The 2007 FHRC Report On Fiji's Fourth Estate.

Fiji media still reeling from the Russell Hunter removal are now circling their wagons with the recent release of the Fiji Human Rights Commission(FHRC) media report of 2007, which was compiled by Dr. James Anthony. The entire report(PDF) available here.

A Fiji Times article reports that release.

The excerpt of FT article:

Media report released

Thursday, February 28, 2008

THE Fiji Human Rights Commission has released a report on its findings on media independence.

Media officer Erica Lee confirmed last night that the report was released yesterday.

The inquiry was carried out by Doctor James Anthony last year.

He conducted the inquiry in consultation with individuals, political parties, Government Ministers, NGOs, members of the judiciary, church leaders, trade unionists and some members of the media.

Fiji Times Editor-in-Chief Netani Rika said the report was disturbing for a number of reasons which the company will respond to today.

"Although it is safe to say that it appears to be malicious, full of conjecture and untruths written by a person who had obviously formulated an opinion before arriving in the country," he said.

Communications Fiji Ltd, the parent company of radio stations and website Fiji Village was quick to ridicule the findings, as reported in an article from Fiji village.

The excerpt of FV article:

FHRC report baseless-Parkinson
Publish date/time: 28/02/2008 [15:23]

Skin colour has nothing to do with how the media organizations in the country operate and provide news to the people.

Communications Fiji Limited Managing Director William Parkinson has labeled the FHRC Report compiled by James Anthony on the media in Fiji as absolutely baseless. Parkinson has also criticized the recommendations by Doctor Anthony that Fiji Human Rights Commission should take necessary steps to strongly recommend to government that all existing work permits in the media industry not be renewed and that no further work permits be issued. He has questioned why only the media is being targeted.

Parkinson has also lashed out at the FHRC for listing a number of companies including media houses as members of the SDL's Duavata Initiative Company without any evidence.
Meanwhile, Parkinson said that some media companies will go bankrupt if the government comes up with a 7 percent tax across the board on all media advertising revenue and further 7 percent on all revenue generated from licence and monthly user fees on consumers as recommended by Dr. Anthony.

Editor of Fiji Times, Netani Rika has strongly condemned the contents of the Fiji Human Rights Commission report which is blaming the media for the 1987 coup. Rika said Dr. Anthony should understand that the coups have not been staged by any media organization. Rika added that Dr. Anthony's allegations are baseless and its his personal view that white men are running the show in the media industry.

Meanwhile, other media organizations are still going through the report and are expected to comment later today.

Doctor James Anthony writes that the power of the media was found to be in the hands of about eight whites (mostly expatriates) operating in the shadows, acting in concert as members of a private club, deciding not only what to print but also deciding what not to print.

It is rather laughable that Parkinson and Rika both used the word "baseless" in the FV article as if they reading from well rehearsed talking points. In the interest of education, it is best that the public read the report and make up their own conclusions without relying on the media to dish out their own hostile reactions.

Other commentators like 1987 coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka also weighed in the report, which was published in an article by Fiji Village.

Media Not Cause of 1987 Coup
Publish date/time: 28/02/2008 [15:05]

The leader of the 1987 coup and former Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is shocked to find out that the Fiji Human Rights Commission report is blaming the 1987 coup on the actions taken by the media.

In his report to the Human Rights Commission on the Freedom and Independence of the Media in Fiji, Hawaii based, Doctor James Anthony writes about one of his sources who said that the media had consistently blown things out of proportion and among others, Rabuka has already stated that the media was very substantially responsible for creating the problem with which Fiji was faced with and by which he had been sucked in.

Doctor Anthony in his report to the FHRC also writes that Rabuka saw himself as being the dupe of a disinformation campaign and Rabuka himself apparently admitted, privately, that he was caught up in a hysteria generated by the media.

Rabuka has denounced all these claims in the report and stresses that the media had nothing to do with the actions that he took on May 14th, 1987. Rabuka said he never met with anyone from the FHRC or Doctor Anthony and does not agree with what has been said about the 1987 coup.

Meanwhile, the report also states that after the December 5th takeover, the military began to analyze the role of the media industry in the polarization of Fiji's two major races, which had deepened and widened over the years.

Doctor James Anthony writes that the power of the media was found to be in the hands of about eight whites (mostly expatriates) operating in the shadows, acting in concert as members of a private club, deciding not only what to print but also deciding what not to print. He further writes that this power not to print, the power to censor news, the power to decide what was fit to be printed, to be aired, was a power that was exercised with stealth. It said that the power was exercised in the corridors of power, away from the daylight of the common forum, away from the spotlight of public attention.

Doctor Anthony writes that it was an exercise of power to protect the power of a complex web of cross owners sitting in crucial positions on a wide range of Board of Directors. He went on and said that what one local author has previously called an "oligarchy of barons" once white, now of various shades, their hands in almost every major pie in the country. The report further said that self regulation has failed and the Media Council is a white man's club and is a do nothing body.

Several allegations have also been made in the report with Doctor Anthony quoting several submissions provided by confidential sources. There is also a long list of companies, including media houses listed as members of the SDL's Duavata Initiative Company.

The list is just typed out without any reference on where the information has been received.

Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Fiji Media Inc.

Fiji Media has come across some important challenges recently in two different stories, one dealing with Fiji TV's recent tango with the Police and the other with the book launch by Fr. Kevin Barr.

First story titled "We Were Denied Media Freedom" was paraphrased from Fiji TV's lawyer appears in an article by Fiji Times and covers the recent arrest of Fiji TV crew for disobeying a lawful order. "Freedom of the Press is limited to those who own one", a quote from A.J Liebling, which Cafe Pacific writer David Robies corrected me on in a sterling post.

The excerpt:

We were denied media freedom'

ERNEST HEATLEY
Thursday, January 24, 2008


POLICE detained and interrogated a television crew for five hours yesterday for allegedly "disobeying a police order" while covering a school dispute in Nasinu.

Reporter Emily Moli and cameraman Shalendra Datt were ordered into a police van and removed from Rishikul Sanatan College where they were assigned to cover the dispute between the school management and the principal.

Their arrest follows claims by Superintendent Waisea Tabakau of the Valelevu Police Station claimed that the two had failed to abide by a lawful order.

He had told the crew that they were interfering in police business by filming the goings-on at the school yesterday morning.

The pair said they were at the school property at the invitation of Rishikul College management.

SP Tabakau and about 20 officers of the Police Tactical Response Unit arrived at the college, escorting ousted principal Mahendra Pal.

Mr Pal was locked out of the college on Monday by an angry management who refused to acknowledge him as principal.

Ministry of Education officials and the police attempted to have Mr Pal reinstated.

As the officers escorted Mr Pal into the college, SP Tabakau ordered the TV crew to leave.

When they continued filming the event, the senior officer told the journalists they were "disobeying a police order."

Fiji TV Legal Manager Tanya Waqanika described the detention as "totally baseless and totally unjustifiable." "We were denied media freedom," she said.

"Our journalists were shooting inside the private premises on the invitation of the school management." Two more Fiji TV employees were detained at noon after they shot footage from outside the school compound on a public walkway.

Reporter Edwin Nand and cameraman Trevuz Chung were told to get into a police van. They were also told by SP Tabakau that they had disobeyed a lawful order.

They were released a short while later along with the equipment that police had seized.

Ms Waqanika said they would lodge a complaint with the Police Commissioner and the Fiji Media Council on the treatment.

The other story in another article from Fiji Times titled "Media Owners Distort Electoral Process: Barr", covers the gate keeping role of the media during elections.

Media owners distort electoral process: Barr

Saturday, January 26, 2008

MEDIA ownership by a few rich elite has been cause for specific distortion of the democratic electoral process, poverty activist Father Kevin Barr claims.

In his book Thinking About Democracy Today, which was launched earlier this week, he said the media was used to protect the interests of its own class and suppress any criticism of the status quo.

"Their particular influence can affect the outcome of an election," he said.

If "big money" is needed for democratic elections, then democracy can never be truly inclusive of the people, Father Barr writes.

The issue of media freedom has been under the spotlight for some time particularly since talks of a legislation to govern the industry was introduced by previous governments, he said.

"The internal policies of those who own media networks seriously curtail the news which filters down to us. They decide what we should see and hear and what we should not see and hear.

"The media moguls mostly come from families of the extravagantly wealthy who have a particular perspective on the world. Consequently much of what is reported to us is far from neutral," Father Barr said.

He said those who reported the news were not free to report the news and were subject to certain fear because of inbuilt policies and prejudices of those they serve.

The Fiji Times Editor-in-Chief Netani Rika who has served the company for 15 years said while the company was owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Limited, he had never once received a call from him or the publisher dictating how the newspaper should be run or what news to cover.

"Our newsroom is an independent operation within The Fiji Times and we attempt to report all the news, fairly and truthfully. We report without fear or favour. We welcome all views that help broaden our news coverage and our doors are open to everyone.

"If Fr Barr takes issue with the news we do or do not cover, he is welcome to bring the matter to us," Mr Rika said.

Communications Fiji Limited's Managing Director William Parkinson said it was a shame Fr Barr did not take the time to meet with media organisations to research these issues fully.

"Instead it would seem he has stuck to the usual sweeping generalisations thrown around by the misinformed. If he conducted real research he would find a very different story actually exists," he said.

Questions sent to Fiji Television Limited remained unanswered.

The usual defense by the Fiji Times and Communications Ltd. Perhaps consumers of Fiji news should look into Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting(FAIR) website and the contents, reinforces Barr's views on the matter.



Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Fiji Media Cartel - Grasping At Straws.

David Robie, a New Zealand academic, who specializes in media matters, comments on the objections by the industry cartel against the Media Inquiry.

Fiji Times Editorial responded to Dr Shameem's remarks with an exceptional display of predictable belligerence.

The following is an excerpt:

Shameem's wrong

Thursday, August 23, 2007

The Fiji Human Rights Commission has again got it wrong.

This time its director, Dr Shaista Shameem, says this newspaper, the Fiji Media Council and another newspaper"appear to be willfully obstructing and hindering the performance of Human Rights Commission's functions in breach of Section 47 (2) of the Human Rights Commission Act".

She refers to comments and reports in the two newspapers and communications between the council and the commission on matters relating to the media inquiry conducted by Doctor James Anthony on behalf of the FHRC.

She threatens to take legal action against all of us if"there is any further harassment of Dr Anthony" by the council and the two newspapers.

It will be interesting how she will prove in court, if it indeed reaches there, how we have been obstructing, hindering or resisting her work.

All the Media Council has been trying to point out to her and the commission is the apparent oversight in consulting stakeholders in the industry on the inquiry and its term of reference.

Why the heavy hand? Surely we, like anyone else in this land, are allowed to make known our views on such an important issue and Dr Anthony's credentials.

If Dr Shameem says that the Human Rights Act prohibits us that right, then she seriously should consider seeking a second opinion. Her threat to take legal action could be read as an attempt to obstruct us from exercising our constitutional right to freedom of speech. In fact there is a strong urge right now to lodge a complaint with the Fiji Human Rights Commission against herself for this reason.

Secondly, the council had shown its disappointment at the way Dr Anthony insulted and abused council secretary Bob Pratt on the phone. It is totally uncalled for and unprofessional. He wanted to complain about an article about him, but didn't want to follow established complaint procedures, and was, apparently, very rude about it twice. Dr Anthony has not bothered, as the council had requested, to apologise to Mr Pratt.

Dr Shameem's threat to take legal action is not going to stop this newspaper from commenting on the media inquiry, or on Dr Anthony's conduct. We doubt it will stop any media outlet, or the Media Council.

She should perhaps expect more comment: we consider her aggressive, misplaced threat a serious issue which not only concerns the media but which directly threatens an important constitutional right called"freedom of speech".

She should be well familiar with such rights, since she heads the body entrusted with the upholding of such rights. Dr Shameem has urged the Fiji Media Council to seek legal advice on the issue. We urge Dr Shameem to abandon this"tough guy" approach. It's unnecessary, and will ultimately have no effect. Consultation and discussion as we have been urging remains the answer, not dictatorial guidelines and misplaced legalese.

It's a prescription the FHRC could follow for everyone's sake.

Fiji Times published an article, quoting Fiji Human Rights Commission Representative, who alluded that the media cartel was "wilfully obstructing and hindering" the media inquiry in Fiji.

This is an excerpt of the FT article:

Shameem warns dailies
Fiji Times
Thursday, August 23, 2007

THE Fiji Human Rights Commission has warned two dailies that "any further harassment of Dr (James) Anthony" will require them to take legal action against the newspapers.

In a letter addressed to Fiji Media Council chairman Daryl Tarte yesterday, Commission director Doctor Shaista Shameem said she had reviewed the media coverage of the media inquiry it was conducting through Dr Anthony, by The Fiji Times and the Fiji Sun as well as the recent exchange of letters between Dr Anthony and Mr Tarte. She said she found the two dailies appeared to be willfully obstructing and hindering the performance of the Commission's functions, which breached section 47 (2) of the Commission Act.

"If there is further harassment of Dr Anthony by yourself or the Fiji Times and the Fiji Sun, I will have no option but to institute legal proceedings under section 47 (2)," said Dr Shameem. She said the Commission had no knowledge of the contents of Dr Anthony's findings with respect to freedom and independence of the media and would await his report.

[Shameem] said they were duty-bound to ensure Dr Anthony was permitted to do the work for the Commission without hindrance, victimisation or willful obstruction. Dr Shameem suggested that the letter be copied to the council and the newspapers' lawyers so that discussions on the legal implications "of such willful interference in the Commission's media inquiry by the media industry" could be held.

She said she had advised Dr Anthony not to speak to both newspapers and Mr Tarte.

"The independence of his report and personal reputation will henceforth be protected by the Human Rights Commission under the legal processes available to it," she said.Mr Tarte declined to comment on the issue, while Fiji Sun editor Leone Cabenatabua said they had not received anything as yet.

The Fiji Times editor Samisoni Kakaivalu said: "We, like anyone else in this land, should be allowed to make known our views on such an important issue and Dr Anthony's credentials."If Dr Shameem says that the Human Rights Act prohibits us that right, then she seriously should consider seeking a second opinion. Her threat to take legal action could be read as an attempt to obstruct us from exercising our constitutional right to freedom of speech."

Although, Fiji Times had provided reader feedback to this particular story; it is apparent that many posts that were critical of the Fiji Times were unceremoniously deleted by the webmaster. In addition, the next day the link to this feedback was conveniently hidden on Fiji Times website, while still available to the readers who examined their browser history tab.



read more | digg story

Fiji Media Inquiry Welcomed By All, But the Owners. (Updated)

"Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one."
A. J. Liebling (1904 - 1963)

Fiji Media Council Chairman, wrote a letter to the Editor of the Fiji Daily Post and published on their website.

This is the excerpt:

FLP and the media
1-Aug-2007

Sir,

IT is sad day for Fiji when the President of a leading political party, and one that shares power with the government of the day, calls for legislation to regulate one of our fundamental freedoms - freedom of the media. For government to control the way the media operates is tantamount to putting restrictions on one of the people’s other essential freedoms - freedom of speech and expression.

If the Fiji Labour Party truly espouses democracy, it should know that in a democratic state the media is not controlled by restrictive legislation. No media is totally free. While freedom is guaranteed in our Constitution there are many specific restrictions.

It is extremely disturbing that our political leaders should be reverting to thinking like the leaders of the communist era. I am sure that it is not the party’s intention that Fiji should end up like the former Soviet state or like Zimbabwe.

But that could be the end result if they introduced legislative controls over the media. The media would be forced to conform to the will of any government of the day. It would not be allowed to publish criticism of the government.

It would have to publish government’s propaganda. One wonders what would happen to the commercial viability of the media organisations. And let us not forget that two of the current media organisations are public listed companies that are owned by the people of the nation.



Daryl Tarte,
Chairman
Media Council (Fiji) Ltd.

It is rather amusing to see that, Daryl Tarte has resorted to emotional appeal to further his outrageous cause. Tarte's claim that, since two media companies are publicly traded on the South Pacific Stock Exchange(SPSE) means these companies belong to all Fiji citizens makes him a laughing stock; especially when considering he is also the Chairperson of CMDA.

Would Tarte back up his statement, by showing the actual Share Certificates from these two companies, listing all Fiji citizens as joint stock owners. Sadly, lip service and rhetoric has always been the Modus Operandi for the media cartel in Fiji.

Fiji Ombudsman has announced a local consultant in a Fiji Times article, as the head of the Media Inquiry project as well as, outlining the overwhelming support for the inquiry from the community at large.
This is the excerpt:

Local to lead media inquiry

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

A LOCAL consultant has been engaged to carry out an inquiry into concerns of human rights violation in the media industry.

Fiji Ombudsman, Doctor Shaista Shameem said the identity of the consultant would be announced today when consultations begin. Dr Shameem said interest had poured in from hundreds of people including the international media who supported the inquiry.

"They talk about media freedom but where is the freedom of the journalists to express themselves. It's a contradiction."

"We even have journalists from media organisations that have opposed the inquiry," she said last night. Submissions are expected not only from journalists, but the public, unionists, civil servants and non-government organisations who, Dr Shameem said, have "all welcomed" the inquiry. Of the four media organisations that have indicated lack of participation into the inquiry, Dr Shameem said "the worst thing is that they prohibit their staff from making submissions".

"We have journalists from these organisations who have been told not to participate in the inquiry and if they do, they need the full authority of their bosses," she said.

All four media organisations, including The Fiji Times, have denied the allegations and say their staff are free to take part in the inquiry if they wish. The organisations said they had not refused to take part but had simply asked for further information and consultation on the terms of reference.

The date of submissions has been extended to August 10 to enable the consultant, who has technical support and Hansard reporters assisting him, time to cater to the large number of submissions that are expected.

Fiji Media Council chairman Daryl Tarte said he was appalled at the commission's stance not to identify the consultant.

Dr Shameem said it was no secret and this was owed to the fact that there were a number of applicants who were not advised of the successful applicant's name. "Why should it matter to him who the consultant is," Dr Shameem asked.

"The council has an agenda it seems. I regret Mr Tarte's point of view. Beats my comprehension why they're making a big song and dance about this.

"If the organisations don't want anything to do with the inquiry, they shouldn't stop their journalists," Dr Shameem said.

Mr Tarte said the commission had failed to consult the council members and stakeholders over the inquiry.

He said some members of the industry had expressed concern over a number of issues which remained unresolved and until they were resolved, the council's position on the inquiry would remain unchanged.

Dr Shameem said the commission was an independent body with its own mandate, duties and responsibilities and did not need to consult prior to the inquiry.

"The terms of reference were clear. It was advertised and sent to all media organisations and journalists. Do they want to override everything?" "I rang up a public member of the council after The Fiji Times ran a story against the inquiry.

"He said he didn't know anything about the decision of the council so I told him to consult with his members and find out.

Dr Shameem said she would not be involved in the inquiry and neither would her staff. Mr Tarte is expected to issue a statement today.

Dr Shameem may have inadvertently exposed the lack of transparency in the decision making process within the Fiji Media Council (FMC). It appears that the cartel of four largest media companies have dominated the FMC to such an extent that, it has become more of a proxy office responding only to the concerns of the cartel and failing to consult with the community appointed members; who appear to be just token members with little influence to control the direction and policies of FMC.

In a Fiji TV news segment, the heads of the four largest media companies backpedaled from their grandstanding threat of not participating in the inquiry, stating that they were just waiting for the terms of reference and the naming of the incumbent head to the Media Inquiry.

Meanwhile, the Radio Fiji news article actually names the incumbent.

This is the excerpt:

Dr James Anthony appointed to conduct Media Inquiry
Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Dr JAMES Anothny has been appointed by the Fiji Human Rights Commission to conduct the media Inquiry.

The inquiry is based on the requirements of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights instruments protecting and promoting freedom and independence of the media.

The Terms of Reference of the Inquiry is to provide an overview of the range of media available in Fiji including ownership and scope of operations.

It will also review the freedom and independence of the media and assess Fiji’s compliance with them and other issues.

The inquiry is an update of a report given by Dr. Shaista Shameem to the international NGO Article 19 in 1987.

Fiji media cartel of 4, responded to Dr. Shameem's remarks in an article by the Fiji Times and a Fiji Village article. Communications Fiji Ltd owner, William Parkinson, who asked for the terms of reference for the Media Inquiry on the Fiji Village article soundbite. Parkinson's response seems more of a flimsy explanation to the flip-flopping objection raised days earlier, by labeling this inquiry as biased.

Although, considered by many as long overdue, this media inquiry in Fiji comes at the unique time, when Fiji Times parent company News Corp, the flag ship company of Rupert Murdoch, just purchased the Dow Jones company and business daily, Wall Street Journal reported by an article by Wired. Incidentally, this resistance to the Media Inquiry in Fiji, would be a skirmish followed with much interest, even by Rupert himself.





Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

Fiji Media Resists Oversight.

Following up on an earlier S.i.F.M post on Fiji Media; the proposed inquiry into Fiji's media as reported by Stuff article, was scuttled by a combination of factors which include clash of schedules for the New Zealand consultant reported by a Fiji Times article corroborated by Dominion Post and predictable belligerence by the cartel of leading media outlets in Fiji.

Kiwi pulls out of media inquiry

Friday, July 27, 2007

A New Zealand consultant approached by the Fiji Human Rights Commission to conduct an inquiry into the extent of media freedom and independence in Fiji has indicated his unavailability.

Greg Fortuin was one of the individuals approached by the commission to help the commission in identifying ways in which it could promote media freedom and independence in the interest of the public and the profession.

Commission director Doctor Shaista Shameem said Mr Fortuin had indicated he had a personal commitment in Australia during the period they needed him.

She said they needed the inquiry to get underway next month.

Mr Fortuin is only one of the people on a list. We hope to engage another person from New Zealand. The inquiry is going ahead, she said.

Fiji TV news segment had aired footage of correspondence signed by the heads of Fiji TV, Fiji Times, Fiji Sun and Communications Fiji respectively. This marks yet another entrenched turf defense by this media cartel, who have escaped any independent assessment for years. It is this cartel who control the Fiji Media Council and have always resisted outside scrutiny into their empire.

Fiji has seen the dangers of media disinformation leading up to the 2000 coup, as well as the slanted editorial opinions and selective coverage. What is really disturbing, that this media cartel has labeled this inquiry on Fiji TV, as "selective" and highlighting a hypothetical risk that, Fiji Human Rights Commission could "invoke causes of Human Rights to control the media", according to the Fiji TV report.

How can the media be in an impartial position, when elements within itself is resisting any resemblance of oversight?

Unfortunately, this media cartel have often used the fear of control to wriggle itself from any independent review of their operations. This 'Red Herring' is designed to obfuscate attention from the putrid state of affairs in the news room. Fiji deserves a free-press and holding them accountable makes the industry more dynamic and independent of gate-keeping by the media owners. Fiji will never quantify this component, if the media companies refuse to have checks and balances on their own affairs.

Sadly, the arrows of dictatorialism launched by the same media cartel at the Interim Government in Fiji, pales in significance to their own dogmatic principles.



Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs