent conditions, with their authors’ rights and professional status underpinned by protective regulation is a guarantor of quality journalism.

3 There must be more commitment to education and training and professional education – particularly in societies striving to develop more open, pluralist and representative government.

4 Multimedia convergence requires new models of governance; press council and broadcast media councils and different forms of self-regulation, co-regulation and legally-binding rules. Existing structures are increasingly made obsolete by the realities of the Internet.

5 The changing world of information requires innovation a new vision, based upon old and tested values. The EFJ recognises that the challenges cannot be overcome by journalists and their unions acting alone. We need to build new alliances involving all stakeholders – media owners, civil society groups and policymakers at national and European level – to create new dialogues and debates about strengthening the role of media.

We must seize the opportunity of a change of administration within the European Union during 2009 to launch a public debate, at national and European level, about the future of media in Europe.

This debate must not focus only on communications policy or technical issues arising from the technological convergence of telephony, broadcasting, print and digital media. These are important, but the critical and historical challenge is to reinforce the role of journalism as a core mechanism for pluralism and public engagement in the democratic life of Europe.

For this reason the EFJ, during its Annual Meeting 2009 in Varna, declares that it will place the journalists of Europe in the vanguard of change with the following actions:

· To campaign vigorously for changes in European policymaking to permit a full examination of media developments and to encourage new initiatives, including a European-wide media summit involving all stakeholders and the creation of a European Union media task-force, with union representation, to guide member states in their navigation of the uncertainties created by the media crisis;

· To investigate, with media owners and other partners, the scope for improving structures for dialogue with governments, politicians and state authorities

· To support proposals at national and European level for urgent support for media, insisting that any forms of assistance whether in traditional or innovative forms must be conditional upon the following:

Respect for the core ethical principles of editorial independence and journalistic freedom are protected and enhanced in the changing landscape of media organisation and journalistic development;

Respect for social rights, including labour standards and decent working conditions for journalists and other media employees;

Investment in quality journalism, promotion of diversity and reaffirmation of public service values in a pluralist media landscape.

· To continue to monitor changes taking place across the industry in Europe and to report on developments;

· To support journalists in their resistance to reckless cost-cutting strategies and to promote the development of strong EFJ unions across Europe and their capacity to reach out to all groups in society, notably young people;

· To organise, during 2009, a European-wide conference on the media crisis to identify further actions to be taken in the defence of journalistic work and the development of new initiatives to strengthen media in Europe.

The EFJ believes the future offers great opportunities as well as powerful challenges. We support our member unions in their defence of the profession and the jobs of journalists; we demand that with change comes responsibility to provide protection for social and professional rights; and we shall continue to promote new dialogues and debates on the future that must embrace a society of values, dialogue and press freedom for all.

Varna
May 16th 2009

Alive and Well, the Unions Roll Out a Vision for Life After the Crash

The unions are not dead. They are frustratingly old fashioned, still led by gray-haired middle-aged men, and sentimentally attached to political friends who have generally betrayed everything they stand for, but they are alive and, interestingly enough, well worth listening to. Later in March the G20 club of big-shot nations will meet for the first time under Obama's watch. They will be expected to provide some answers to questions on how to rebuild the world economy in the face of financial collapse, global recession and massive social dislocation.

The bankers' lobby have already rehearsed their lines -- the system is inherently stable they say. Of course, we can do with a bit more regulation, but hold off on any serious state intervention beyond bailing out the banks to get money flowing again. Once the wheels of private enterprise are suitably greased, the invisible guiding hand of global capitalism will soon get us back on track. When that happens, so the line goes, the state can move back into the shadows from whence it emerged.

Many western governments will go along with this because it is what they have grown up with. They have no alternatives. Even social democratic governments fool themselves into believing that they manage capitalism better than conservatives; that the system can be patched up and made to work; that they can tame the beast.

But the realities of the last six months -- and the hardships yet to come -- tell another story. This crisis is the worst for half a century. It is about to get much worse. Countries are on the verge of bankruptcy. Millions of workers are crossing continents -- some on the move to try to work their way out of poverty, others are being sent back by the plane and busload to their countries because migrant labour is no longer wanted. The chasm of inequality between rich and poor is widening dangerously by the day.

It's time for change say the unions. It is not just a matter of tinkering with systems of regulation or capping bonuses, or throwing money into a few public infrastructure projects. The major depression of the Twentieth Century lasted more than a decade and was finally extinguished on the back of massive investment in the economics of war.

This time around there needs to be a wholesale redrawing of political and economic architecture based upon a fresh vision of social relations, and rooted in respect for public service values, redistribution of wealth, and social equality. That is what unions are calling for:

Regulation and social and economic policy shaped by a global administration with the power to act, that is inclusive of voices from the south as well as the north and that is transparent in its work. What they have in mind is something like the United Nations Security Council, but that is not an exclusive club for the nuclear elite and former colonial powers, and which has a mandate to shape and dictate global development and investment strategies. In short, the first steps towards a new landscape of democratic global governance;

Invigoration of the public sector with more investment in health and education, less privatisation and a commitment to building healthy and thriving communities through, initially, actions over climate change and the Millennium Development Goals;

Redistribution of the world's wealth by releasing the workforce from the scourge of poverty and denial of human rights and giving them the chance to form unions and to bargain for better wages and conditions. Today this remains the most efficient and effective way of challenging social inequality and ensuring a fair distribution of wealth.

These pillars of policy are being shaped by the unions at international level for presentation to world leaders at the next G20 meeting. They will argue for conviction politics to deliver a future for world trade and development based upon respect for rights and elemination of social inequalities.

Of course, the unions support extra regulation of banks and new forms of international supervision of financial affairs, after all who can argue against it? But this will not provide a durable solution.

Having tried the disastrous model of capitalism nourished and cultivated by neo-liberal economists in the Reagan and Thatcher years, few will contest the need for a complete change of direction.

After years of stagnation, the global union movement has found new energy and fresh enthusiasm based upon a traditional vision of their virtues -- community, humanity and decency. The major question now is whether political leaders are ready to listen.

Oscar and Friends are no Match for the Real Thing

It's Oscar weekend, a time for fantasy and fairytales. In the week that has Kate, Angelina, Brad and Sean making mental notes for acceptance speeches before an anticipated audience of one billion, it's worth recalling that their stories, full of texture and well-crafted though they are, are made small by enduring images of real life. The simplicity of a job well done, like that of Captain Sully and his crew when they ditched in the Hudson saving 155 other ordinary lives, or the matter-of-fact death-defying performance of Jade Goody who has exposed media hypocrisy in class-stricken Britain, or the news that Tiger is coming back to reinvigorate the tired world of sports all reveal how drama, tragedy and passion and extrordinary events are all around us. That's not to say the Oscars do not have their place, but I went out today and bought Visconti's La Terra Trema for the wonderfully chubby girl I hang out with, and realised I'm an old sentimentalist at heart. And that's not so bad after all. Is it?

Justice for Anna and Dawit -- is it Really too much to Ask?

Two cases to make you weep. The Russians promised they would do everything to nail the killers of Anna Politkovskaya. They failed abysmally. The recent trial has been chaotic and confused. The jury unanimously threw out evidence, much of it contradictory, against four men accused of killing a courageous investigative reporter who accused Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin mafia of appalling human rights abuse in Checnya.

Politkovskaya was shot dead at 4pm on 7 October 2006. I was called by a friend in Russia an hour later. He told me she had been gunned down as she lugged her shopping bags up to her flat in a Moscow apartment block. Ever since that day I and others have waited patiently for justice for Anna and her family.

Prosecutors said the defendants were part of a criminal gang, but they have never identified who ordered the assassination. Everyone with half a brain understands that the orders came from a senior figure in Russian politics and probably linked to Ramzan Kadyrov, the hoodlum Chechen president who was a target of Politkovskaya's trenchant reporting.

Politkovskaya's supporters say there is no doubt that her murder has been covered up. Some of the crucial evidence in the case mysteriously disappeared. Investigators found computer drives and SIM cards gone from the computers and telephones of key suspects. Their telephone records days before the murder are missing.

The journalists' union say it is a shameful affair. Given the Kremlin's record the suggestion of official manipulation is well founded. The judge himself tried to keep media out of the trial (probably under instructions from elsewhere) and the investigation was subject to infighting between rival Kremlin agencies. Ten original suspects were mysteriously reduced to four.

At the same time Politkovskaya's newspaper Novaya Gazeta carried out its own investigation. Its editor, Dimitry Muratov, says he knows who ordered the killing, but refuses to go public because of lack of proof.

I have no doubt. I was a speaker at a meeting in the Frontline Club a few weeks after the shooting when Alexander Litvinenko, a former KGB officer stood up and denounced Vladimir Putin as the man responsible for Anna's death. Three weeks later he was killed himself, succumbing to poisoning from a radio-active substance likely to have come from a Russian state-controlled plant.

All of this is proof enough that notions of democracy and respect for human rights are wilfully ignored at the highest levels in modern Russia. That may be so, but for many of us the campaign for justice in the case of Anna Politkovskaya is far from over.

Equally distressing is the news that Dawit Isaak, the journalist held for seven years without charge or trial in the twilight world of Eritrea, is in failing health. This brave young man was jailed by the bullies and thugs who run this sad state because he edited a newspaper calling for justice, decency and reform. He has suffered from high blood pressure, is thought to have been tortured and now, according to his family, has been diagnosed with diabetes, raising fears that his life is in danger.

Today I wrote to Carl Bildt, Foreign Minister of Sweden, because Dawit has taken Swedish nationality and asked him to intervene with the rulers of this one-party state, the People's Front for Democracy and Justice. In a country where private newspapers have been shut down and any journalists who criticise the president or his regime are immediately put into prison it is difficult to see where there is any justice or democracy. So far at least four journalists have died in detention.

We don't want Dawit Isaak to be another victim, so we are trying to get his release on humanitarian grounds. Fingers crossed and watch this space.

Up Union Street and Down Revolutionary Road

Two books I've just finished -- Union Street by Pat Barker and Revolutionary Road by Richard Yates -- made me think afresh about myself, my friends and neighbours. They are worlds apart -- Yates unpicking pompous liberalism in 1950s suburban New England while Barker in her first book explores the raw and poignant working class experience of post-war Britain. These are good texts to have about as we mull over how to reconnect with values and honesty and, less grandly, are just a bloody good read about the sort of people we are.

1809 -- Welcome to Charles and Abe, but say farewell to Tom

1809 was some year. It was the year history-makers Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin were born, and we will hear a lot in the months to come about the bicentenary celebrations and achievements of these pioneers of politics and science. But we should also recall another event in this momentous calendar -- the death of Thomas Paine, who faded away alone and in poor circumstances in New York in June of that year.

Paine's legacy is as important to humanity as that of Lincoln and Darwin. His trenchant writing and radical thought left an indelible mark on the the great events of his time including the American war of independence, the French Revolution and the birth of the industrial age.

He was never rewarded. Cheated by the Americans, sentenced to death by the French and outlawed by the British, he died an outcast and lived his last years filled with bitterness over his poor treatment. Yet as an activist journalist there are few to match him. His call to arms to rebellious America in Common Sense was the publishing sensation of the age and the dignified ideas set out in the Rights of Man provide the outline for our modern humanitarian landscape. Let's drink to him this June. His spirit is truly missed in these dark and troubled times.

Reporting Europe: Propaganda, Espionage or Real Journalism?

European Union leaders have never had a good relationship with journalists. They have always been irritated by reporters who ask searching questions, demand access to secret documents or express scepticism over the policies and programmes flowing from the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers.

Six years ago they were so frustrated by one journalist who was on their tails over internal corruption -- Hans Martin Tillack of Stern magazine in Germany -- that they laid bogus charges of bribery against him and got the Belgian police to raid his offices and home. The European Court in Strasbourg condemned them for it and last month he was finally cleared of all charges, without one hint of an apology from Brussels.

Now according to a German newspaper insiders in the Commission have smeared the entire community of investigative journalists by suggesting some of them are engaged in espionage.

While it's a painful reality that the European Union is not in step with the citizens of its member states, and this may may be hard to bear for the bureaucrats, it's a pity to take it out on the journalists who are reporting European Union affairs.

It's bad enough that media employers are cutting down on decent journalistic work to save money without having those who are trying to do a decent job smeared as potential spies by public officials. Investigative journalism may resemble spying -- its about asking tough questions and getting documents that others might like to keep secret -- but it's an essential component of democratic society.

As usual the European Union gives the impression that it wants only tame journalists, ready to be spoon-fed propaganda by their political masters. What they don't understand is that their lack of real respect for journalism not only further damages the European project in the public mind, it also undermines democratic values.

That's one reason why the Commission's approach to media should be one of the issues to be put on the agendsa of the new team that is going to be appointed later this year.

Gaza: Reckless Disregard for Life on all Sides

The reckless disregard for life in Palestine, displayed by both Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the past weeks, which is part of a tradition that stretches back half a century and more, makes it abundantly clear to all but the most ideologically infirm, that a new politics is desperately needed. The jabbing fingers and indignant walk-outs in Davos are part of the theatre of of this political tragedy. In Isreal the major parties are full of war-mongering bluster, ill-discipline and political cynicism. No party on the radar screen has any coherent vision for change. In Palestine the choice is cholera or pest -- thugs in Gaza or corruption in Ramallah. Violence, and the consequences of violence, are the strategic cornerstones of policy. We should be angry with them all. There are solutions and they can be found, but only if we clear away the deadwood.

So journalists would do better to stop their absurd balancing acts and expose the inhuman consequences of Israeli double-talk and Palestinian sectarianism. Tell stories that are not on anyone's agenda; build solidarity with the humanitarian movement inside Israel and Palestine that is working ceaselessly to repair the lives of damaged communities; show courage and challenge foul-smelling politics of expediency at home and abroad whenever it lacks conviction, or is driven by historical obsessions that minimise and trivialise the suffering of others. Ethical, intelligent people need information that is in context and that is not distorted by partisan passions.

In wartime, says Harold Evans, the truth gets buried under the rubble. If journalists do their jobs and clear away the debris to find out what is really going on, we may get to a solution sooner.