Denmark “trying to intimidate and stifle independent journalism.” - IFJ

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Sun Jul 09, 2006 12:13

The launch of the Privacy and Defamation laws by Michael Mc Dowell
In Dublin , the last day of the Dail- good introduction to the implications
of them in the Irish Times of yesterday (8/07/06).

I have not got a copy of the bill yet, and it is not progressing through
the stages as yet, but Mc Dowell introduced after much pressure
from the information commissioner the strongest and longest
data retention period in Europe and America.

Implications for freedoms and rights would require careful study
of the projected legislation, given the overall majority of the Government
and the weakness of the opposition. A good information campaign
regarding a step by step analysis of the implications of the joint bills
wd be a starting point. Though there is no independent corporate media
in Ireland and the broadcasting agenda is set by amongst others Denis O Brien.

by Seán Ryan Sun Jul 09, 2006 13:15

I will continue to write and publish. I will not be fettered by the whims of McDowell or any other traitor.

There are many fine journalists, who, for no financial concerns whatsoever, contribute to Indy.

Can we not get together, organise each other and financing, and print our own newspaper?

by Coilín Sun Jul 09, 2006 14:06

Thanks for that, Chris.

We already have such poor access to information about government decisions, I can hardly believe it can be made any more restrictive.

Great suggestion, Seán. I reckon a print edition of selected items from Indymedia would be a good way to proceed - at least to test the idea out.

Mind you, I wouldn't underestimate the work involved. One of the greatest advantages of Indymedia is that people have instant access to publish an article or comment, and this can't be done in the print medium. So there immediately arise issues of selection of items for publication, checking and quoting sources, establishing editorial line and so on. Not to mention financing, distribution, etc.

Best,
Coilín.

by Coilín Sun Jul 09, 2006 14:15

BTW, I find it ticklesome that Michael McDowell should try to pass any more defamation laws.

Would these defamation laws extend to comments he might make in the Dáil, calling people Nazis, trying to implicate John Gormley's kind of people in the Love Ulster riots, etc.?

I saw plenty of things flying through the air on 25 February, including an aluminium chair that landed in the PDs' office, but muesli was not among them.

Best,
Coilín.

by Seán Ryan Sun Jul 09, 2006 14:21

I'd never underestimate Indy, tis my bread and butter. I'd currently not allow any of my work to be published anywhere else in the media.

I think you've made an excellent suggestion Coilín. We ought to test the waters.

I'll be back in Dublin from tomorrow, for the Ploughshares miscarriage of justice - maybe we could meet and discuss this, others interested would be welcome also.

I'd advocate using the Indymedia ethos as a template, ie. no advertising.

I've lots of ideas in how to proceed in all this, as I'm sure yourself and others do.

We have the will and the ability, and to a degree, thanks to Indy, we have the momentum.

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Sun Jul 09, 2006 18:05

in the Times are crucial-

Hoping that the print idea is gender-open and welcoming to women activists
and contributors. As Indy is, though the ed panel is a little woman-light.....

The legislation has been published and should, before it goes through the Oireachtas
be available from Molesworth Street ( Government Publications)

also check out www.oireachtas.ie for the 7th of july, press releases from Dept of Justice.

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Sun Jul 09, 2006 18:18

http://www.ireland.com (irish times)

http://www.oireachtas.ie (tho, I couldn't find anything about the bill, except in the mainstream media)

a few months between publication/launch- committee stage, debate, amendments etc-

by Seán Ryan Sun Jul 09, 2006 20:00

Equality all the way here Chris. I'm hoping that you'll participate (as well as others) in both the formation and the creation of it.

The mainstream media is a failed experiment. It's time we had a go.

by Coilín Sun Jul 09, 2006 23:35

While I do think it´s a great idea, I have two reservations:

1. Firstly, I am first and last a peace and anti-war activist. While I have a great interest in many other issues, e.g. the environment, the status of women, the homeless, I am not likely to make a sustained effort to produce a newpaper or magazine, beyond possibly those aspects that bear directly on promoting peace and ending the war without end promised in the name of "war on terrorism".

2. While I often find the Irish newspapers and magazines disappointing and a bit boring, I don't think we should write them off. When I started doing media work in Denmark about four years ago, I was advised that there were certain issues that the old media wouldn't touch with a barge pole, but it turned out that some of the best Danish journalists would not just touch the big issues, they would bring them into their bosoms. And I think the same high standards can be realised in Ireland, despite the prevailing culture of official secrecy.

I think Indymedia and similar efforts in print format can be used as a lever to persuade the people in the old media to do their job properly, including:
1. covering the grassroots issues decently
2. listening with respect when well-qualified punters come and warn them that they have overlooked certain big issues
3. having the bottle to research and publish articles about controversial issues, such as vote fraud in the US presidential elections of 2004, and scientific scepticism about the fire hypothesis as the cause of the collapse of three (3) skyscrapers in New York on 11 September, 2001.

If we can publish stuff that the old media are afraid to touch, then that may be useful, but I would much prefer to persuade the professionals to get on with doing their job properly.

At one point last year, the foreign editor of a national Irish newspaper sent a reply to one of my e-mail messages, saying simply and without punctuation: "get a life". So I am to understand that, although I am a customer of that newspaper, I should mind my own business and not pester him to investigate the numbers that exist to document the serious issues of Bush fraud 2004? The thing is, if he would mind his business properly and publish articles covering the most important issues of our time, then I would go back to minding mine: reading his paper.

Sooner or later, despite this kind of contempt for the reader, I believe the old media will discover that, in a free market, it is savvy punters like ourselves who will determine what issues they must cover. If the old media don't cover the important issues, as identified by people like us, then they will lose readers and viewers to the wondrous world of Indymedia and other good sources on the Web, but if and when the papers do properly get to grips with the issues, then people like me will gladly buy what they are selling. After all, I would much rather read about the important issues printed to high production values in the comfort of my local cafe than to spend a couple of hours every week scratching around on the Web after the straight dope.

The old media may yet recognise me as a guru for telling them this.

But in the meantime, since they apparently don't yet want to know, there is room for a print-medium project such as you propose.

Best,
Coilín.

by Seán Ryan Mon Jul 10, 2006 01:13

I understand Coilín that you're anti-war, first and foremost. But I know you see and I hope you'll agree that lateral thinking and behaviour, can, has and will continue to push these issues. I'll not elaborate at this point - I'm very sure you know what I mean.

We've known each other a while, so I'm sure what I'm about to say will not drive a wedge between us.

I disagree with you on pushing the mainstream media.

We cannot push it to do its job. Simply because it is doing its job.

If we were the customers, like they pretend we are, it would be possible to force them.

Big business are the customers and owners of the media. The best we'll ever do is to get them to concede mere points - and then bury them and us later.

This is not to say that we do not possess some very fine and well meaning journalists - because we do. We can push them, we can embarass them and alienate them. But not to our credit.

This was why I emphasised 'no advertising' earlier. Our soul must never be for sale, or even look like it's for sale.

So... We've a difficult road ahead of us. Establishing a new kind of media, without commercial advertising will be a massive uphill battle. But I look at what we have been battling, and that we do so without resources and I feel nothing but confidence and solidarity. We have become the media - and it's time we recognised this and all the responsibilities it entails.

Scary shit huh?

Sláinte,
Seán

by Coilín Mon Jul 10, 2006 02:40

Thanks, Seán.

Lateral thinking is good. You may notice that it has left indelible marks on my CV.

(BTW, did you know there were two anti-war demonstrators outside Meteor in Henry Street, Dublin, on Saturday afternoon, protesting against Meteor's sponsorship of the Jeb Bush visit?)

While I acknowledge that the newspapers derive revenues from their advertisers, I would point out that these advertisers are trying to attract the attention of people like us. So if we stop reading the paper, they won't pay as much money for advertising in it. So who's calling the shots at the end of the day?

I don't know about the Irish papers, and if you can tell me how to get access to their circulation figures, I'd love to see them, but I can tell you that ALL of the Danish newspapers have shown steadily declining circulation figures since the end of 2001. Interestingly, this trend seemed to be sparked off by the demolition of a cluster of buildings in New York in September of that year, when people realised that they could get more rapid access to news on the Net.

I don't envy the old media people their jobs. I know the journalists work hard for few thanks, and while I think you've got a good idea, I agree that it's a difficult road ahead.

On a positive note, I am told that the Swedish libertarian socialist online news service, Yelah, has more readers than any of the left-wing newspapers in Sweden. See www.yelah.net.

The Yelah people in the Malmö office kindly hosted a media relations workshop led by myself at the Skåne Social Forum two years ago:
Medieaktivism och oberoende media
http://www.skanesocialforum.org/edited/program04.pdf

At the time, Yelah didn't do advertising, but was not rolling in cash. I advised them to consider doing some advertising, but to apply strict selection criteria and to monitor it carefully. Whether my comments had any influence, I don't know, as the collective also has other offices in Sweden, but I notice that they now have a few ads on the site: not very conspicuous, and they do seem to fit with the collective's political views: zapatista coffee, two local newspapers run by a media cooperative, a non-profit Web store selling Palestinian olive oil, etc.

As co-director of a small translation company, I don't necessarily think advertising is a bad thing.

And as this brings us back to the theme of lateral thinking, I'll leave it there for now. :-)

Best,
Coilín.

by Seán Ryan Mon Jul 10, 2006 03:17

The Devil is in the detail I guess.

I was confident that there would be at least one faithful demonstrater outside Meteor.

Since you've ended in lateral mode, I'll begin there.

This legislation that McDowell's bringing in, is not aimed directly at the mainstream media, it's aimed specifically at us. We are being told to 'shut up.' This is because he is afraid of us. And because of this, it is now that we should shout louder than ever before.

Circulation is an ethereal entity. I don't think looking at circulation in isolation from all of the wares of big business describes what I'm getting at.

Debt is increasing. This is the simple way of looking at the picture. People are more in debt than ever before. Indentured slavery is on the increase. Terror (pushed by the global war on terrorism - this isn't a new war - it's an ancient one) is the currency. Spend your terror - become a slave - but at least one will think one's self safer.

If we play the game, regardless as to whether we play by the rules - we still play the game.

Ok, enough of the lateral - me head is hurting lol.

Advertising:

If something is worth advertising, we should do it simply because it is worth doing - that's where the value is.

If we must be paid to advertise - then that which we advertise, is not worth advertising on its own merits. And we begin to lie.

;O)

Seán

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:08

One of the things that Indymedia does , is that it inherits politically from other protest movements historically) the art of the polemic, the pamphlet and the broadsheet. That is something which
has lacked in the left along with a certain unity of purpose. There are many different shades and opinions within the left, in Ireland at the moment and seeking to impose or organise a voice for it would fail unless it were truly open and provided a structure that is amenable to all voices. "A safe Place"
wherein community was the first principle of protest and the voice could be heard, whatever the intellectual impetus. Some of the stories that shine through on indy do so because they are prompted by community based eglatarianism, authenticity. This should sit a while and be thought about
throughly, looking for difficulties wherein none exsist is promblematical. As to strictures, these are self-imposed by seeing problems where few exist implies limitation . Provision, is crucial and
I think engagement on the issue of vocal freedom should necessarily take time and consultation-
ie knee-jerk reaction is not necessarily a good reaction.

Interesting research wd include picking up the legislations from (largely 2002-2006) and disseminating them to people , the opposition lacks the ability to communicate to people the exact repercussion that laws, such as SIB, sex laws, citizenship, Nice2, monuments, roads, privacy and defamtion have on the individual. and take it from there. some community groups already organise seminars and information on how these laws effect them, and they are way ahead. Links between the communities involved in this work is important too. As well as the communities that do not live in specific locals such as Tara, Rossport, Bleachlough, Bantry, there are scattered voiceless communiities, alienated from the systemisation which we experience: Women, asylum seekers,
children, refugees,.

Other noteworthy news today : the kids in the hunger-strike were housed in a centre unfit for human habitation (traumatised further) and the Supreme Court is about to release the reasons why Mister A
was re-incarcerated) this happened concurrently with the sex-law debate, and was indeed announced during the Seanad Debate.

by Coilín Tue Jul 11, 2006 00:09

Chris, thanks for the insights.

Seán, I can only conclude with an old medical proverb: Suck it and see. I think a print edition of selected items from Indymedia with references back to the online version might meet some of the challenges Chris mentions, and might have a revolutionary impact on the Irish print media. Consider a collaboration with the folks at Indymedia to produce neatly formatted selections of items, ready for printing into a grassroots magazine wherever you happen to be?

Returning to the Grevil case, I had one of my elves translate the analysis below many weeks ago, but it's only becoming more topical as the trial of the Danish journalists and editor approach.

Best,
Coilín.

Don't shoot the messenger

Kristeligt Dagblad 20 May 2006, page 13

SATURDAY REFLECTIONS: The intelligence services must go back to the basics for good intelligence work: if there is any doubt about the value of the information, this must be made crystal-clear to the decision-makers. Sending journalists to prison for pointing out this simple fact is wrong.

By Frank Esmann

Two journalists from Berlingske Tidende and the newspaper's editor-in-chief have now been charged in what we might call the Defence Intelligence Service affair. The reason is that, in a number of articles, the newspaper published information from the Defence Intelligence Service as to whether the now deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. He was not, and there is now a suspicion throughout the western world that our spies were well aware of this, but allowed themselves to be intimidated by war-mongering politicians into misinterpreting the material.

This is not merely a national matter. The charge against editor-in-chief Niels Lunde brings the number of European journalists and editors caught up in the whirlwind of "The Great Iraqi Manoeuvre of Mass Distraction" to eight. An important but unsurprising fact is that the only offence these journalists committed was to seek the truth about the prelude to the so-called war against international terror, in connection with disinformation about WMD, Iraq and Iran’s alleged links to Al-Qaeda, the CIA’s secret prisons, etc.

For this, they are now to be punished. Editor-in-chief Niels Lunde ... is happy to finally be in the dock, which is understandable. He has written that Berlingske Tidende "would do the same again" in similar circumstances, which illustrates just how seriously Berlingske Tidende is taking this matter, and indicates the degree of solidarity among the staff of the paper.

The journalists have been charged under legislation which is used to punish people for passing on information in a manner which endangers national security and is devoid of a clear public interest. This is absurd. It is the war in Iraq, not the information on how it started, that threatens national security. Denmark now possesses its highest level of anti-terrorist measures ever, and information about how this situation came about was clearly in the public interest when it was published. At the time, Berlingske Tidende gave editorial support to the government's decision to participate in the war, but sought at the same time correct information regarding the basis for the decision. In doing so, the newspaper was serving its readership, in accordance with the ideals upon which it was founded. This week, the absurdity reached its hitherto highest point when the chairman of the Danish Parliament's legal affairs committee, Peter Skaarup, stated in Berlingske Tidende that the man who leaked the information, Frank Grevil, was "a villain who deserved his punishment", while at the same time declaring that the information revealed did not endanger national security!

I understand that this may turn out to be irrelevant in a legal sense; one could even argue that, given the way the legislation is formulated, it was correct to bring charges against these three persons. Neither will a sentence necessarily be incorrect in the legal sense. This does not alter the fact that a conviction would turn the three into martyrs and lead to a demand for a change in the law - an outcome that cynics and opportunists among the opponents to the war would love to see.

The question, however, remains: did the articles in Berlingske Tidende destroy the Defence Intelligence Service’s future possibilities for drawing upon information supplied by friendly foreign intelligence agencies? This is doubtful, especially if it turns out that the reports on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and links with Al-Qaeda were doctored and perhaps erroneous from the start. These services do not employ idiots. They are well aware of what went wrong. And they are also asking the question: how does it benefit a nation to draw upon intelligence which is misleading and possibly incorrect? The suspicion was there, after all. The two Berlingske Tidende journalists did not produce their questions out of thin air: they were helped along by Frank Grevil and by numerous articles in American and British media. In evaluating what is right and what is one’s duty in this matter, the judge should take account of the entire case, including how the fundamental intelligence on Saddam's supposed weapons of mass destruction was obtained, processed and presented for re-use by the Defence Intelligence Service. When that is done, we will see whether it would have been in the interests of the nation for Berlingske Tidende to remain silent when Frank "Whistleblower" Grevil came along.

Frank Esmann is a journalist and author.

English translation by Billy O'Shea: http://www.oshea.dk/