Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Fiji TV: Fuzzy & Misleading Reporting.

In the wake of the Russell Hunter story, which some circles in the Fiji media have labeled 'intimidation' or a 'threat to media freedom'. Hunter was interviewed by Radio NZ podcast.


Fiji media should be made aware of the legal precedent in a 1919 US Supreme Court case, Schenck v. United States.

The ruling:

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.


Another side to the media's coverage of the story was lamented in a posting by Oceanic blogger and IT developer, Jonathan Seagal who is subsequently crying foul after being interviewed by Fiji TV. Seagal claims that the interview was sliced and diced to show a different story from what he told.

I received a call yesterday afternoon from a reporter at FijiTV. She wanted to ask me questions about email security as it related to this news story. I answered her questions but then she asked whether they could film me on camera. I told her I wasn't comfortable with that given the current environment but she insisted that this was completely non-political. Stupidly, I relented.

She came over and asked me some initial questions about email security and how someone could gain access to other people's email. I said some things about how people inside a company can have access, how Internet providers can have access, etc...

The conversation then seemed to shift over to these email documents which, if FijiTV is to be believed, were at the center of this deportation story.

Next thing I know, I'm being asked about these documents and if they were genuine.

Of course, I had no idea if they were genuine at all and said that repeatedly. The reporter asked questions like "but its certainly possible these printed emails were fabricated, right?" The way it was presented on air though is demonstrated below [posted youtube video]:



"Segal SAYS they could be fabricated." is really quite different from "Segal AGREED they could be fabricated." The latter alludes to someone else coming up with that ridiculous notion.

I've experienced this before with FijiTV. Yeah, I know I'm the one who opened my mouth at the end of the day. I've been quoted before in print many times and never run into the kind of editing FijiTV tends to do.




Rizwan Dean, another blogger with IT background, whose latest posting lashes out at Fiji TV for their shameful editing process as well using other respected people as a proxy for their gutter reporting. Rizwan further lampoons the 5 day turn around for addressing complaints, in a lame response from Fiji TV CEO Mesake Nawari to Seagal.

I've noticed that whenever FijiTV wants to air something controversial which they know will land them in hot water, they get other people to do it so they can shift the blame.

Its a little sad that they used an unsuspecting IT Professional to do their dirty work and then twisted his professional opinion and almost made it sound like a political one. This is fairly common with the rest of the media industry in Fiji and it perhaps explains why people really don't believe anything thats published these days or are just tired of reading[...]
Fiji's media are always harping on about media freedom and the right of the press to report what they feel is important - perhaps they need to realize that media freedom is not simply about reporting rubbish and forgetting the real issues and the true side of a story.








Social Bookmarking



Add to: Digg
Add to: Del.icio.us
Add to: Reddit
Add to: StumbleUpon
Add to: Furl
Add to: Yahoo
Add to: Spurl
Add to: Google
Add to: Technorati
Add to: Newsvine




No comments:

Post a Comment