What the cuts mean for British journaliam

If you ever imagined that, over time, British journalism would inevitably adjust to the society it serves by becoming less white and less middle class, now is probably the time to abandon that idea.

For a few exciting years it looked as though improvement might be on the way, but sharp increases in university fees will surely put paid to that. Like it or not, for at least another generation your news and current affairs will continue to come to you through that white, middle-class filter.

The window of hope that is now closing was opened by the universities, which over the past 20 years quietly took over responsibility for most journalism education after the big news organisations, national and regional, cut down or shut down their training schemes to save money.

At first the media studies departments did the teaching, but now universities teach journalism as a subject in its own right, often at both undergraduate and MA levels. This transformation has been almost entirely state-funded, which means the news industry pulled off the clever trick of nationalising its own training.

But if this change has given employers a free, trained talent pool (they ask for their applicants to be “newsroom-ready”, like so many supermarket chickens), it has also had the potential to bring valuable long-term change to the industry.

For one thing, universities teach students to think about journalism as well as do it; they teach about the ethics, responsibilities, history, politics and social function of the job – never high priorities when the industry was training its own. Call me an idealist, but I think that could only improve the news culture in this country.

For another, the universities have operated open, transparent recruitment and admissions policies which gave applicants from ethnic minorities and from poorer backgrounds a far better chance than before of getting an education in journalism.

There are drawbacks. Experience of the workplace is important in journalism education, as was recognised in the old sandwich courses. Universities can’t provide that themselves, or at least they can’t provide enough of it, and the result is the journalism work experience phenomenon, a powerful filter that halts the progress of many who can’t afford to work for several months for no pay.

None the less, university journalism departments have been quietly turning out able, independent-minded, thoughtful graduates who, though they are by no means a perfect reflection of the society they live in, collectively reflect it far, far better than the industry itself does. In other words, more people from poor backgrounds, more people from the ethnic minorities, more disabled people, more women…

The idealist in me fondly imagines this generation, over time, moving through the system and helping to change the way that British society sees and understands itself.

But a big hike in university fees, combined with other effects of the reforms proposed by the government and Lord Browne, will cut this precious experiment short.

Of all the professions, journalism is surely among the most vulnerable when it comes to the kind of touch cost-benefit analysis that school leavers and parents will have to do in a world of higher fees. Undeniably, the news industry is in existential crisis: yes, it offers thrilling new possibilities, but it is distinctly short on security.

In this environment, whatever Vince Cable and Nick Clegg may say, poorer students — by which I mean students who are not middle class — are more likely to back away than risk the big debts that will accompany a journalism degree.

The next generation of journalists, therefore, will probably have just the same social profile as the generation currently supplying us with news, even though the country around us will have changed.

It reminds me of those generals in the Crimean War whose mindset equipped them to fight only in the way that Wellington had fought Napoleon 40 years earlier. They made a terrible hash of it.

Brian Cathcart is professor of journalism at Kingston University London.

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Rupert Murdoch uses Margaret Thatcher lecture for a display of power

This article appears in Media Guardian

The gathered clan laughed nervously when Lord Saatchi, their host, declared that Britons now spent more on Sky TV subscriptions than they did on bread. When the other man on the stage smiled, the audience relaxed. To understand Rupert Murdoch‘s grip on British public life it is instructive to see the body language when the elite comes together. I counted at least five Conservative cabinet ministers among the great and good in the ornate surroundings of Lancaster House for the inaugural Margaret Thatcher lecture on Thursday.

The timing was equally pertinent. Murdoch’s speech, entitled Free Markets and Free Minds, came the day after the Comprehensive Spending Review that sought not just to tackle the budget deficit but to complete Thatcher’s unfinished business of reducing the size of the state and unleashing the private sector.

Concerns over Thatcher’s health could not mask a celebratory mood among News Corporation executives who, in just a matter of days, have seen the BBC’s budget cut by 16% and Ofcom denuded of staff.

Murdoch, even now, continues to portray himself as the rebel with a cause. “I am something of a parvenu,” he said. At each step of the way, he had taken on vested interests – whether trade unions at Wapping or other “institutions hungry for power at the expense of ordinary citizens”. He argued that technological change was leading to a new “democracy … from the bottom up”. A free society, he said, “required an independent press: turbulent, inquiring, bustling and free. That’s why our journalism is hard-driving and questioning of authority. And so are our journalists.”

Such a laudable commitment to free expression sits uneasily with his company’s dealings in countries with dubious civil liberties records, notably China, where his business interests invariably trump journalistic inquiry.

Murdoch suggested that traditional mediated journalism remained the only serious constraint on elites. “It would certainly serve the interests of the powerful if professional journalists were muted – or replaced as navigators in our society by bloggers and bloviators.” Bloggers could play a “social” role but this had little to do with uncovering facts. In saying this, Murdoch was doing more than justifying the Times’ and Sunday Times’ internet paywall. He appeared to be echoing the views of the New Yorker columnist Malcolm Gladwell, and others who argue that social media and blogs are not speaking truth to power in the way their advocates proclaim.

When tackling the most controversial areas, Murdoch moved from unequivocal statement to hints. The words “Andy” and “Coulson” came immediately to mind when he stated: “Often I have cause to celebrate editorial endeavour. Occasionally I have cause for regret. Let me be clear: we will vigorously pursue the truth – and we will not tolerate wrongdoing.” One News Corp executive suggested afterwards that this was the closest Murdoch had come, and would come, to apologising for the phone-hacking affair.

The official line is that no senior figure knew about the practice at the News of the World. Coulson, who is now director of communications in Downing Street, resigned as the editor when the paper’s former royal editor, Clive Goodman, was jailed in January 2007. Intriguingly, a senior Murdoch executive told me after the speech: “If Coulson hadn’t quit, he would have been fired”. If that is the case, why do they continue to insist publicly that Coulson had done nothing wrong and had fallen on his sword only to protect the reputation of the company?

The other unspoken drama in the room was Murdoch’s bid to take full control of BSkyB and the campaign of resistance by an alliance of newspaper editors and the BBC, who are urging Vince Cable to block the deal.

Murdoch said the energy of the iconoclastic and unconventional should not be curbed, adding: “When the upstart is too successful, somehow the old interests surface, and restrictions on growth are proposed or imposed. That’s an issue for my company.”

The assembled ministers will have taken note. Just as the Labour government kowtowed at every turn, so the coalition – and Cable in particular – will be scrutinised closely by News Corp to ensure that it does the decent thing.

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Appeal granted in Sikh holy man libel case

Just back from the High Court, where Lady Justice Smith granted Indian national His Holiness Sant Baba Jeet Singh ji Maharaj the right to appeal in his libel case against journalist Hardeep Singh.

The case centres on an article that Singh wrote in August 2007 for the Sikh Times, a British newspaper, in which he claimed that Jeet Singh was an “accused Cult leader” whose teachings were not in line with mainstream Sikh doctrine. The article also connected his followers with conflict in UK temples. The claimant —a self proclaimed “Holy Man” — has never visited the United Kingdom.

In May 2010 a High Court judge threw out the case brought against freelance British journalist Hardeep Singh. Mr Justice Eady ruled for a permanent stay with no right to appeal. Eady’s judgment held that secular courts should not make a judgment on a religious dispute.

Today’s application for appeal was granted on the limited basis that there are arguable issues in Singh’s article that do not tread on the forbidden area of doctrinal dispute.

The appellant had previously made a written application for appeal that was refused by the Rt Hon Lord Justice Laws on the 30 July 2010.

UPDATE: Press release from the Libel Reform Campaign

Journalist faces £1 million bill in libel action – Appeal allowed in His Holiness vs Singh case

At the High Court in London this morning, Lady Justice Smith granted Indian national His Holiness Sant Baba Jeet Singh ji Maharaj the right to appeal in his libel case against British journalist Hardeep Singh. The case will now go before three judges at the Court of Appeal to decide whether it should proceed to a full trial.

Hardeep Singh said: “I’ve been fighting this case for three years already; this adds a minimum of another six months of torment. If I lose, it will cost me over £1 million, let alone my costs so far and a tenth of my life. This feels like the biggest game of poker you can possibly play: all for exercising my right to free expression.”

He added: “I’m hoping the government take reform of our libel laws seriously and we get a robust bill in the New Year.”

Mike Harris from Index on Censorship said: “When individuals like Hardeep Singh risk £1m and bankruptcy all for a single newspaper article, it really hits home how important libel reform is. I hope the government backs the Libel Reform campaign’s call for wholesale reform of our libel laws so free speech is protected.”

Síle Lane from Sense About Science said: ‘Change in the libel laws cannot come soon enough. Singh’s case highlights that the laws as they stand are unfair, unduly costly, out of date and against the public interest. Until we have a clear, strong public interest defence against libel actions writers, bloggers, NGOs and journalists will be forced to back down in the face of threats.’

1. The case centres on an article that Hardeep Singh wrote in August 2007 for the Sikh Times, a British newspaper, in which he claimed that Jeet Singh was an “accused Cult leader” whose teachings were not in line with mainstream Sikh doctrine. In May 2010 Mr Justice Eady threw the case out with no right to appeal. Eady’s judgment held that secular courts should not make a judgment on a religious dispute. Today’s application for appeal was granted on the limited basis that there are arguable issues in Singh’s article that do not tread on the forbidden area of doctrinal dispute. The appellant had previously made a written application for appeal that was refused by the Rt Hon Lord Justice Laws on the 30 July 2010.

The Libel Reform Campaign is being run by a coalition of three charities English PEN (Registered charity no. 1125610), Index on Censorship (Registered charity no. 325003) and Sense About Science (Registered charity no. 1101114). Together, the campaign is calling for parliamentary reform of the current libel laws, to make the law fairer to defendants and people without influence and resources, and to support and encourage the voices of citizen critics.

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Pot and kettle, Mr Mugabe

Robert Mugabe: Guardian of electoral integrity. You heard it here first.

Sadly, this new found democratic fervour does not extend itself to Zimbabwe’s next election — just last week the president branded the current power-sharing agreement “foolish and stupid”. Instead, Mugabe’s allies are outraged by the African version of Big Brother. Following the Zimbabwean contestant’s fall at the final hurdle, Mugabe’s office demanded recordings of the show. Mugabe’s nephew, Phillip Chiyangwa, and other loyalists have declared that the voting was not “free and fair” and the Africa-wide voting system by mobile phone was blasted as a “disgrace”.

Fortunately, the injustice done by the Nigerian winner to 24-year-old Munyaradzi Chidzonga, who often appeared draped in the Zimbabwean flag and regularly expressed a desire to meet Mugabe, has been redressed. On his return to Harare and a hero’s welcome, Chidzonga received a high profile meeting with his supportive president and $300,000 raised in donations.

Mugabe and his Zanu-PF party have never been short of audacity, crushing expressions of dissent in everything from elections to cricket. We should not be surprised at this profession of respect for a fair franchise though. Slapstick hypocrisy appears the norm for Mugabe and his party.

The Big Brother incident mirrors Zanu-PF’s pathological aversion to the choices of the populace, especially when the outcome proves inexpedient. It will take quite a shift before we witness a magnanimous departure and hear the words, “Robert, you have been evicted. Please leave the building.”

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

“If you ask me what could irritate the authorities about the Russian NEWSWEEK’s coverage, I will tell you: everything”

German publishers Axel Springer has announced the closure of Russian Newsweek, one of the few independent national current affairs publications left in the country.

Axel Springer say the move is solely commercial, but some at Russian Newsweek feel that politics has played a part, with authorities resenting the magazine’s staff going about their business of investigating and reporting stories:

“If you ask me what could irritate the authorities about the Russian NEWSWEEK’s coverage, I will tell you: everything,” says Mikhail Zygar, NEWSWEEK RUSSIA’s news editor.

One of NEWSWEEK RUSSIA’s biggest scoops—and one that earned it the lasting enmity of at least one powerful faction in the Kremlin—was about the family origins of chief ideologue and deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov. In 2005 the magazine revealed that his father, Andarbek Danilbekovich Dudayev, was an ethnic Chechen, and that Surkov had taken steps to obscure his family origins. “Surkov was angry when we published our story from Chechnya with photographs of his Chechen family,” says Leonid Parfenov, who was editor of NEWSWEEK RUSSIA at the time. “I had to explain to him that he could not keep his Chechen background secret.”

Read the rest here

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Ups and downs: World Press Freedom Index 2010

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) published its ninth annual World Press Freedom Index today, with a mixed bag of what secretary-general Jean François Julliard calls “welcome surprises” and “sombre realities”.

Six countries, all in Europe, share the top spot this year — Finland, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland — described as the “engines of press freedom”. But over half of the European Union’s member states lie outside the top 20, with some significantly lower entries, such as Romania in 52nd place and Greece and Bulgaria tied at 70th. The report expresses grave concerns that the EU will lose its status as world leader on human rights issues if so many of its members continue to fall down the rankings.

The edges of Europe fared particularly badly this year; Ukraine (131st) and Turkey (138th) have fallen to “historically low” rankings, and despite a rise of 13 places, Russia remains in the worst 25 per cent of countries at 140th. It ranks lower than Zimbabwe, which continues to make steady — albeit fragile — progress, rising to 123rd.

At the very bottom of the table lie Eritrea, North Korea and Turkmenistan, as they have done since the index first began in 2002. Along with Yemen, China, Sudan, Syria, Burma and Iran, they makes up the group of worst offenders, characterised by “persecution of the media” and a “complete lack of news and information”. RSF says it is getting harder and harder to distinguish between these lowest ten countries, who continue to deteriorate. There are particular fears about the situation for journalists in Burma ahead of next month’s parliamentary election.

Another country creating cause for concern in the run-up to elections is Azerbaijan, falling six places to 152nd. Index on Censorship recently joined other organisations in a visit to Baku to assess the health of the country’s media. You can read about their findings in a joint mission report, ‘Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan’s Deteriorating Media Environment’, launching this Thursday, 28 October, 6.30 pm, at the Free Word Centre. Belarus, another country on which Index is campaigning, languishes at 154th.

It is worth noting, though, that relative press freedom rankings can only tell so much. Cuba, for example, has risen out of the bottom 20 countries for the first time, partly thanks to its release of 14 journalists and 22 activists this summer, but journalists still face censorship and repression “on a daily basis”. Similarly, countries such as South Korea and Gabon have climbed more than 20 places, only to return to the position they held before a particularly bad 2009. It seems, then, that the struggle for press freedom across the world must continue to be a “battle of vigilance”.

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Middle East: A bad month for media freedom

It’s not going well for maverick, boundary-pushing journalists this month.

In Morocco edgy magazine Nichane closed its doors, with the publisher claiming it was the victim of an advertising boycott ordered by the royal palace.

In Syria, a young female blogger who was mysteriously arrested 10 months ago, has officially been accused of being a spy for an unnamed foreign power. It remains unclear whether Tal al-Mallohi’s arrest or the espionage accusation has anything to do with her  blogging activity.

Several journalists are facing jail time in Turkey, and the murder of a prominent journalist three years ago remains unresolved with no convictions.

In Saudi Arabia, the religious police have ominously started training on how to monitor Facebook, Twitter and other digital forms of social media. The Saudis, along with fellow Gulf monarchy the United Arab Emirates, continue to block the Blackberry messaging service.

Finally in Egypt Al-Dostour newspaper publisher Ibrahim Eissa, Egypt’s best and most provocative political columnist,  was abruptly pushed out of his job and potentially blackballed.

There are two national Egyptian elections on the horizon — parliamentary next month and a crucial presidential vote next year. The authorities seem to be tightening the screws in preparation. The latest sign: new restrictions on SMS text messaging, which is frequently used as a mobilisation tool by activists. Independent newspaper Al Masry Al Youm (disclosure, I work for its English language edition) speculated that the new restrictions would,

hinder the logistical capabilities of Egypt’s political opposition, which has come to depend on SMS messaging to mobilise supporters for public protests and demonstrations.

A government spokesman’s priceless response? “We are not making life difficult. We are making life organized, that is all.

The very next day, the exact same telecommunications regulatory agency struck again. This time it moved to establish firmer control over all live television news broadcasts from Egypt.

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Leading activists keep the pressure on the Chinese leadership

More than 100 Chinese professors, writers, lawyers and activists sign an open letter which calls on the government to release nobel prize winner Liu Xiaobo

关于刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖的声明

On Liu Xiaobo and the Nobel Peace Prize

The awarding of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese citizen, has drawn strong reactions both inside and outside China. This is a major event in modern Chinese history. It offers the prospect of a significant new advance for Chinese society in its peaceful transition toward democracy and constitutional government. In a spirit of responsibility toward China’s history and the promise in its future, we the undersigned wish to make these points:

1. The decision of the Nobel Committee to award this year’s prize to Liu Xiaobo is in full conformity with the principles of the prize and the criteria for its bestowal. In today’s world, peace is closely connected with human rights. Deprivation and devastation of life happens not only on battlefields in wars between nations; it also happens within single nations when tyrannical governments employ violence and abuse law. The praise that we have seen from around the world for the decision to award this year’s prize to a representative of China’s human rights movement shows what a wise and timely decision it was.

2. Liu Xiaobo is a splendid choice for the Nobel Peace Prize. He has consistently advocated non-violence in his quest to protect human rights and has confronted social injustice by arguing from reason. He has persevered in pursuing the goals of democracy and constitutional government and has set aside anger even toward those who persecute him. These virtues put his qualifications for the prize beyond doubt, and his actions and convictions can, in addition, serve as models for others in how to resolve political and social conflict.

3. In the days since the announcement of his prize, leaders in many nations, regions, and major world organisations have called upon the Chinese authorities to release Liu Xiaobo. We agree. At the same time we call upon the authorities to release all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience who are in detention for reasons such as their speech, their political views, or their religious beliefs. We ask that legal procedures aimed at freeing Liu Xiaobo be undertaken without delay, and that Liu and his wife be permitted to travel to Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize.

4. Upon hearing the news of Liu Xiaobo’s prize, citizens at several locations in China gathered at restaurants to share their excitement over food and wine, and to hold discussions, display banners, and distribute notices. Normal and healthy as these activities were, they met with harassment and repression from police. Some of the participants were interrogated, threatened, and escorted home; others were detained; still others, including Liu Xiaobo’s wife Liu Xia, have been placed under house arrest and held incommunicado. We call upon the police to cease these illegal actions forthwith and to immediately release the people who have been illegally detained.

5. We call upon the Chinese authorities to approach Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel Prize with realism and reason. They should take note of the responses to the prize inside and outside China and see in these responses the currents in world thinking as well as the underlying preferences of our fellow citizens. China should join the mainstream of civilized humanity by embracing universal values. Such is the only route to becoming a “great nation” that is capable of playing a positive and responsible role on the world stage. We are convinced that any signs of improvement or goodwill from the government and its leaders will be met with understanding and support from the Chinese people and will be effective in moving Chinese society in a peaceful direction.

6. We call upon the Chinese authorities to make good on their oft-repeated promise to reform the political system. In a recent series of speeches, Premier Wen Jiabao has intimated a strong desire to promote political reform. We are ready to engage actively in such an effort. We expect our government to uphold the constitution of The People’s Republic of China as well as the Charter of the United Nations and other international agreements to which it has subscribed. This will require it to guarantee the rights of Chinese citizens as they work to bring about peaceful transition toward a society that will be, in fact and not just in name, a democracy and a nation of laws.

The signatories included two writers who have written for Index in recent years, Tibetan poet Woeser and journalist Li Datong

徐友渔(北京,学者)
郝建 (北京,学者)
崔卫平(北京,学者)
贾葭 (北京,专栏作家)
何方 (北京,学者)
张祖桦 (北京,宪政学者)
戴晴 (北京,学者)
资中筠(北京,学者)
沙叶新(上海,回族剧作家)
张博树(北京,学者)
周舵 (北京,学者)
夏业良(北京,学者)
于浩成(北京,学者)
王力雄(北京,作家 )
唯色 ( 西藏,作家)
滕彪 (北京,学者)
莫之许(北京,自由撰稿人)
蒋亶文(上海,作家)
马亚莲(上海,人权捍卫者)
温克坚(杭州,自由撰稿人)
钱跃君(工学博士,德国《欧华导报》主编)
浦志强(北京,律师 被限制人身自由中)
程益中(北京,出版人)
梁文道(香港,媒体人)
李大同(北京,学者)
梁晓燕(北京,编辑)
许医农(北京,编辑)
傅国涌(杭州,学者)
丁东 (北京,学者)
艾晓明(广州,学者)
邢小群(北京,学者)
宋以敏(北京,学者)
王东成(北京,学者)
徐岱 (杭州,学者)
丘延亮 (台北,副研究员 中央研究院民族学研究所)
王康 (重庆,学者)
徐贲 (北京,学者)
邓晓芒(武汉,学者)
叶匡正(北京,诗人)
朱日坤(北京,独立电影人)
张闳 (上海,学者)
老村 (北京,作家)
周枫 (北京,学者)
蔡甘铨(香港,媒体人)
林盈志(台湾,编辑)
雷永生 (北京,学者)
杨富芳(北京,教师)
徐敬亚(海南,诗人)
王小妮(海南,诗人)
吕频 (北京,妇女权利工作者)
郑海天(北京,离休编辑)
程迺欣(北京,离休编辑)
岳建一(北京,学者)
郭于华(北京,学者)
姚大力(上海,学者)
杨伟中(台湾,媒体人)
周保松(香港,学者)
徐晓 (北京,编辑)
朱正琳(北京,学者)
郑也夫(北京,学者)
石涛 (北京,企业管理者)
朴抱一(上海,媒体人)
郑褚 (成都,媒体人)
花落去(北京,媒体人)
姚博 (北京,作家)
杜婷 (香港,媒体人)
何杨 (北京,独立纪录片制作人)
华泽 (北京,纪录片导演)
张辉 (北京,德先生研究所负责人)
野渡 (广州,作家)
游精佑(福建,工程师)
吴华英(福建,人权捍卫者)
苏雨桐(德国,媒体人)
杨海 (西安,民间学者)
黎雄兵(北京,律师)
倪玉兰(北京,维权律师)
刘巍 (北京,维权律师)
李和平(北京,律师)
金光鸿(北京,律师)
李金星(北京,律师)
唐吉田(北京,律师)
陆以诺(上海,公民 基督徒)

黄燕明 (贵州,人权捍卫者)
郑创添(广东,公民)
刘强本(北京,公民)
董继勤(北京,人权捍卫者)
周洪玉(福建,公民)
吴玉堂(福建,公民)
魏英 (福建,人权捍卫者)
卓友桂(福建,人权捍卫者)
林碧仙(福建,人权捍卫者)
李华 (北京,自由职业)
任嘉祺(北京,诗人)
张永攀(北京,由撰稿人)
王德邦(广西,人权捍卫者)
张居正(河南,人权捍卫者)
韩颖 (北京,人权捍卫者)

杨树枝(北京,人权捍卫者)
杨树萍(北京,人权捍卫者)
王炜 (山东,公民)
游豫平(福州,大学生)
王立红(哈尔滨,自由职业)
门延文(北京,市民)
王我 (北京,纪录片导演)
刘沙沙(北京,人权活动人士)
胡杰 (南京,纪录片导演)
王超 (北京,电影导演)
徐娟 (德国,媒体工作者)
唐晓渡(北京,评论家)
魏海田(内蒙古,新闻记者)
张真 (纽约,学者)
安替(北京,媒体人)
萨冲 (意大利, 工程师)
郭小林(北京 , 诗人)
王晓鲁(北京,媒体人)

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Fundamental differences?

The ever-readable Salil Tripathi, in his column in India’s Mint, points us to a disturbing story in Mumbai. The university there has withdrawn a book by renowned author Rohinton Mistry after a member of the right-wing Hindu Shiv Sena group complained it was offensive to his party.

…Rajan Waulkar, vice-chancellor of Mumbai University became the poster child of acquiescence to bullying when he hastily withdrew Mistry’s acclaimed previous novel Such A Long Journeyusing his emergency powers, after an undergraduate student aspiring for political leadership of the Shiv Sena’s youth wing, the Bharatiya Vidyarthi Sena, complained that the book made disparaging remarks against his party and his people. His claim to lead the youth wing rests on what he considers his inherent birthright—he is born in the Thackeray family.

Such A Long Journey is a thoughtful narrative about the scarcity-prone India at the cusp of the Bangladesh war of 1971, when Gustad Noble, a bank clerk, gets enmeshed in a conspiracy to assist the Mukti Bahini, the India-backed armed group fighting for Bangladesh’s freedom. He is brought to the shadowy world by an old acquaintance who is an intelligence officer, loosely based on the life of Rustom Nagarwala, who allegedly imitated prime minister Indira Gandhi’s voice and got a State Bank of India officer to hand him Rs. 60 lakh after the phone call, ostensibly for Bangladesh’s liberation.

The junior-most Thackeray’s complaint is vague, and political analysts might see his grandstanding as part of his desire (and his father Uddhav’s desire) to regain political ground, ever since Uddhav’s bête noire, his cousin Raj Thackeray, began wolfing down the Shiv Sena’s jhunka bhakar through his party, the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena.

Salil points out an uncomfortable truth for fundamentalists:

Hindu nationalists get riled when they are compared with Muslim leaders declaring fatwas. But the difference between those who want Such A Long Journey or Breathless in Bombay banned and the clerics who hate Rushdie—and the cartoonists of Jyllands-Posten—is marginal. Their threats chill free speech.

Read the full article here

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

BSkyB: Could Murdoch sack Andy Coulson?

Andy Coulson must be scared. Not of the Guardian, which to date has failed to root him out of his job in Downing Street. And not of David Cameron, who shows no inclination to sack him. No, Coulson must be scared that his old boss Rupert Murdoch will pull the rug out from underneath him.

Murdoch wants, very much, to buy the whole of BSkyB so that he can move a big step closer to monopoly control of the British media market, and Coulson, almost accidentally, is getting in the way.

Any day now, Murdoch could pick up the phone in New York and ask Cameron (instruct him?) to ditch his most senior media adviser. No doubt News Corp would offer the former News of the World editor a nice job in compensation, but it would be the end of Coulson’s promising career as the smarter, slicker version of Alastair Campbell.

He is an embarrassment to the old man because the never-ending scandal of phone hacking keeps reminding us just how depraved and sinister the Murdoch empire can be. And this is happening at a moment when Murdoch wants us all to think of him as an inspiring business genius, a victim of Establishment snobbery and the man who just gives viewers what they want.

Murdoch employees illegally hacked the voicemails of the future king of this country, as well as dozens or more likely hundreds of other people very prominent in our public life. Reported targets include Cabinet ministers, a celebrity agent, a top sports official, a supermodel and at least one senior police officer — not to mention, perhaps most chillingly, ordinary members of the public who are victims of crime.

And as the revelations tumble out and the lawsuits against Murdoch’s company stack up, something even more significant is happening. People are talking more and more about his extraordinary power, and the fear he can spread.

That was the most potent message to come out of Peter Oborne’s Dispatches programme on the scandal last week. There were complaints afterwards that the key new witness casting doubt on Coulson’s I-knew-nothing defence was anonymous, but they missed the point: as Oborne made clear, the systematic need for anonymity provided eloquent proof of how frightened people are. Grassing on the Murdoch empire looks uncomfortably similar to grassing on the IRA.

Tom Watson MP, in a remarkable speech about phone-hacking to the Commons last month, sent the same message: “The barons of the media, with their red-topped assassins, are the biggest beasts in the modern jungle. They have no predators; they are untouchable. They laugh at the law; they sneer at parliament. They have the power to hurt us, and they do, with gusto and precision, with joy and criminality. Prime ministers quail before them, and that is how they like it.”

And have a look at the story of Michael Wolff, who had the nerve to write a critical biography of Murdoch. We probably wouldn’t have read that if it were not for phone-hacking.

Right now, when Murdoch has all his other ducks in a row for the total takeover of BSkyB — the Tories owe him for his papers’ election support; Ofcom is being neutered; the BBC is being kicked from pillar to post — he emphatically does not want to be making headlines as the monstrous bogey man of British public life.

So one day soon he may decide that Coulson, in principle a terrific Murdoch asset at the heart of British government, is in fact a liability. He may calculate that if Coulson went, the heat would go out of the phone-hacking scandal and those nasty headlines about ruthless, bully-boy News International would fade away.

And if that day comes, does anyone doubt that one phone call to Number 10 would settle the matter?

http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/digg_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/reddit_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/stumbleupon_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/delicious_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/furl_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/newsvine_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/technorati_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/google_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/facebook_24.png http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/plugins/sociofluid/images/twitter_24.png

Bad Behavior has blocked 3585 access attempts in the last 7 days.