Wednesday, October 06, 2010

The Talk Of The Town: News Corp & Its Political Intent.

Café Pacific | Cafe Pacific blog, from David Robie, a Pacific Media Professor; republished a posting from Croz Walsh's blog: Media freedom and transparency: Pacific 'dictatorship of the publishitariat'?: "Crosbie Walsh plays Devil's Advocate with the media SPEAKING at the 2010 Pacific Islands Media Association (PIMA) conference in Auckland on..."

Following up on the interesting review of the freedoms of the media in Croz's post and the issue of News Corp relinquishing control of " The Fiji Times", is best seen in the light of the repeat offenses of the conglomerate.

Another important take on the legacy of New Corp International, is in the political arena, of both the U.S and the U.K.
A recent article from the Columbia Journalism Review highlights these wanton and willful intentions.
The act of News Corp's $1 million dollar donation to the Republican party in the U.S, as reported by Washington Post piece seem to buttress those claims.

The excerpt of C.J.R article:

The Audit — October 04, 2010 12:49 PM
Murdoch’s Threat to Democracy

Direct influence via the power of the purse—here and in the UK

By Ryan Chittum

Politico astutely pointed out the other day that Fox News now employs four of the leading Republican presidential candidates: Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Rick Santorum.

It’s hardly news that Fox News is more propaganda outlet than news organization. But this ought to be a more troubling development than it seems to have been thus far. Here’s the broader media angle from Politico:

With the exception of Mitt Romney, Fox now has deals with every major potential Republican presidential candidate not currently in elected office.

The matter is of no small consequence, since it’s uncertain how other news organizations can cover the early stages of the presidential race when some of the main GOP contenders are contractually forbidden to appear on any TV network besides Fox.

C-SPAN Political Editor Steve Scully said that when C-SPAN tried to have Palin on for an interview, he was told he had to first get Fox’s permission — which the network, citing her contract, ultimately denied. Producers at NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC all report similar experiences.

And here’s the more insidious one Paul Krugman points out today:

Now, media moguls have often promoted the careers and campaigns of politicians they believe will serve their interests. But directly cutting checks to political favorites takes it to a whole new level of blatancy.

Rupert Murdoch: Never subtle.

Murdoch, at least, is a naturalized American citizen, and who can forget the heart-warming story of why he became one: To get past legal requirements so he could snap up TV stations here.

But I’ve never understood why the UK allows a foreigner like Murdoch to have so much control over its press—he controls some 40 percent of newspaper circulation and has huge influence over television, too, with his big stake in BSkyB. Here’s The Observer:

Blair’s deputy director of communications, Lance Price, called Murdoch the 24th member of the cabinet. “His presence was always felt,” he wrote. “No big decision could ever be made inside Number 10 without taking account of the likely reaction of three men – Gordon Brown, John Prescott and Rupert Murdoch. On all the really big decisions, anybody else could safely be ignored.” That is almost certainly true of the new government and Andy Coulson is seen as the key facilitator of Rupert’s habitual privilege.

Andy Coulson is the former News of the World editor who headed the paper while it hacked the royal family’s—and hundreds’ and perhaps thousands of others’—phones and listened to their voicemails.

That News of the World scandal and cover up continues to unravel, and Murdoch’s influence is one of the key stories there. It looks for all the world as if Scotland Yard was so in debt to and/or scared of News Corporation that it wouldn’t investigate the crimes properly—and even helped cover them up.

Guess who’s also on the Murdoch payroll? The Scotland Yard cop who headed up the failed investigation.

The Guardian quotes from an upcoming Channel 4 documentary, which reports that the influence is hardly limited to the indirect “you-don’t-know-what-I-might-do-so-watch-out” variety:

Adam Price, one of the MPs from the media select committee which last year investigated the phone-hacking scandal, described how he stopped voting to compel News International’s chief executive, Rebekah Brooks, to be called as a witness.

“I was told by a senior Conservative member of the committee, who I knew was in direct contact with executives at News International, that if we went for her, they would go for us – effectively that they would delve into our personal lives in order to punish them.”

The Labour MP Tom Watson said he was threatened in 2006 after he called for Tony Blair to resign at a time when News International was supporting him.

“A very senior News International journalist told me that Rebekah would never forgive me for what I did and that she would pursue me through parliament for the rest of my time as an MP,” he said.

Adam Price: a modern-day Profile in Courage! But I digress.

This is the corporation that has more than half of the leading candidates for president of the United States on its payroll.



Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
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

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Fair & Softly Goes Far In A Day!

Croz Walsh's Blog -- Fiji: The Way it Was, Is and Can Be: Beyond the Gibberish, Possible Crusher Sabotage: "Commonwealth Gibberish Opinion Crosbie Walsh I don't really know why the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group¹ needed to meet in New York t..."


Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State's recent meeting with Fiji's Foreign Affairs Minister as pointed out by Croz blog post on the intent of America to engage with Fiji, seemed to have caught the usual naysayers flat-footed, with much chagrine from the Trans-Tasmanians.

Kurt M. Campbell, the Assistant Secretary for Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs follow up and re-affirmation to the premise of "lifting their game" in the Pacific region and the re-engagement with Fiji recognizing its strategic importance within the region, was reflected in the hearing conducted by US House Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Asia, Pacific and Global Environment.

The video of the opening statement by Campbell to the sub-committee.


Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
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

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Every Little, Helps.

Radio Australia (ABC) article regarding Fiji's MDG obligations were misconstrued (intentionally or not) by the article heading: "Fiji boasts it's ahead on UN MDGs" and conveniently glosses over the significance of the achievement and barely uses a snippet of the entire statement.

MDG Debate, statement by H.E. Mr. Ratu Inoke Kubuabola, Minister for Foreign Affairs, International Cooperation and Civil Aviation of Fiji (UN video posted below):



Campbell Cooney, the ABC Pacific correspondent, finished off the radio segment with the following vindictive statement:

COONEY:
And while this summit is being held to look at MDGs, national politics have not been far from the surface. Since the 2006 coup Fiji has been criticised by UN members and other bodies for not keeping its promise to hold elections last year, and for scrapping the country's constitution.

The interim regime has said Fiji is not ready to return to democracy and that it won't be until 2014. Ratu Inoke might have been in New York to debate the Millennium Development Goals. But he was not missing the opportunity to promote the regime's position and also link those goals to its plans for Fiji's future.

What the Radio Australia web article did not bother to comment on, was the statement from Australia's nascent Foreign Minister and former Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd who seemed to be nursing a back injury-a stabbing wound so to speak.

Although, Rudd had highlighted the usual diplomatic rhetoric on the benevolent qualities of the MDGs, used the heart wrenching narrative of a poor Soweto girl and an unnamed beggar boy.

In the same speech, Rudd swept the dismal report card on Australia's MDG obligations, under the proverbial rug (UN video posted below):



Rudd called on the richer and developed donor nations to assist in the eradication of poverty (as he termed "self-evident" truths) and outlined the intent of Australia to double its aid program by 2015; itemizing their sectors of interest coupled with the donation amount.

Rudd ended his speech quoting again from an unnamed child. This time a letter a girl from Australia and Rudd quoted her words ad verbatim. What Rudd forgot to mention, was that the letter the girl wrote (whom he quoted), was addressed to the Prime Minister of Australia.

Oddly enough, even Radio Australia did not draw attention to the final communique of the MDG summit.

The UN Summit regarding Millennium Development Goals (MDG), was held between 20-22 September 2010, New York, during the High-Level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly.



Save Page As PDF 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

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

From Croz Walsh's Blog : Wharf Heist, PM Talks Priorities, Ro Teimumu, Ratu...

Croz Walsh's Blog -- Fiji: The Way it Was, Is and Can Be: Wharf Heist, PM Talks Priorities, Ro Teimumu, Ratu...: "INSIDE JOB? Half a million dollars in $20 notes intended for the Reserve Bank were stolen from Kings wharf, Suva, last weekend.  The thieves..."

Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
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

Thursday, August 12, 2010

The Greater The Sin, The Greater The Saint- A Waning Crescent Of Forum Influence In The Pacific?

Croz Walsh on the latest Australian election debate regarding the issue of foreign policy initiatives during the Lowy hosted debate; highlighting the litany of promises politicians bring to the discussion, during the season of elections.

The excerpt of Croz's post.
AUSSIE OPPOSITION WOULD open negotiations with Fiji's military ruler Frank Bainimarama for electoral reform as a way of breaking the current diplomatic standoff between Suva. If this means they will respond to Fiji's requests for legal, technical and financial assistance, great; but if they are still talking about dates, what's new?

Foreign Affairs Minister Stephen Smith said there are three priorities when it comes to Fiji.

(1) "To continue to keep pressure on Fiji both bilaterally and through international institutions like the Commonwealth;"
(2)"We don't want to do things to hurt the people of Fiji, which is why we don't have trade sanctions and bans.
(3) "Thirdly, and most importantly, we do need to continue in conjunction with the international and regional community to find some way of opening up an effective dialogue with the Commodore to return Fiji to democracy." In other world they will continue to pursue the policy that has proved so successful over the past four years.

Meanwhile, Lowy Institute's Jenny Hayward-Jones thinks Australian-Fiji relations have deteriorated. “Other Pacific countries want to talk to Fiji, and Australia and New Zealand are the only ones maintaining this 'don't talk' policy,” she said.

Another Fiji specialist in Lowy, apart from Jones, comes from the "silly mid-wicket" quadrant of Lowy's "experts"- whose latest post reflects the same old "anglosphere" oversimplification, cultural ignorance and gubernatorial over reach.

The excerpt from Fergus Hanson's post:

Fiji and China: Besties?

by Fergus Hanson - 12 August 2010 2:38PM

In today's Age, Dan Flitton reports statements from Fiji's dictator Frank Bainimarama that he wants to ditch ties with Australia and New Zealand in favour of China.

While China tried to make a big splash in Fiji right after the coup, promising to deliver over $US160 million in grants and soft loans, the reality has been a little different.

After the 2006 coup, China came in strong to pre-empt Fiji making a switch to diplomatically recognising Taiwan. It handed Bainimarama US$5 million in cash, leading him to bring control over Chinese aid under his own immediate office.

But since then, China and Taiwan have agreed to an informal détente, ending their damaging diplomatic competition in the region for the time being. China also seems to have felt pressure not to be seen to be lavishing aid on a pariah government.

It has gone ahead with projects like the Nadarivatu hydro project, which had been previously scoped by the World Bank, but it has been slow to disperse the other aid promised.

The Fiji Government might claim this is because of disagreements over use of local labour or some such excuse, but surely it would have been in Bainimarama's interest to see infrastructure projects rolled out on a timely basis so he could at least demonstrate some benefits from his rule?

So is China the saviour that Fiji's strongman has been looking for?

The evidence suggests it isn't. China has been slow to unroll its aid to Fiji and there are reports it has knocked back proposals to do more. A review Mary Fifita and I are undertaking of China's aid pledges to the region in 2009 also suggests the flows to Fiji were minimal.

Frank's just huffing and bluffing.

Hanson's remarks seemed to have missed the large point of contention, which has been successfully underscored by Dev Nadkarni's opinion article. In comparison, the former was a more astute piece of observation as well as, authored from a person with more street cred than, Hanson and the usual suspects from Lowy.

Island Business columnist offers another view point.

The excerpt of Nadkarni article:

VIEWS FROM AUCKLAND

ENGAGING WITH FIJI: ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY LOST


Dev Nadkarni

Despite the unchanging rigidity of their isolationist approach towards Fiji, the political leaderships in Australia and New Zealand would now have all but realised that trying to keep Fiji out of the South Pacific regional equation was never going to be a tenable strategy.
This isolationist tack has come a complete cropper—it has achieved next to nothing. Suspension of bilateral ties, suspension from the Commonwealth, suspension from the Pacific Island Forum, travel bans, adverse travel advisories, besides all sorts of other measures have brought little change, if any, in Fiji.

Reams have been published on the lead up to the December 2006 military action, the regime and its style of functioning since then. And nearly all the ideas from politicians, academics and the media especially in New Zealand and Australia on dealing with the Fiji situation have centered on such isolationist strategies that have come up almost solely with punitive measures.
It is as though engagement can never be an option. That sort of rigidity is hard to explain. Especially so, when the writing was clearly on the wall that the strategy wasn’t working and the situation could not be remedied with that tack. No matter what the situation within Fiji, there ought to have been more efforts from the ANZAC nations to engage with it these past years.
Several windows of opportunity were lost, the latest one being last month.

With no recourse to any regional platform now that it has been suspended from the Pacific Island Forum, Fiji pushed hard for regional engagement through the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG)—the sub regional grouping of Melanesian countries that was to have been held in Fiji last month.
Fiji has alleged that the meet was scuttled by the ANZAC nations to predictable denials from both, as well as Vanuatu, which was supposed to have been prevailed upon not to attend the meet. The decidedly isolationist policy hitherto followed by Australia and New Zealand is what could well give credence to that allegation.

With the MSG meet not happening, Fiji thought up another ploy at engagement and invited regional leaders to the “Engaging with the Pacific” meeting just about a week later. Though several leaders, ministers and government representative attended, Australia, New Zealand – and Samoa – did not. And that was a huge opportunity missed by the Anzac nations.
Among other things, the Fiji regime presented its updated roadmap to the proposed 2014 election. The presence of political leaders from Australia and New Zealand or at least their representatives—no matter how junior—would have been extremely useful in that they would then have had an all new handle to hold the regime to account in the months ahead leading up to the 2014 election and the achievements of the stated milestones.

By not sending representatives and refusing to engage even tentatively at the most tenuous of levels, Australia and New Zealand have chosen to persist with their one pronged, unimaginative isolationist tack of trying to force Fiji into a tight corner with no room to manoeuvre.
Except that in this rapidly globalising world, there aren’t any corners anymore. If the traditional longstanding South has stonewalled it, a huge front from the rapidly growing, increasingly prosperous North has long opened up not only for Fiji but also for almost all other South Pacific nations.

Chinese and Korean investment in Fiji has grown tremendously in the past few years and with every passing month the country is further building up its ties with Asian countries. The ANZAC nations know it only too well that the region’s future—including their own—is tied up with Asia. New Zealand is the first western nation to have signed a Free Trade Agreement with China, which is now not only poised to become its largest trading partner but also wants to buy big into its dairy sector.

Australia and New Zealand’s rigid stand notwithstanding there is no denying that Fiji is the hub of the Pacific and is too significant geopolitically for their simplistic, almost childish, isolationist non-strategy. Their persistence in following this tack beggars belief and exposes their leaderships’ paralysis in trying to come up with more sensitive, open minded and communicative approaches.

The Melanesian brotherhood has realised this. And more than just the warm fraternal ‘wantok’ feeling, it is the hard and practical knowledge that they are sitting on a great deal of mineral wealth both inland and offshore that is at work here.

The potential of that offshore wealth is poised to grow with the redrawing of the continental shelf boundaries following changes to the United Nations Law of the Sea in the coming years.
The countries know that together they stand much to gain—and that explains why its leaders attended Fiji’s hurriedly called engagement gig with such alacrity. That message seems lost on the leadership of the ANZAC nations that has gone on record saying that there will be no change in their Fiji policy.

Fiji’s efforts to engage with the region despite being suspended from the Forum need to be actually seen as a positive step. The ANZAC nations need to set their hurt false pride aside and engage at whatever level—to begin with even informally, outside the ambit of recognised channels out of which Fiji has been excluded in any case.

Nothing can ever be achieved by non-engagement and isolationism especially in modern day geopolitics. Engagement and communication are key to diplomatic conflict resolution—particularly so when one of the parties sends all the right signals that it is game for it.
The flawed assumption that any engagement with the present Fijian dispensation would be illegitimate needs to change because inaction based on such assumption will go nowhere and negate any possibility and hope of addressing the situation.
The events that have taken place so far cannot be reversed and despite the ongoing controversial developments in Fiji, the regime has once again presented its plan for elections in 2014—which, according to media reports have been received positively by the leaders who attended the meet.

Attending that meet would have been a great opportunity to restart dialogue and work with Fiji to work towards an outcome that is best for its people and for the region as a whole.
Fiji should also realise that once it has made an undertaking or promise it must keep its end of the bargain. The writing on the wall is clear. Sticking to their isolationist strategy is not an option and staying rigid will undoubtedly have huge consequences for the geopolitics of the South Pacific region in the years to come.


Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
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