Media Matters In Fiji.

David Robie, author of Cafe Pacific, whose latest posting views the latest tribulations involving Michael Field and the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA)of New Zealand.

Free Press video (posted below)lampoons the American news industry's coverage of the 2008 Presidential election and is a sobering wake up call for all consumers of news and Fiji is no exception. Particularly so, in the wake of the Fiji Media Council's FAME awards and the accompanying hero worship and navel gazing.



Bill Moyers, an American public commentator and journalist takes a critical view of the Fiji Times owner, Rupert Murdoch in a video (posted below).

Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Respecting The Dead- A Fiji Times Case.

A photograph appearing in a Fiji Times article published online (Wednesday Sept. 10 2008)covering the murder at Suva point, brings to the forefront some ethical questions.

One particular case of the issue of distressing images in Saudi Arabia, was covered by a posting by Media Channel.

Although, the Fiji Media Council (FMC), code of ethics has a brief about the issue, it does not explore the matter in-depth. Nor does the FMC measure, keep track of any violations of this code.

The excerpt of FMC code #26:

26) DISTRESSING MATERIAL

a) Editors, producers and broadcasters of news, current affairs and documentary programmes and articles should take particular care in deciding whether the inclusion of graphic detail and intensity of violent or distressful material is warranted by its relevance and add to public understanding, of the subject.

b) Special consideration must be given before publication or transmission of particularly disturbing, images including:

1) Torture or ill-treatment of people or animals
2) Close-ups of dead or mutilated bodies
3) Images of people in extreme pain or on the point of death
4) Violence or ill treatment of children.

The exact subject on how to treat images , is contained in an interesting book, titled "Images in Ethics Codes in an Era of Violence and Tragedy" and should be considered, a must-read for the print media industry in Fiji.

Another obscure local media organization, Fiji Media Watch is supposedly a watch dog on these issues, but it seems to being enjoying its charitable organization status more than its primary role/mission; by virtue of the non-existing case studies or publications focusing exclusively on the media industry.



While the Fiji Media Watch website claims to be monitoring the media, what good does it do, if the organization keeps those observations and analysis under wraps?

Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Media Matters in Fiji

Fiji Media Council Chairman, Daryl Tarte who also chairs the Capital Markets Development Authority (CMDA) made a remark about the gender imbalance in financial institutions in a speech reported by a Fiji Times article.
It was unclear from the context of Tarte's speech, whether the turn around of Fiji as he advocated; also extends to the "gender-imbalance" issue.

This is an excerpt:

Let us turn Fiji around: Tarte

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

BUSINESSES are operating in a confused, negative and stressful environment paving the political way ahead with uncertainty, says Capital Markets Development Authority chairman Daryl Tarte.

Speaking at the welcoming ceremony of new CMDA chief executive officer Mereia Volavola, he said people often invested at a time when there was blood on the street.

"Fortunately, we do not have any blood on the street but there is an incredible challenge for all of us. Times like this present a great opportunity for lateral thinking, to be innovative, to be bold, to be visionary," he said.

Strong, dynamic and wise leadership was sadly lacking, Mr Tarte said.

"We all know there are opportunities here in Fiji and we are all in a position to stimulate the capital markets.

"It is incumbent on us all to think positively and turn Fiji around. We the stakeholders in the capital markets must make this happen," he said. [Tarte] called for more brainstorming sessions by stakeholders.

In welcoming Ms Volavola, he said CMDA had come full circle after a succession of two CEOs, Julie Apted and Suren Kumar who was unable to make it to the handover as his wife was taken ill in New Zealand.

"Looking at the staff of CMDA, I see we have a serious gender imbalance. It is female dominated. Even the South Pacific Stock Exchange is led by a woman," Mr Tarte said.

He said Mr Kumar had to hand over by phone and email with Ms Volavola.

"What attracted him ( Mr Kumar) to us was his obvious energy, motivation and passion for the capital markets industry. We have not been disappointed. For him, it has been a 24/7 job. That was a tough call, succeeding Julie," he said.

On Mr Kumar's leaving he said "none of us are in control of the events that shape our destinies".

Does Tarte implicitly declare that there is a 'glass ceiling' for men, in the stock brokering industry? Tarte's ability to chair the boards of both entities, raise serious questions of conflict of interest. Where does the line of demarcation lie; when the Fiji Media Council is asked to provide an impartial review of media coverage in CMDA's performance?

One can only wonder how Fiji's Old Media can fathom the issue of wrong messages; as the Fiji Times Editorial accuses the Interim Government of.

This is the excerpt of the Editorial:

The wrong message

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

THE move by the interim Government to block prominent Suva lawyer Graham Leung from leaving the country sends a terrible message to the world.

Mr Leung is not under investigation for any suspected or real wrongdoing. He has no court order against him preventing him leaving the country.

Mr Leung's "crime" it seems, is to have said things that do not meet the approval of the interim Government. Certainly he has been forthright in his views on the December 5 takeover and subsequent events, speaking at a recent Hong Kong law conference about how he believes our nation's judiciary risks being seen as compromised through what he contends are some legally dubious appointments.

Mr Leung is an internationally respected lawyer. He is a vice-president of Law Asia, itself one of the world's most respected bodies of legal minds. Perhaps that position is now working against him too. Law Asia president Mah Weng Kwai was set to head the Fiji Independent Commission Against Crime until there was an uproar about it, with much of the outrage coming from within Law Asia itself.

And Mr Leung had been in the interim Government's sights before that. His law firm has been black-banned from doing work for the interim Government because it is involved in legal challenges to the legitimacy of the regime. The interim Government claims it is a conflict of interest.

Mr Leung has applied for a judicial review of the travel ban and is awaiting a hearing date.

In the meantime, it seems the only person who can fully explain why he cannot leave the country is interim Home Affairs Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama, who has so far refused to tell Mr Leung why he is on the immigration watch-list. He is, of course, not the only person in such a situation and joins a seemingly ever-growing group.

The interim Government is desperate to tell the world that all is normal in the country. It is also desperate to win international acceptance of its actions and continually argues it should not be punished because it is acting for the greater good of the nation.

Banning dissidents or people who do not meet some mystery criteria is not the action of a government that has nothing to hide but reeks of a repressive regime intent on silencing alternative viewpoints. The truth is that in this electronic age, banning people from travelling will not stop them being heard and therefore the bans come across as, at the very least, petty vindictiveness.

Once again, the nation has lost ground in the eyes of the world and yesterday's events will do nothing to redeem our reputation in that arena.

T he FT Editorial begs the question of, what is the right message?
Is the Fiji Times along with the cartel called Fiji Media Council, the sole determiner of whether a message is right or wrong; right or left?

The Fiji Media mongols defended the role of the media's coverage in a Fiji Times article.

This is the excerpt of the Fiji Times article.

Media is only 'playing its role'

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

AT least two media organisations have labelled the comments made by interim minister for health Dr Jona Senilagakali as a mistake.

Dr Senilagakali said on Sunday the steadfast stand taken by the Fiji Nursing Association were due to the union leaders who were paid to make noise and the media for the headlines it used.

Fiji Sun publisher Russell Hunter said the comments by Dr Senilagakali were the usual tactic of pinning the blame on the messenger.

"I think he's making the usual mistake of blaming the messenger," Mr Hunter said. He said the media was only there to report on what the nurses wanted.

Communications Fiji Limited managing director William Parkinson said he did not know how the media could be blamed on the issues raised by the nurses. "The media shouldn't be blamed because they are there to cover the story and that is our role."

Mr Parkinson said the media was not a player as it was between government and the FNA.

The Fiji Times, in an editorial comment yesterday, said Dr Senilagakali should sit down and address the nurses' problems rather than blame the media and the union.
End of story

Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

Gauging Fiji Media Council's Journalism Standards. (Update)

Fiji Village article describes Fiji Media Council (FMC) Forum's archaic focus on Fiji's economy and can be described as a loss of direction by an entity that, was supposedly established specifically for the discussion and discourse of the media's performance in Fiji. Nothing more or nothing less.

"However, Mr Tarte said blogs

were a scourge and were generally full of defamatory information and were inflaming an already politically-charged situation, Pacific Radio News reported".

It is highly questionable to ascertain how the media performance in Fiji has a correlation with Fiji's economy, despite overseas articles stating that, the Fiji Media Council Awards is a ceremony for
excellence in media journalism, not a forum for discussing the
financial abilities and economic performances of Fiji.
Although, bloggers in Fiji have been painted with a

broad brush by the Fiji Media Council Chairman in a

Fiji Times article.

It is rather unfair for Tarte, to "throw out the baby
with the bath water" in his dishonest view of Fiji blogs. A desperate attempt to defend the turf of the old media in Fiji. But, given the
Fiji Media Council's seemingly biased conjecture on journalistic standards in Fiji ; it is highly applaudable for Fiji blogs to fill in this vacuum, using respectable online resources like Media Law Resources Center.

This vacuum which has been long forgotten and scorned by the Fiji Media Council, Media Law Resources exceeds these limitations by FMC; by focusing on matters like Blogger legal case studies and other journalistic issues pertinent to Fiji, like:

• Libel
• Defamatory
  
• Meaning
  
• Opinion
  
• Truth/Falsity
  
• Fault • Republication
  
• Privileges
  
• Damages
  
• Motions to Dismiss
  
• Discovery Issues
  
• Trial Issues
  
• Appellate Review
  
• Remedies for Abusive Suits
  
• Retraction
  
• Constitutional/Statutory Provisions
  
• Summary Judgment

Although, the Fiji Media Council's own ethics on accuracy, balance and coverage is far beyond their industry practice and realistically unenforceable by Fiji law. The following is an excerpt of Fiji Media Council rules:

1) ACCURACY, BALANCE AND FAIRNESS

a) Newspapers and magazines, radio and television broadcasting organizations, web sites and internet newsletters, and journalists working for them, should report and interpret news and current affairs honestly. They should aim to disclose all known relevant facts and should take care not to publish material, which is inaccurate, misleading or distorted by wrong or improper emphasis or any other factor.

b) If a significant inaccuracy, misleading or distorted statement is published it must be corrected promptly with due prominence and, where appropriate, an apology.

c) Media must distinguish clearly between the news, comment, conjecture, fact and paid advertising.

d) Media organizations are free to be partisan. Each has a duty to be balanced and fair in their treatment of news and current affairs and their dealings with members of the public.

e) Editorial comment in any medium must be clearly identified as such and kept physically separate from news reports.

f) Media should report fairly the result of any legal action brought against them and have an obligation to publish/broadcast, without diluting the finding, any adjudication by the Media Council on a complaint made against them.

One factor not addressed by any ethical rules produced by Fiji Media Council, is the aspect of Incitement Standard also not covered in Fiji media laws. This particular "Incitement Standard" is an international standard in objective journalism, which was obviously breached by the Fiji Times coverage of former Fiji Vice-President, Joni Madraiwiwi's speech published in a Fiji Times article, quoting Madraiwiwi, who labeled the 2006 coup as an Indian Coup; without offering, attaching or disclaiming empirical evidence to support that outrageous claim.

Madraiwiwi's incendiary statement alluded to the racial support of the 2006 Fiji coup, and realistically was an opinion and not a fact. No disclaimer was ever satisfactory offered, published or added by the Fiji Times or the speech author ascertaining that and perhaps sums up the editorial hallmarks of 'The Fiji Times' to mislead.

UN Human Rights Index highlights certain issues of media coverage which the Fiji Media Council had conveniently sidelined.




AddThis Social Bookmark Button" height="24" width="160">

Seed Newsvine

Digg!" height="17" width="91">




Technorati Favorites">


Club Em Designs

The Common Knowledge of Editorial Stove-Piping in Fiji.

Fiji Media Council was rather quick to denigrate the travel ban placed on the former CEO of Fiji Broadcasting Corporation in this Fiji Times article and FT Editor was only too happy to publish the concerns of one SDL apologist, to another.
This is an excerpt:

Media council berates ban

Sunday, July 08, 2007

THE Fiji Media Council is disturbed that former Fiji Broadcasting Corporation Limited chief executive Francis Herman had been stopped from leaving the country.

Council chairman Daryl Tarte said Mr Herman was a senior member of the media and his treatment was quite disturbing.

"I think the media council is very disturbed that a senior member of the media was treated this way," he said.

Mr Herman was stopped from leaving Fiji for a media conference in Australia last Wednesday by the Fiji immigration after his name was found to be in a watch list.

Meanwhile, the FBCL board has come to the defence of Mr Herman who is being investigated over allegations of alleged abuse of office.

Board chairman Daniel Whippy in a paid advertisement in the local dailies "vehemently denied allegations of abuse of office" against Herman and the company.

"The allegations are mischievous, baseless and considered acrimonious campaign by a former disgruntled employee whose aims are to discredit the FBCL and Mr Francis Herman," he said.

Mr Whippy said FBCL was appalled that both the company and Mr Herman were subjected to vilification and vindictiveness by the former employee.

"External audits of the company's finances have always been carried out by reputable external auditing firms under the supervision of the Office of the Auditor-General," Mr Whippy said.

Mr Herman yesterday confirmed he had met with Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption deputy commissioner George Langman on Thursday.

He said he met Mr Langman on Thursday to clarify why his name was on the watch list.

FICAC media relations officer Loraini Seru said another meeting had been arranged with Mr Herman next week to deal with the allegations.

Immigration director Viliame Naupoto said yesterday Mr Herman's name was still on the watchlist.

T his reaction is rather predictable given that Fiji Media Council is embedded with several Fiji media personnel and any endorsements, or opposition from this cartel should be realistically viewed with extreme caution.

Frequently, any editorial positions from this cartel has been analyzed to sing a unified tune and often echoing sentiments raised from their own stove-piping information or news flow.
An overwhelming amount of evidence supports that premise of bias in the Fiji Media and the burden of guilt now weighs heavily on the conscious of well informed readers.

Unfortunately, it rather misleading to feature alone this incident of Herman's travel ban; without appraising readers of Herman's dark past of muzzling an experienced and well appreciated radio journalist, and further remind readers of this amazing twist used by the media elite in Fiji; which provides lip service to the so called ideals for "Freedom of Expression" and "Media Independence" under a so called "Democractic Elected Government". Mass produced tags that ride a cushion of half-truths, compounded by this entrenched layer of corruption.

Case in point: In March 2006, Messr Herman fired the renown radio personality, Sitiveni Ratulala for interviewing Army Commander Frank Bainimarama, regarding the military truth campaign before the 2006 elections.

It is rather unfortunate for the Fiji Media Council to defend Herman, and disappointingly choose not even raise a finger for Ratulala, let alone issue a statement denouncing it. In the eyes of Fiji Media Council, Herman has more rights of Freedom, than Ratulala. S.i.F.M denounces this hypocrisy and calls for the Fiji Media Council and Fiji Media Watch to step up to the plate call a strike, a strike and a foul, a foul.

Avoiding, Evading, Denying an even playing field in media coverage is among the classic uses of turf protection displayed by the Fiji Media Council.

It is quite simply appalling to observe this degree of selectivity employed by Fiji Media Council. Quick off the mark, to raise the issue of freedom of expression
and defend all and any ethical violations of the media elite;
yet embarrassing slow and cumbersome to even
issue any statement decrying the recent coverage of
the Interim Finance Minister, which unfolded in
a Fiji Times article,
with overtones of sensationalism.

The reporting lines of some of these "Free media" advocates are now being drawn in the sand; separating those despotic media robber barons in Fiji and those on their payroll directly or indirectly, from honest readers and observers. The same readers and observers, who now are increasingly disgusted, with the glass house belonging to the ilks of Fiji Media Council; a corporate ogre, which routinely throws stones of clique idioms like freedom of expression. But only when it suits their agenda, purchased and designed by the highest bidder.

Fiji Media Council does not represent the public, which the Fiji media are duty bound to impart factual information. Fiji Media Council has no representation from native landowners, whose concerns of their native land being abused, fitted their campaign of fear; using the ethno-nationalistic talking points that created a series of divisive political fractures in Fiji society. Fiji Media Council does not have any cohesive grassroots representation from any segment of the multi-racial fabric of Fiji; all of whom have been their silent victims of the media's calculated campaign of defamation, first seen in 1987 and magnified in 2000.

Fiji Media Council, is in fact a culpable mouthpiece and an accessory to capital crimes; for their abysmal effort in encouraging public discourse on abuses of NLTB and native land. Some Fiji media outlets have even used the status quo in native land as a solid revenue stream, rather than providing readers of Fiji with investigative articles, to solve, trace and discern these reoccurring and grave abuses of office(long complained by Fijian mataqali landowners)now being unraveled in the clean up campaign.

Freedom of Expression in Fiji is a two way street, which the media have long exploited. Freedom of the Media, as one scholar exclaimed, is restricted to those who own one. This inconvenient truth, is slowly being understood by the masses in Fiji.


S.i.F.M post titled Fiji Media and Ethical Deviations had pointed out instances of this blatantly unfair coverage that has surprising roots in the 2000 putsch.

The following is a article covering the reactions to Ratulala's dismissal from an earlier S.i.F.M post:

Druavesi warns FBCL

Fiji Broadcasting Corporation chief executive officer Francis Herman should come out publicly on who gave him the directive to sack popular Fijian talk back show host Sitiveni Raturala. Soqosoqo Ni Vakavulewa Ni Taukei Party secretary Ema Druavesi yesterday warned Mr Herman to be careful, as he had been used to fire a Fijian, who had a huge following in the Fijian community for many years.

“The Fijian community is not happy with the actions of the FBCL,” she said. “Mr Raturala’s talkback show has a huge following throughout the country and now the Fijian people are not happy. There was nothing wrong in his interview with the army commander. Actually, it was well received by the Fijian community because they now have heard straight from the horse’s mouth.

“Mr Herman should be careful not to be caught in the web because the Fijian people will see him as a villain even though he is innocent since he is acting on higher orders to safeguard his job as well.” Ms Druavesi said the Government should appreciate the fact that it was through Mr Raturala’s popularity and ways of conducting his talkback shows that had helped the FBCL stay afloat.

Mr Herman said the FBCL’s editorial policies like all other independent and credible news organisations, reiterated their strong commitment to promoting and upholding the free flow of information, the principles of democracy and respect for human rights.

“It also demands objectivity, balance, impartiality and requires that we maintain a high degree of balance, fair play and justice in all our broadcasts,” he said.

However, Ms Druavesi said Mr Herman may have his reasons but the Fijian community did not see that. “Mr Herman should come out publicly whether the directive came from the Prime Minister’s Office but if he refuses he should not blame anyone because now he has been used,” she said. Ms Druavesi said the FBCL for its survival should apologise to Mr Raturala and reinstate him before it lost its Fijian listeners.

Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs