• (20+) Claude Angeli : « Aucun pouvoir ne résiste à la tentation d’aller chercher les sources des journalistes » - Libération
    https://www.liberation.fr/france/2019/08/16/claude-angeli-aucun-pouvoir-ne-resiste-a-la-tentation-d-aller-chercher-le

    Figure de l’investigation au « Canard enchaîné », Claude Angeli revient sur le secret des sources, pilier de la profession, et sur ceux qui l’ont toujours attaqué.

    #liberté #presse

  • Why we’re rethinking the images we use for our climate journalism | Environment | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/18/guardian-climate-pledge-2019-images-pictures-guidelines
    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/afe269d9ec06740a551d25fa8d8e07c902892cd2/0_260_4000_2400/master/4000.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&overlay-ali

    Guardian picture editor Fiona Shields explains why we are going to be using fewer polar bears and more people to illustrate our coverage of the climate emergency

    #photographie #iconographie #presse

  • Droit d’informer : Nous ne devons pas nous habituer aux intimidations, aux gardes à vue et aux poursuites judiciaires - Acrimed | Action Critique Médias
    https://www.acrimed.org/Droit-d-informer-Nous-ne-devons-pas-nous-habituer

    Rédactions : Acrimed, Bastamag, Fakir, Mensuel Le Ravi, Radio GI.NE, Rapports de force, Rue89 Lyon, Sans Transition, Street Press, Street Politics, La Mule du pape, Alternative libertaire, L’Anticapitaliste hebdo

    #liberté #presse #information

  • ’It’s a crisis, not a change’: the six Guardian language changes on climate matters

    A short glossary of the changes we’ve made to the Guardian’s style guide, for use by our journalists and editors when writing about the environment
    In addition to providing updated guidelines on which images our editors should use to illustrate the climate emergency, we have updated our style guide to introduce terms that more accurately describe the environmental crises facing the world. Our editor-in-chief, Katharine Viner, said: “We want to ensure that we are being scientifically precise, while also communicating clearly with readers on this very important issue”. These are the guidelines provided to our journalists and editors to be used in the production of all environment coverage across the Guardian’s website and paper:

    1.) “climate emergency” or “climate crisis” to be used instead of “climate change”

    Climate change is no longer considered to accurately reflect the seriousness of the overall situation; use climate emergency or climate crisis instead to describe the broader impact of climate change. However, use climate breakdown or climate change or global heating when describing it specifically in a scientific or geophysical sense eg “Scientists say climate breakdown has led to an increase in the intensity of hurricanes”.

    2.) “climate science denier” or “climate denier” to be used instead of “climate sceptic”

    The OED defines a sceptic as “a seeker of the truth; an inquirer who has not yet arrived at definite conclusions”. Most “climate sceptics”, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, deny climate change is happening, or is caused by human activity, so ‘denier’ is more accurate.

    3.) Use “global heating” not “global warming”
    ‘Global heating’ is more scientifically accurate. Greenhouse gases form an atmospheric blanket that stops the sun’s heat escaping back to space.

    4.) “greenhouse gas emissions” is preferred to “carbon emissions” or “carbon dioxide emissions”. Although carbon emissions is not inaccurate, if we’re talking about all gases that warm the atmosphere, this term recognises all of the climate-damaging gases, including methane, nitrogen oxides, CFCs etc.

    5.) Use “wildlife”, not “biodiversity”
    We felt that ‘wildlife’ is a much more accessible word and is fair to use in many stories, and is a bit less clinical when talking about all the creatures with whom we share the planet.

    6.) Use “fish populations” instead of “fish stocks”

    This change emphasises that fish do not exist solely to be harvested by humans – they play a vital role in the natural health of the oceans.

    Since we announced these changes, they have been reported widely, shared across social media channels, and even prompted some other media outlets to reconsider the terms they use in their own coverage.

    The update to the Guardian’s style guide, originally announced earlier this year, followed the addition of the global carbon dioxide level to the Guardian’s daily weather pages – the simplest measure of how the mass burning of fossil fuels is disrupting the stable climate. To put it simply, while weather changes daily, climate changes over years and decades. So alongside the daily carbon count, we publish the level in previous years for comparison, as well as the pre-industrial-era baseline of 280ppm, and the level seen as manageable in the long term of 350ppm.

    In order to keep below 1.5C of warming, the aspiration of the world’s nations, we need to halve emissions by 2030 and reach zero by mid century. It is also likely we will need to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, perhaps by the large-scale restoration of nature. It is a huge task, but we hope that tracking the daily rise of CO2 will help to maintain focus on it.

    Viner said: “People need reminding that the climate crisis is no longer a future problem – we need to tackle it now, and every day matters.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/16/guardian-language-changes-climate-environment
    #terminologie #vocabulaire #journalisme #mots #presse #glossaire

    ping @fil @reka

  • Une journée avec les hommes et les femmes de Frontex

    Chaque jour ils surveillent, contrôlent, lisent avec attention vos documents. Les employés de Frontex sont au taquet. L’Agence européenne de garde-frontières et de garde-côtes a pour mission principale d’aider les Etats membres de l’Union européenne et de l’espace Schengen à sécuriser leurs frontières extérieures. Elle dispose d’une réserve de réaction rapide de 1500 agents et sera dotée, progressivement jusqu’à 2027, d’un corps permanent de 10.000 agents.

    Les hommes et les femmes qui la composent traquent la moindre anomalie, le moindre document frauduleux. Au moindre doute, tout votre véhicule est fouillé.

    Frontex dirige des opérations maritimes, aériennes et terrestres (en Méditerranée et dans les pays de l’Est notamment). Elles sont menées par des garde-frontières mis à la disposition de l’agence par les Etats membres. Ils sont reconnaissables à leur brassard ou leur dossard bleu clair et sont toujours accompagnés par des agents de l’Etat membre dans lequel a lieu l’opération.

    A l’été 2018 par exemple, dans le cadre de l’opération opération Minerva, Frontex a aidé les autorités espagnoles à contrôler les passagers arrivant du Maroc par ferry. L’agence avait également déployé des experts en documents contrefaits et des agents formés pour repérer les véhicules volés.

    https://ds1.static.rtbf.be/article/image/770xAuto/5/b/b/b8d4c4953a1d60bd9cf28d042fa96f59-1568391909.pngCertains week-ends jusqu’à 100.000 voyageurs et 20.000 véhicules différents sont contrôlés au poste frontière de Medika. D’un côté c’est l’Europe. De l’autre, l’Ukraine. Un point de passage idéal pour a trafiquants en tout genre, drogue, contrebande, contrefaçon. Pour les affronter, une coopération internationale est tout simplement indispensable.

    En matière de lutte contre l’immigration illégale, Frontex coordonne aussi des opérations de renvoi de migrants irréguliers vers leurs pays d’origine (chaque Etat membre restant libre de déterminer quelle personne doit être renvoyée). Elle peut aider les États membres à financer les opérations de retour et à coopérer avec les pays tiers chargés des procédures de réadmission.

    L’Agence européenne assure également une veille permanente de la situation aux frontières extérieures de l’UE et de l’espace Schengen : elle analyse les tendances et collecte des données sur les personnes liées aux filières d’immigration clandestine ou aux activités criminelles transfrontalières (trafics, terrorisme, pêches illégales…). Elle transmet ces informations aux Etats membres et à l’office européen de police Europol.

    Une vocation familiale

    Piotr Wiciejowski a toujours voulu être soldat, il faut dire que c’est une tradition dans la famille. Sauf qu’il a choisi la protection des frontières comme terrain de chasse. Aujourd’hui il coordonne l’agence européenne Frontex à Medyka.

    Dans le même bureau travaillent un Polonais, un Autrichien, un Portugais, un Letton et un Moldave. Tous ont des expériences différentes mais un même objectif : agir rapidement et compter les uns sur les autres.

    « On contrôle les polices d’assurance, les documents de voiture, les passeports, les papiers de voyage, les visas et même les cartes de pêche. » Explique Piotr Wiciejowski.

    La détection des faux documents est une priorité dans la profession et un succès face aux criminels.

    « Notre groupe s’entraîne constamment. Nous avons des spécialistes de la contrefaçon de documents, de la détection des documents de voitures volées, nous partageons les expériences de nos collègues des services de police et des services des frontières d’autres pays de l’Union européenne. » ajoute le garde-frontière.

    En 2018, 1500 faux documents d’identité ont été saisis à la frontière orientale de l’Union européenne. La contrebande est un aussi un défi aux postes frontières. Drogues, alcool sans accise, cigarettes permettent aux organisations criminelles de gagner beaucoup d’argent.

    Un agent témoigne anonymement. « Il s’agit d’un secteur très lucratif pour les groupes criminels, c’est de l’argent facile à gagner, il n’est pas étonnant que des personnes peu scrupuleuses tentent leur chance. Mais nous sommes là pour l’éviter. »

    Les passeurs rivalisent d’imagination pour cacher leur marchandise. Mais les hommes de Frontex ne sont pas dupes et les chiens détecteurs de drogue par exemple, sont très utiles pour dénicher les cargaisons frauduleuses.

    « L’innovation et la créativité de ces groupes criminels n’ont pas de limite » explique le garde.

    Piotr Wiciejowski sait que toutes les voitures doivent être soigneusement contrôlées à la frontière de Medyka. C’est le dernier point de passage pour qu’un véhicule volé ne disparaît complètement des radars. La lutte contre les voleurs de voitures est possible grâce à la coopération internationale. En 2018, près de 1000 voitures volées ont été interceptées aux frontières de l’Union européenne. « Nous venons de saisir une voiture Jaguar en version limitée, d’une valeur marchande supérieure à 400.000 PLN. (Soit 92.313 euros) Lors des contrôles frontaliers en Pologne, il s’est avéré que les numéros d’identification et les papiers de la voiture étaient contrefaits », explique une responsable du bureau polonais.

    Lorsqu’un agent doit vérifier un document ou obtenir des informations rapidement, les employés de Frontex peuvent immédiatement contacter leurs collègues européens. Le temps et la rapidité de réaction sont au détriment des criminels." Si quelqu’un franchit la frontière de notre côté, il peut ensuite arriver facilement à Lisbonne, au Portugal. Nous sommes donc tenus de travailler d’une façon précise et la plus professionnelle possible. Nous sentons la pression sur nous, mais nous la gérons très bien. "

    Lorsqu’ils rentrent dans leur pays, les employés de Frontex ont acquis de nouvelles expériences tout en contribuant à protéger la frontière orientale de l’Union européenne. Une coopération qui joue aussi sur la dissuasion. Les hommes de Frontex veulent aussi donner l’impression aux trafiquants qu’ils ne peuvent leur échapper.

    https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_ces-heros-du-quotidien-les-hommes-et-les-femmes-de-frontex?id=10313604
    #Frontex #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #témoignage #gardes-frontière #travail #asile #migrations #réfugiés

    • Frontex, rempart de l’Europe forteresse !

      À la lecture de l’article paru sur le site de la RTBF du 21 septembre dernier[1], initialement titré “Ces héros du quotidien : les hommes et les femmes de Frontex” et rebaptisé quelques heures plus tard “Une journée avec les hommes et les femmes de Frontex”, nous aurions pu croire qu’il s’agissait d’une campagne de recrutement pour cet organisme européen. “Travailler pour Frontex, c’est agir pour la collectivité” ; “travailler pour Frontex, c’est se réaliser” ; “travailler pour Frontex, c’est faire partie de la grande Europe” semble affirmer ce papier. Mais sous des faux-semblants d’objectivité, cet article nous apparaît clairement partial étant donné l’omission de nombreuses informations.

      Melting-pot nauséabond

      Non, Frontex n’a pas un rôle émancipateur mais est un outil de répression et de blocage des arrivant.e.s et migrant.e.s avant qu’ils.elles ne touchent le sol de l’Union européenne ou de l’Espace Schengen.

      Or, les raisons d’être de Frontex – en réalité, celles que l’autrice a choisi de présenter – s’égrènent tout au long de l’article sous un jour positif. Nous y apprenons que les employé.e.s se dévouent pour nous protéger de la drogue, de la criminalité, des trafics en tout genre… mais aussi de l’immigration “illégale”. Il s’agirait donc de nuisances multiples agrégeables en un tout homogène. Autrement dit, les Européen.ne.s, honnêtes citoyen.ne.s, seraient menacé.e.s et l’objet du malheur viendrait, forcément, de l’extérieur. Cette idée prend appui sur une sémantique très orientée : “sécurité”, “protection”, “affrontement”, “terrain de chasse” (l’Europe serait-elle un terrain de chasse ?!)...

      Paresse intellectuelle et alimentation des peurs constituent donc le ton de cet article. À l’heure où l’extrême droite, véritable menace, gangrène toute l’Europe, nous ne pouvons nous y résoudre. Dès lors, nous formulons une série d’interrogations.

      Quels sont les effets possibles de ce type d’article ? A titre d’illustration, de la perception de menaces à l’armement des agents[2], il n’y a qu’un pas… que la Commission européenne a déjà franchi… et que l’article de la RTBF ne mentionne pas.

      Faut-il, une fois de plus, assimiler l’immigration à une menace ? Faut-il associer l’immigration au trafic de drogue ? À la criminalité ? Faut-il rappeler que les migrant.e.s sont en danger et que les politiques migratoires européennes tuent ? L’Europe, érigée en terre isolée, a déjà laissé périr 30 000 personnes depuis l’année 2000, rien qu’en Méditerranée (selon The Migrants files). Pourtant elles tentaient seulement de fuir des guerres, des traitements iniques et des conditions de vie indignes. Leurs espoirs se heurtent aux murs d’une Europe érigée en forteresse. Cela, l’article ne le mentionne pas non plus. Ne nous y trompons pas : ce ne sont pas “seulement” des personnes qui nous sont étrangères qui décèdent. Nous affirmons que chaque corps qui se noie, chaque vie arrachée s’accompagne de l’amenuisement de notre conscience et de nos valeurs. Voilà bien une menace réelle.

      Angles-morts de l’article

      Le fait que Frontex soit très fort critiqué par des associations ne figure pas non plus dans l’article. Les actions de ces “héros” (comme le titrait au départ la journaliste rédactrice) sont dénoncées par de nombreuses associations (Agir pour la Paix, CNCD, Migreurop, à titre d’illustrations). Beaucoup de critiques venant du monde journalistique ont été faites concernant le manque de transparence de l’agence de contrôle des frontières. Le Guardian, notamment, avait déclaré que Frontex se rendait coupable de violations des droits fondamentaux. Par ailleurs, le journaliste allemand Arne Semsrott et l’espagnole Luisa Izuzquiza, une militante du droit à l’information avaient déposé plainte contre Frontex pour manque de transparence. Nous aurions aimé a minima une solidarité journalistique de la part de la RTBF[3]

      L’article omet également de mentionner ce que Frontex nous coûte. Cette agence, garante de l’Europe forteresse, a investi, depuis l’an 2000… 15 milliards d’euros pour barricader ses frontières qui n’ont pour effet que de garder les personnes migrantes prisonnières à l’intérieur de nos murs physiques et numériques (fichages et contrôles) en complément d’une politique de l’externalisation (Turquie, Maghreb, Libye, collaborant ainsi avec des régimes autoritaires sinon des dictatures) qui représentent un marché lucratif, impossible à mener sans des politiques sécuritaires (et corollaires, racistes).

      Frontex et ses dérives

      Ce sont bien les mesures de nos gouvernements démocratiques qui ont préféré investir des milliards d’euros dans des moyens issus de la haute technologie sécuritaire prônée par Frontex, distillant le principe de la libre circulation des capitaux, au détriment de la sécurité des personnes qui sont forcées de fuir la misère, les changements climatiques ou les dictatures.

      Ainsi, durant la récente période des “vacances”, des centaines de personnes sont mortes en mer, contraintes de fuir dans des embarcations de fortune, faute d’obtenir des moyens légaux de quitter des terres hostiles. Les avions et bateaux de Frontex ont empêché les missions de sauvetage des ONG en criminalisant leurs actions, en les poursuivant pour délit de solidarité ou en les accusant de trafic d’êtres humains. Notons que cette épée de Damoclès poursuit également les hébergeur.se.s aujourd’hui.

      Questionner la déontologie journalistique

      Cet article s’avère donc problématique, et ce, à bien des égards. En plus des questions soulevées précédemment, nous questionnons l’aspect déontologique. La mission du journalisme est d’informer et non de faire du publi-reportage. Faut-il le rappeler ?

      Certes, protéger un territoire des trafics en tout genre, comme la criminalité, est indispensable. Néanmoins, Frontex, comme nous l’avons démontré, c’est avant tout le rempart de l’Europe forteresse.

      Ce reportage unilatéral, partiel et partial est-il digne de l’ambition de la RTBF qui est d’offrir à ses auditeur.trice.s une information de qualité et de référence ? On attend mieux du service public.

      Aucun des médias principaux de la presse écrite de Belgique francophone n’a accepté positivement notre carte blanche selon nos conditions, à savoir qu’elle soit l’objet d’un article à part entière.

      Conclusion

      Le contrôle des murs aux frontières de l’Europe est le problème et non la solution. La hiérarchisation entre les personnes, la catégorisation entre celles et ceux qui ont le droit d’avoir des droits ou non sur le sol européen doit cesser. Les personnes qui risquent leur vie aux frontières doivent être sauvées et accueillies dignement. La solidarité est la seule solution pour faire face aux défis climatiques, démocratiques et économiques à venir.

      https://blogs.mediapart.fr/collectif-citoyen-belge/blog/270919/frontex-rempart-de-l-europe-forteresse
      #journalisme #presse #fact-checking
      ping @karine4

    • Le #Maroc et Frontex renforcent leur coopération

      La capitale polonaise a abrité, jeudi, une séance de travail entre le Maroc et l’Agence européenne de garde-frontières et de garde-côtes (Frontex) axée sur les moyens de renforcer la coopération et la coordination entre les deux parties afin de relever les défis de la migration clandestine et de la criminalité transfrontalière.
      Lors de cette réunion dirigée par le wali, directeur de la migration et de la surveillance des frontières au ministère de l’Intérieur, Khalid Zerouali, et le directeur exécutif de l’Agence Frontex, Fabrice Leggeri, les débats ont porté sur le rôle central du Maroc dans la lutte contre la migration clandestine et la criminalité transfrontalière, l’évaluation des mécanismes de coordination et les différents aspects de la coopération.
      Dans une déclaration à la MAP, Khalid Zerouali a indiqué que la séance de travail, à laquelle ont participé une importante délégation marocaine et l’ambassadeur du Maroc en Pologne, Abderrahim Atmoun, a été l’occasion de jeter la lumière sur le rôle important et les grands efforts déployés par le Royaume en matière de lutte contre l’immigration clandestine et les autres phénomènes transfrontaliers, et sur la contribution importante du Maroc à la stabilité et à la sécurité régionale et internationale.
      Il a également souligné que les responsables de l’Agence Frontex ont salué les approches pratiques, efficaces et pluridimensionnelles adoptées par le Maroc pour faire face aux flux migratoires sur Hautes orientations de Sa Majesté le Roi Mohammed VI, et le souci du Royaume à consacrer ces efforts non seulement pour lutter contre ce phénomène mais également pour le traiter dans ses dimensions humaines et suivant des méthodes proactives dont l’efficacité a été prouvée.
      Le Maroc a exprimé sa disposition permanente à contribuer à la lutte contre ces phénomènes négatifs, a affirmé Khalid Zerouali, appelant à concevoir de nouvelles solutions pour accompagner le développement de ces phénomènes qui se compliquent de plus en plus à cause des conditions sociales et sécuritaires prévalant dans certaines régions du continent africain.
      Il a, en outre, rappelé que le Maroc ne s’est pas limité à traiter la question de l’immigration illégale en se basant seulement sur une approche purement sécuritaire mais il a également contribué dans sa position de leader à mettre en place une institution chargée d’évaluer, d’analyser et d’étudier les causes de ce genre de migration suivant des approches pratiques afin de trouver les solutions appropriées, et ce rôle a été confié à l’Observatoire africain de la migration basé à Rabat, soulignant l’importance de la Conférence intergouvernementale sur le Pacte mondial pour des migrations sûres, ordonnées et régulières, tenue à Marrakech et qui a constitué un espace pour innover des solutions concrètes pour l’établissement de partenariats à tous les niveaux.
      Pour leur part, les responsables de l’agence européenne, dont le siège est à Varsovie, ont relevé que la coordination et la coopération institutionnelle entre Frontex et le Maroc constituent un modèle et une référence dans la coopération entre les pays du Nord et du Sud pour lutter contre la migration irrégulière et mettre à profit les expériences accumulées par le Maroc pour traiter les questions sécuritaires et faire face aux défis posés par les flux migratoires, la criminalité transfrontalière et le terrorisme.
      Ils ont également souligné que la feuille de route claire et les approches du Maroc ont prouvé leur efficacité et leur efficience pour transcender les entraves en rapport avec la migration clandestine.
      La délégation marocaine a participé à Varsovie à la 24ème Conférence internationale sur la sécurité des frontières, organisée cette semaine par Frontex en présence des représentants de plus de 100 pays et 300 experts internationaux, dont les représentants de plusieurs organisations et institutions internationales œuvrant dans le domaine de la sécurité des frontières.
      La conférence a examiné plusieurs questions portant notamment sur les mécanismes permettant de prévenir, de faire respecter et de lutter contre les problèmes mondiaux liés à la sécurité des frontières, tels le trafic des êtres humains et la falsification des documents et des pièces d’identité.

      Fabrice Leggeri : Le Royaume, un partenaire clé dans la lutte contre la migration clandestine

      Le Maroc est « un partenaire clé, modèle et fiable » dans la coopération avec l’Union européenne et les différents pays du monde dans la lutte contre la migration clandestine et d’autres phénomènes connexes, a affirmé jeudi à Varsovie en Pologne le directeur exécutif de l’Agence européenne de garde-frontières et de garde-côtes (Frontex), Fabrice Leggeri.
      Le partenariat avec le Maroc a toujours permis de trouver de nombreuses solutions pour lutter contre le phénomène de la migration illégale et ce grâce aux « bonnes expériences » accumulées par le Maroc en matière de lutte contre les phénomènes négatifs, notamment la migration clandestine, la criminalité organisée transfrontalière et le terrorisme, a-t-il souligné dans une déclaration à la MAP en marge d’une séance de travail tenue à Varsovie entre le Maroc et l’Agence Frontex axée sur les questions de migration et de coopération bilatérale.
      Fabrice Leggeri a, par ailleurs, indiqué que cette réunion a été « fructueuse et riche » au niveau des débats constructifs et francs entre les deux parties, et aussi au niveau des propositions avancées par le Maroc en vue de renforcer davantage la coopération bilatérale, ajoutant que la séance de travail a aussi permis d’aborder d’autres questions d’intérêt commun notamment la technologie d’analyse des risques et d’innovation, la coopération entre les garde-côtes et les institutions de sécurité compétentes.
      Le responsable européen a, en outre, souligné que le dialogue et la coopération avec le Maroc ont été toujours une priorité pour l’Union européenne et l’Agence Frontex.

      https://www.libe.ma/Le-Maroc-et-Frontex-renforcent-leur-cooperation_a113092.html

  • Remembering the day the Eritrean press died

    Eritrea’s transformation into a police state started with a ban on independent media 16 years ago today.

    Exactly 16 years ago, on September 18, 2001, Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki and his clique banned seven independent newspapers and imprisoned 11 of the most senior government officials.

    That “#Black_Tuesday” was the start of Eritrea’s transformation into the police state that it is today. Before this happened, despite various challenges, Eritrean independent media briefly had created space for open discussion, even providing a forum for dissident political leaders.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/remembering-day-eritrean-press-died-170918074330130.html
    #Erythrée #liberté_de_la_presse #presse #journalisme #histoire #totalitarisme #dictature #2001 #Etat_policier

  • « Les inculpations contre Julian #Assange sont sans précédent, effrayantes, et un coup porté à la #liberté de la #presse »
    https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2019/05/24/assange-des-accusations-sans-precedent-effrayantes-et-un-coup-porte-a-la-lib

    Associations de défense des libertés et juristes sont scandalisés par les accusations d’espionnage de la #justice américaine.

    • Il linguaggio dell’odio è stato ‘normalizzato’ e la manifestazione dell’odio è divenuta accettabile, secondo l’ultimo rapporto dell’#Ohchr

      Che la diffusione del linguaggio dell’odio sia un problema per l’Italia e dell’Italia ce lo dice l’ultimo Rapporto sulla missione dell’Alto commissario per i diritti umani delle Nazioni Unite nel nostro Paese, da poco pubblicato. Una missione incentrata proprio sulle questioni della discriminazione razziale e sull’incitamento all’odio. Il documento traccia un quadro preoccupante di un Paese, segnato nel 2018 da un forte incremento degli episodi di discriminazione e tuttora da una persistente mancanza di attenzione e di analisi del fenomeno nel suo complesso da parte delle istituzioni. A colpire è soprattutto il capitolo sull’incitamento all’odio razziale alla discriminazione e alla violenza. Nel Rapporto, l’Alto Commissariato delle Nazioni Unite evidenzia l’emergere di discorsi razzisti basati su stereotipi negativi contro i migranti, i musulmani, le persone di origine africana, le comunità rom, sinti e caminanti. E ciò avviene – si legge nel documento – soprattutto nei discorsi politici e nei media: a incoraggiare la crescita dell’intolleranza, dell’odio religioso e della xenofobia sono alcuni leader politici e talvolta gli stessi membri del Governo. Sicurezza e difesa dell’identità nazionale, sono le parole chiave di tali discorsi, che si fondano sulla criminalizzazione della migrazione e sul principio “prima gli italiani” di fronte alla crisi economica. Un modo – si legge nel Rapporto – per rendere la discriminazione razziale socialmente più accettabile. Le conseguenze sono evidenti: una escalation di «hate incidents» contro singoli o gruppi per motivi etnici, del colore della pelle, della razza o dello status di immigrato.

      Le stesse leggi, in alcuni casi – secondo il Rapporto dell’Alto Commissario ONU – contribuiscono a rafforzare tale clima, come nel caso del ‘decreto sicurezza’ che stabilisce una relazione tra immigrazione e sicurezza, «rafforzando in tale modo una percezione discriminante che stigmatizza e associa i migranti e le minoranze alla criminalità». Così come preoccupa la campagna contro le associazioni della società civile impegnate nelle operazioni di soccorso nel mare Mediterraneo, campagna che il documento definisce diffamatoria. Tutto ciò non può essere ricondotto a singoli casi. Il linguaggio dell’odio, riporta il documento, è stato ‘normalizzato’ e la manifestazione dell’odio è divenuta accettabile. Perché questo linguaggio è nello stesso tempo espressione ed elemento costruttore di culture diffuse. Ed è proprio sul piano culturale che occorre agire, restituendo significato alle parole, rimettendo al centro le persone, ognuna nella sua singolarità, ricordando che i diritti non sono mai dati una volta per tutte, ma vanno tutelati e rafforzati, va fatta memoria della sofferenza e delle battaglie che sono dietro alla loro conquista. La diffusione di una cultura dei diritti è uno dei terreni su cui si gioca la sfida della prevenzione e della tutela delle persone più vulnerabili. Un terreno su cui sono chiamati a contribuire tutti: le istituzioni pubbliche, le organizzazioni della società civile, il mondo della cultura e dei media. A cominciare dal linguaggio.

      https://www.cartadiroma.org/news/in-evidenza/lincitamento-allodio-razziale-e-un-problema-per-litalia-il-rapporto-onu
      #médias #presse

  • UN Human Rights Council Should Address Human Rights Crisis in Cambodia at its 42nd Session

    Dear Excellency,

    The undersigned civil society organizations, representing groups working within and outside Cambodia to advance human rights, rule of law, and democracy, are writing to alert your government to an ongoing human rights crisis in Cambodia and to request your support for a resolution ensuring strengthened scrutiny of the human rights situation in the country at the upcoming 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council (the “Council”).

    National elections in July 2018 were conducted after the Supreme Court, which lacks independence, dissolved the major opposition party, the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP). Many believe that this allowed the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) under Prime Minister Hun Sen to secure all 125 seats in the National Assembly and effectively establish one-party rule. Since the election, respect for human rights in Cambodia has further declined. Key opposition figures remain either in detention – such as CNRP leader Kem Sokha, who is under de facto house arrest – or in self-imposed exile out of fear of being arrested. The CNRP is considered illegal and 111 senior CNRP politicians remain banned from engaging in politics. Many others have continued to flee the country to avoid arbitrary arrest and persecution.

    Government authorities have increasingly harassed opposition party members still in the country, with more than 147 former CNRP members summoned to court or police stations. Local authorities have continued to arrest opposition members and activists on spurious charges. The number of prisoners facing politically motivated charges in the country has remained steady since the election. The government has shuttered almost all independent media outlets, and totally controls national TV and radio stations. Repressive laws – including the amendments to the Law on Political Parties, the Law on Non-Governmental Organizations, and the Law on Trade Unions – have resulted in severe restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.

    It is expected that a resolution will be presented at the 42nd session of the Human Rights Council in September to renew the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia for another two years. We strongly urge your delegation to ensure that the resolution reflects the gravity of the situation in the country and requests additional monitoring and reporting by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Mandated OHCHR monitoring of the situation and reporting to the Council, in consultation with the Special Rapporteur, would enable a comprehensive assessment of the human rights situation in Cambodia, identification of concrete actions that the government needs to take to comply with Cambodia’s international human rights obligations, and would allow the Council further opportunities to address the situation.

    Since the last Council resolution was adopted in September 2017, the situation of human rights in Cambodia, including for the political opposition, human rights defenders, and the media, has drastically worsened. Developments since the 2018 election include:

    Crackdown on Political Opposition

    On March 12, 2019, the Phnom Penh Municipal Court issued arrest warrants for eight leading members of the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party who had left Cambodia ahead of the July 2018 election – Sam Rainsy, Mu Sochua, Ou Chanrith, Eng Chhai Eang, Men Sothavarin, Long Ry, Tob Van Chan, and Ho Vann. The charges were based on baseless allegations of conspiring to commit treason and incitement to commit felony. In September 2018, authorities transferred CNRP head Kem Sokha after more than a year of pre-trial detention in a remote prison to his Phnom Penh residence under highly restrictive “judicial supervision” that amounts to house arrest. Cambodian law has no provision for house arrest and there is no evidence that Sokha has committed any internationally recognizable offense.

    During 2019, at least 147 arbitrary summonses were issued by the courts and police against CNRP members or supporters. Summonses seen by human rights groups lack legal specifics, containing only vague references to allegations that the person summoned may have violated the Supreme Court ruling that dissolved the CNRP in November 2017.

    Human Rights Defenders and Peaceful Protesters

    In November 2018, Prime Minister Hun Sen stated that criminal charges would be dropped against all trade union leaders related to the government’s January 2014 crackdown on trade unions and garment workers in which security forces killed five people. However, the following month, a court convicted six union leaders – Ath Thorn, Chea Mony, Yang Sophorn, Pav Sina, Rong Chhun, and Mam Nhim – on baseless charges and fined them. An appeals court overturned the convictions in May 2019, but in July 2019 the court announced its verdict in absentia convicting Kong Atith, newly elected president of the Coalition of Cambodian Apparel Workers Democratic Union (CCAWDU), of intentional acts of violence in relation to a 2016 protest between drivers and the Capitol Bus Company. The court imposed a three-year suspended sentence, which will create legal implications under Article 20 of the Law on Trade Unions, which sets out among others that a leader of a worker union cannot have a felony or misdemeanor conviction.

    In December 2018, Thai authorities forcibly returned Cambodian dissident Rath Rott Mony to Cambodia. Cambodian authorities then prosecuted him for his role in a Russia Times documentary “My Mother Sold Me,” which describes the failure of Cambodian police to protect girls sold into sex work. He was convicted of “incitement to discriminate” and in July 2019 sentenced to two years in prison.

    In March 2018, the government enacted a lese majeste (insulting the king) clause into the Penal Code, and within a year four people had been jailed under the law and three convicted. All the lese majeste cases involved people expressing critical opinions on Facebook or sharing other people’s Facebook posts. The government has used the new law, along with a judiciary that lacks independence, as a political tool to silence independent and critical voices in the country.

    In July 2019, authorities detained two youth activists, Kong Raya and Soung Neakpoan, who participated in a commemoration ceremony on the third anniversary of the murder of prominent political commentator Kem Ley in Phnom Penh. The authorities charged both with incitement to commit a felony, a provision commonly used to silence activists and human rights defenders. Authorities arrested seven people in total for commemorating the anniversary; monitored, disrupted, or canceled commemorations around the country; and blocked approximately 20 members of the Grassroots Democracy Party on their way to Takeo province – Kem Ley’s home province.

    Attacks on Journalists and Control of the Media

    Prior to the July 2018 election, the Cambodian government significantly curtailed media freedom, online and offline. In 2017, authorities ordered the closure of 32 FM radio frequencies that aired independent news programs by Radio Free Asia (RFA) and Voice of America. RFA closed its offices in September 2017, citing government harassment as the reason for its closure. The local Voice of Democracy radio was also forced to go off the air.

    Since 2017, two major independent newspapers, the Phnom Penh Post and The Cambodia Daily, were subjected to dubious multi-million-dollar tax bills, leading the Phnom Penh Post to be sold to a businessman with ties to Hun Sen and The Cambodia Daily to close.

    Social media networks have come under attack from increased government surveillance and interventions. In May 2018, the government adopted a decree on Publication Controls of Website and Social Media Processing via Internet and the Law on Telecommunications, which allow for arbitrary interference and surveillance of online media and unfettered government censorship. Just two days before the July 2018 elections, authorities blocked the websites of independent media outlets – including RFA and VOA – which human rights groups considered an immediate enforcement of the new decree.

    Since then, Cambodian authorities have proceeded with the politically motivated prosecution of two RFA journalists, Yeang Sothearin and Uon Chhin. They were arrested in November 2017 on fabricated espionage charges connected to allegations that the two men continued to report for RFA after RFA’s forced closure of its Cambodia office. They were held in pre-trial detention until August 2018. Their trial began in July 2019 and a verdict on the espionage charges is expected late August. They face up to 16 years in prison.

    *

    The Cambodian government’s actions before and since the July 2018 election demonstrate a comprehensive campaign by the ruling CPP government to use violence, intimidation and courts that lack judicial independence to silence or eliminate the political opposition, independent media, and civil society groups critical of the government.

    We strongly urge your government to acknowledge the severity of the human rights situation and the risks it poses to Cambodia’s fulfillment of its commitments to respect human rights and rule of law as set out in the Paris Peace Accords 1991. It is crucial that concerned states explicitly condemn the Cambodian government’s attacks on human rights norms and take steps to address them.

    For these reasons, we call on the Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution requesting the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to monitor and report on the situation of human rights in Cambodia and outline actions the government should take to comply with its international human rights obligations. The High Commissioner should report to the Council at its 45th session followed by an Enhanced Interactive Dialogue with participation of the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia, other relevant UN Special Procedures, and members of local and international civil society.

    We further recommend that your government, during the Council’s September session, speaks out clearly and jointly with other governments against ongoing violations in Cambodia.

    We remain at your disposal for any further information.

    With assurances of our highest consideration,

    Amnesty International
    ARTICLE 19
    ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR)
    Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
    Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC)
    Cambodian Alliance of Trade Unions (CATU)
    Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR)
    Cambodian Food and Service Workers’ Federation (CFSWF)
    Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC)
    Cambodian League for the Promotion & Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO)
    Cambodian Youth Network (CYN)
    Cambodia’s Independent Civil Servants Association (CICA)
    Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights (CENTRAL)
    CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
    Civil Rights Defenders (CRD)
    Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
    Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
    FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights
    Fortify Rights
    Human Rights Now
    Human Rights Watch (HRW)
    International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
    Independent Democracy of Informal Economy Association (IDEA)
    International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
    Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC)
    National Democratic Institute (NDI)
    Reporters Without Borders (Reporters Sans Frontières - RSF)
    World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/30/un-human-rights-council-should-address-human-rights-crisis-cambodia-its-42nd-se
    #Cambodge #droits_humains #arrestations #opposition #liberté_d'expression #censure #presse #médias #lese_majeste #Kem_Ley #Rath_Rott_Mony #Kong_Raya #Soung_Neakpoan #réseaux_sociaux

  • l’hypocrisie des magazines féminins n’a pas pris une ride
    https://www.franceculture.fr/societe/rentrer-le-ventre-et-tenir-son-rang-lhypocrisie-des-magazines-feminins

    Femmes - femmes sur papier glacé un brûlot écrit au lance-flammes dans les années 70 par Anne-Marie Lugan Dardigna

    Les éditions La Découverte ont décidé de le rééditer cette année juste avant l’été, à l’occasion des 60 ans de la création des éditions #Maspero (dont La Découverte est la maison héritière), sans avoir été retravaillée, simplement enrichie d’une préface signée Mona Chollet. @mona

    https://www.editionsladecouverte.fr/catalogue/index-Femmes_femmes_sur_papier_glac__-9782348043789.html


    http://www.zones-subversives.com/2019/07/l-ideologie-des-magazines-feminins.html
    #féminisme #presse_féminime #Chloé_Leprince #zones_subversives

  • #Macron, #Neymar : Carton Rouge
    https://lemediapresse.fr/politique/macron-neymar-carton-rouge

    « Le foot, comme la #Politique, c’est d’abord de la com’. Et tous ceux qui gravitent autour et en tirent bénéfices ont pour ennemis communs les journalistes. Macron, Neymar, même enfumage ». De l’Elysée au Parc des Princes, Denis Robert tente le grand pont.

    #Social #Sport #ADP #BFM #chômage #démocratie #Etat #Football #Gilets_Jaunes #Hong_Kong #Journalisme #Presse #Reworld #sport

  • How the #El_Paso Killer Echoed the Incendiary Words of Conservative Media Stars

    It remains unclear what, or who, ultimately shaped the views of the white, 21-year-old gunman, or whether he was aware of the media commentary. But his post contains numerous references to “invasion” and cultural “replacement” — ideas that, until recently, were relegated to the fringes of the nationalist right.


    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/11/business/media/el-paso-killer-conservative-media.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pg

    #vocabulaire #terminologie #invasion #rhétorique_de_l'invasion #mots #médias #journalisme #presse #Tucker_Carlson #tuerie #massacre #USA #Etats-Unis #eau #métaphore #liquide #remplacement #grand_remplacement

  • How the media contributed to the migrant crisis

    Disaster reporting plays to set ideas about people from ‘over there’.

    When did you notice the word “migrant” start to take precedence over the many other terms applied to people on the move? For me it was in 2015, as the refugee crisis in Europe reached its peak. While debate raged over whether people crossing the Mediterranean via unofficial routes should be regarded as deserving candidates for European sympathy and protection, it seemed as if that word came to crowd out all others. Unlike the other terms, well-meaning or malicious, that might be applied to people in similar situations, this one word appears shorn of context; without even an im- or an em- attached to it to indicate that the people it describes have histories or futures. Instead, it implies an endless present: they are migrants, they move, it’s what they do. It’s a form of description that, until 2015, I might have expected to see more often in nature documentaries, applied to animals rather than human beings.
    Lose yourself in a great story: Sign up for the long read email
    Read more

    But only certain kinds of human beings. The professional who moves to a neighbouring city for work is not usually described as a migrant, and neither is the wealthy businessman who acquires new passports as easily as he moves his money around the world. It is most often applied to those people who fall foul of border control at the frontiers of the rich world, whether that’s in Europe, the US, Australia, South Africa or elsewhere. That’s because the terms that surround migration are inextricably bound up with power, as is the way in which our media organisations choose to disseminate them.

    The people I met during the years I spent reporting on the experiences of refugees at Europe’s borders, for my book Lights in the Distance, were as keenly aware of this as any of us. There was the fixer I was introduced to in Bulgaria, a refugee himself, who was offering TV news crews a “menu” of stories of suffering, with a price range that corresponded with the value the media placed on them. Caesar, a young man from Mali I met in Sicily, told me he was shocked to find that Italian television would usually only show images of Africa in reports about war or poverty. Some refugees’ stories, he felt, were treated with more urgency than others because of what country they came from. Or there was Hakima, an Afghan woman who lived with her family in Athens, who confronted me directly: “We keep having journalists visit, and they want to hear our stories, but, tell me, what can you do?” Often, people I met were surprised at the lack of understanding, even indifference, they felt was being shown to them. Didn’t Europe know why people like them were forced to make these journeys? Hadn’t Europe played an intimate role in the histories and conflicts of their own countries?

    Europe’s refugee crisis, or more properly, a disaster partly caused by European border policies, rather than simply the movement of refugees towards Europe, was one of the most heavily mediated world events of the past decade. It unfolded around the edges of a wealthy and technologically developed region, home to several major centres of the global media industry. Scenes of desperation, suffering and rescue that might normally be gathered by foreign correspondents in harder-to-access parts of the world were now readily available to reporters, news crews, filmmakers and artists at relatively low cost.

    The people at the centre of the crisis were, at least for a time, relatively free to move around once they had reached safety and to speak to whoever they pleased. This gave certain advantages to the kind of media coverage that was produced. Most of all, it allowed quick and clear reporting on emergency situations as they developed. Throughout 2015, the crisis narrative was developed via a series of flashpoints at different locations within and around the European Union. In April, for example, attention focused on the smuggler boat route from Libya, after the deadliest shipwreck ever recorded in the Mediterranean. A month or so later focus shifted to Calais, where French and British policies of discouraging irregular migrants from attempting to cross the Channel had led to a growing spectacle of mass destitution. By the summer, the number of boat crossings from Turkey to Greece had dramatically increased, and images and stories of people stepping on to Aegean shores, or of piles of orange lifejackets, came to dominate. Then came the scenes of people moving through the Balkans, and so on, and so on.

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/2fe295c2e8dc7ea934d7091beaee84d9c5c3c804/42_649_3645_2186/master/3645.jpg?width=880&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=4029d3e00eba3245a92c5c

    In all of these situations the news media were able to do their basic job in emergency situations, which is to communicate what’s happening, who’s affected, what’s needed the most. But this is usually more than a matter of relaying dry facts and figures. “Human stories” have the greatest currency among journalists, although it’s an odd term if you think about it.

    What stories aren’t human? In fact, it’s most commonly used to denote a particular kind of human story; one that gives individual experience the greatest prominence, that tells you what an event felt like, both physically and emotionally. It rests on the assumption that this is what connects most strongly with audiences: either because it hooks them in and keeps them watching or reading, or because it helps them identify with the protagonist, perhaps in a way that encourages empathy, or a particular course of action in response. As a result, the public was able to easily and quickly access vivid accounts and images of people’s experiences as they attempted to cross the EU’s external borders, or to find shelter and welcome within Europe.

    The trade-off was that this often fit into predetermined ideas about what disasters look like, who needs protection, who is innocent and who is deserving of blame. Think, for example, about the most recognisable image of the refugee crisis in 2015: the picture of a Turkish police officer carrying the lifeless body of three-year-old Alan Kurdi away from the water’s edge on a beach near Bodrum.

    As the Dutch documentary Een zee van beelden – A Sea of Images – (Medialogica, 2016) asked: why did this image in particular strike such a chord? After all, many news editors see images of death on a daily basis, yet for the most part decide to exclude them. The documentary showed how the apparently viral spread of the Alan Kurdi photograph on social media was in large part the result of a series of decisions taken by senior journalists and NGO workers.

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/dae2df82cc5f6e0366d71f29daacfa5fdbc32e71/0_285_4500_2700/master/4500.jpg?width=880&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=08662beb01cdef62f0e718

    First, a local photo agency in Turkey decided to release the image to the wires because they were so fed up with the lack of political response to the crisis on their shores. The image was shared by an official at a global human rights NGO with a large Twitter following, and retweeted by several prominent correspondents for large news organisations. Picture editors at several newspapers then decided, independently of one another, to place the photo on the front pages of their next editions; only after that point did it reach its widest circulation online. The image gained the status it did for a mix of reasons – political, commercial, but also aesthetic. One of the picture editors interviewed in the documentary commented on how the position of the figures in the photo resembled that of Michelangelo’s Pietà, an iconography of suffering and sacrifice that runs deep in European culture.

    But if this way of working has its advantages, it also has its dark side. News media that rush from one crisis point to another are not so good at filling in the gaps, at explaining the obscured systems and long-term failures that might be behind a series of seemingly unconnected events. To return to the idea of a “refugee crisis”, for example, this is an accurate description in one sense, as it involved a sharp increase in the number of people claiming asylum in the European Union; from around 430,000 in 2013, according to the EU statistics agency Eurostat, to well over a million in 2015 and 2016 each. In global terms this was a relatively small number of refugees: the EU has a population of over 500 million, while most of the world’s 68.5 million forcibly displaced people are hosted in poorer parts of the world. But the manner of people’s arrival was chaotic and often deadly, while there was a widespread institutional failure to ensure that their needs – for basic necessities, for legal and political rights – were met. To stop there, however, risks giving the false impression that the crisis was a problem from elsewhere that landed unexpectedly on European shores.

    This impression is false on two counts. First, Europe has played a key role, historically, in the shaping of a world where power and wealth are unequally distributed, and European powers continue to pursue military and arms trading policies that have caused or contributed to the conflicts and instability from which many people flee. Second, the crisis of 2015 was a direct effect of the complex and often violent system of policing immigration from outside the EU that has been constructed in the last few decades.

    In short, this has involved the EU and its members signing treaties with countries outside its borders to control immigration on its behalf; an increasingly militarised frontier at the geographical edges of the EU; and an internal system for regulating the movement of asylum seekers that aims to force them to stay in the first EU country they enter. This, cumulatively, had the effect of forcing desperate people to take narrower and more dangerous routes by land and sea, while the prioritising of border control over safe and dignified reception conditions compounded the disaster. How well, really, did media organisations explain all this to their audiences?

    The effect, all too often, was to frame these newly arrived people as others; people from “over there”, who had little to do with Europe itself and were strangers, antagonistic even, to its traditions and culture. This was true at times, of both well-meaning and hostile media coverage. A sympathetic portrayal of the displaced might focus on some of those images and stories that matched stereotypes of innocence and vulnerability: children, women, families; the vulnerable, the sick, the elderly.

    Negative coverage, meanwhile, might focus more on the men, the able-bodied, nameless and sometimes faceless people massed at fences or gates. Or people from particular countries would be focused on to suit a political agenda. The Sun, one of Britain’s most widely read newspapers, for example, led with a picture of Alan Kurdi on its front page in September 2015, telling its readers that the refugee crisis was a matter of life and death, and that the immediate action required was further British military intervention in Syria. A few weeks later it gave another refugee boat story the front page, but in contrast to the earlier one the language was about “illegals” who were seeking a “back door”. This time, the refugees were from Iraq, and they had landed on the territory of a British air force base in Cyprus, which legally made them the responsibility of the UK.

    The fragmented and contradictory media coverage of the crisis left room for questions to go unanswered and myths to circulate: who are these people and what do they want from us? Why don’t they stop in the first safe country they reach? Why don’t the men stay behind and fight? How can we make room for everyone? Are they bringing their problems to our shores? Do they threaten our culture and values? The problem is made worse by those media outlets that have an active desire to stoke hostility and misunderstanding.

    One of the first people I met in the course of my reporting was Azad, a young Kurdish man from northern Syria, in a hastily constructed refugee camp in Bulgaria at the end of 2013. At the time, the inability of Bulgarian and EU authorities to adequately prepare for the arrival of a few thousand people – the camp, at Harmanli in southern Bulgaria, marked the first time Médecins sans Frontières had ever set up emergency medical facilities within Europe – seemed like an unusual development. Everyone was new to this situation, and the camp’s inhabitants, largely Syrians who had fled the war there but decided that Syria’s neighbouring countries could not offer them the security they needed, were shocked at what they found. Several of them told me this couldn’t possibly be the real Europe, and that they would continue moving until they found it. Azad was friendly and wanted to know lots about where I came from, London, and to find out what he could about the other countries in Europe, and where people like him might find a place to settle.

    I went back to meet Azad several times over the next two years, as he and his family made their way across Bulgaria, and then central Europe, to Germany. During that time, the backlash against refugees grew stronger, a fact Azad was keenly aware of. In Sofia, in the spring of 2014, he pointed out places in the city centre where homeless Syrians had been attacked by street gangs. Later that year, in eastern Germany, we walked through a town where lampposts were festooned with posters for a far-right political party.

    https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/fa2e141ab6724115920ad9c8da0a9a8f5062613a/178_3160_7900_4740/master/7900.jpg?width=880&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=f94d910248f1757de42634

    By the autumn of 2015, Azad and his family were settled in Germany’s Ruhr area, and he was much warier of me than he had been in our early meetings. He could see that hostility ran alongside the curiosity and welcome that had greeted the new arrivals to Europe; and he knew how giving too many details away to journalists could threaten what stability people in his situation had managed to find. Within a few months, a series of events – the Islamic State attack in Paris in November 2015, the robberies and sexual assaults in Cologne that New Year’s Eve – had provided the excuse for some media outlets to tie well-worn stereotypes about savage, dark foreigners and their alleged threat to white European purity to the refugees of today.

    The most brazen of these claims – such as the Polish magazine wSieci, which featured a white woman draped in the EU flag being groped at by the arms of dark-skinned men, under the headline The Islamic Rape of Europe – directly echoed the Nazi and fascist propaganda of Europe’s 20th century. But racist stereotyping was present in more liberal outlets too. The Süddeutsche Zeitung, in its coverage of the Cologne attacks, prominently featured an illustration of a woman’s legs silhouetted in white, with the space in between taken up by a black arm and hand. Racism is buried so deep in European history that at times like these it can remain unspoken yet still make its presence clear.

    Now, several years on from the peak of the refugee crisis, we are faced with a series of uncomfortable facts. The EU has tried to restore and strengthen the border system that existed before 2015 by extending migration control deep into Africa and Asia. The human rights of the people this affects, not least the many migrants trapped in horrendous conditions in Libya, are taking a back seat. Far right and nationalist movements have made electoral gains in many countries within the EU, and they have done this partly by promising to crack down on migration, to punish refugees for daring to ask for shelter from disasters that Europe was all too often the midwife to. Politicians of the centre are being pulled to the right by these developments, and a dangerous narrative threatens to push out all others: that European culture and identity are threatened by intrusions from outside. If we come to view culture in this way – as something fixed and tightly bounded by the ideologies of race and religion, or as a means for wealthy parts of the world to defend their privilege – then we are headed for further, greater disasters.

    The irony is that you can only believe in this vision if you ignore not only Europe’s history, but its present too. Movement, exchange, new connections, the making and remaking of tradition – these things are happening all around us, and already involve people who have been drawn here from other parts of the world by ties not just of conflict but of economics, history, language and technology. By the same token, displacement is not just a feature of the lives of people from elsewhere in the world; it’s been a major and recent part of Europe’s history too. And what has kept people alive, what has preserved traditions and allowed people to build identities and realise their potential, is solidarity: the desire to defend one another and work towards common goals.

    If there is a failure to recognise this, then the way people are represented by our media and cultural institutions has to be at fault, and setting this right is an urgent challenge. This isn’t only in terms of how people are represented and when, but who gets to participate in the decision-making; who gets to speak with authority, or with political intent, or with a collective voice rather than simply as an individual.

    All too often, the voices of refugees and other marginalised people are reduced to pure testimony, which is then interpreted and contextualised on their behalf. One thing that constantly surprised me about the reporting on refugees in Europe, for instance, was how little we heard from journalists who had connections to already settled diaspora communities. Immigration from Africa, Asia or the Middle East is hardly new to Europe, and this seems like a missed opportunity to strengthen bridges we have already built. Though it’s never too late.

    Any meaningful response to this has to address the question of who gets to tell stories, as well as what kinds of stories are told. The Refugee Journalism Project, a mentoring scheme for displaced journalists, based at London College of Communication – disclosure: I’m on the steering committee, and it is supported by the Guardian Foundation – focuses not only on providing people with a media platform, but helping them develop the skills and contacts necessary for getting jobs.

    All too often the second part is forgotten about. But although initiatives like these are encouraging, we also need to rethink the way our media organisations are run: who owns them, who makes the decisions, who does the work. This reminds me of what I heard Fatima, a women’s rights activist originally from Nigeria, tell an audience of NGO workers in Italy in 2016: “Don’t just come and ask me questions and sell my story or sell my voice; we need a change.”

    The more those of us who work in media can help develop the connections that already exist between us, the more I think we can break down the idea of irreconcilable conflict over migration. Because, really, there is no “over there” – just where we are.

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/aug/01/media-framed-migrant-crisis-disaster-reporting
    #médias #journalisme #presse #crise #terminologie #mots #vocabulaire #asile #migrations #réfugiés #crise_migratoire

  • Une défaite historique de la droite au sein de la droite allemande
    https://www.wams.de


    Il y trente ans la presse Springer abandonne les guillemets autour de l’abbréviation pour l’état socialiste allemand. L’éditeur de Welt am Sonntag Mathias Döpfner, grand ami de la veuve d’Axel Cäsar Springer, le regrette encore aujourd’hui.

    „DDR“, Ein historischer Fehler, Welt am Sonntag, édition du 4.8.2019
    https://framadrop.org/r/la8_ZRMKg4#elsqpXdAGxpAvEL8zFgcTIxNWmzVng7wOS/uTtxCQSY=

    #DDR #guerre_froide #mur #Berlin #histoire #presse #Allemagne #politique

  • François de Rugy victime de la vengeance du Mollah Homard Jacques-Marie Bourget - 11 Juillet 2019 - Le Grand Soir
    https://www.legrandsoir.info/francois-de-rugy-victime-de-la-vengeance-du-mollah-homard.html

    Les commentateurs de l’actualité politique, tout si indépendants, n’ont pas compris que François de Rugy était une victime du djihad. Etonnant ! Non !

    Il est surprenant que nos analystes politiques, eux qui font l’honneur de la presse comme le « Cellofrais » plaqué sur la barquette de saucisses de Toulouse, n’aient pas correctement expliqué les désarrois de l’élève Rugy. Alors que l’exemplaire ministre de l’écologie -c’est-à-dire un traitre par Nature- est simplement victime de l’islamisme, le terrible mal qui court. Victime d’un djihad lancé par Plenel et son « Médiapart ». On oublie trop qu’Edwy, qui voulait naguère « construire une maison commune » avec Tariq Ramadan, est un supporteur des Frères Musulmans. Lui-même étant, à sa façon, une sorte de Mollah Omar version piéton, il était logique qu’il volât au secours de ses amis crustacés, victimes de la marmite de Lassay.

    Pour affirmer mon propos je vais me référer au maître en la matière : Alexandre Vialatte, l’écrivain qui, sans l’avoir autorisé, a accouché de Desproges. Vialatte a publié un formidable « Eloge du homard et autres insectes utiles ». Traducteur de Kafka et journaliste à « La Montagne », le quotidien de Clermont-Ferrand, Alexandre le magnifique a parlé du homard avec des mots qu’aucune langouste n’aurait su trouver :

    « Le homard est un animal paisible qui devient d’un beau rouge à la cuisson. Il demande à être plongé vivant dans l’eau bouillante. Il l’exige même, d’après les livres de cuisine. La vérité est plus nuancée... le homard n’aspire à la cuisson que comme le chrétien au ciel, mais le plus tard possible. Précisons de plus que le homard n’aboie pas et qu’il a l’expérience des abîmes de la mer, ce qui le rend très supérieur au chien et décidait Nerval à la promener en laisse dans les jardins du Palais Royal ». Vous voyez que nous sommes dans la plus haute éthologie, art à ne pas confondre avec l’éthylisme. Même si son avantage est de faire voir double.

    Trop jeune, et visiblement peu instruit de « l’Affaire Greenpeace », François de Rugy ignore qu’outre sa Carte de Presse, Plenel est le seul journaliste français à posséder un « Permis de chasser le ministre ». Si un titulaire de maroquin déplait, surtout les siens, Plenel reçoit en Colissimo la bouteille de poison. Cette fois de homard. Y’a plus qu’à verser.

    Ne croyez pas que j’ai la plus petite pitié pour Rugy, guignol devenu fils de Caligula mais, en tant qu’ancien grand reporter au « Chasseur Français », permettez-moi de démonter le dernier coup de fusil d’Edwy. Il a commencé avais-je écrit, avec le scandale du Rainbow Warrior. Pendant des jours, au moment du scandale en juillet et août 1985, le Tintin du Monde n’a écrit que des sottises, dans mensonges pour épargner l’Elysée. Puis soudain, on lui a soufflé un scénario, la révélation d’une « Troisième équipe », des barbouzes présents à Auckland dans le port où a coulé le bateau écolo (Déjà des écolos !). Ce vrai faux secret était le moyen de flinguer Charles Hernu, ministre des Armées. Et le frère barbu de Villeurbanne a démissionné. La mort politique de Jérôme Cahuzac, qui ne me fait pas chagrin, c’est aussi Edwy et le trophée du menteur « les yeux dans les yeux » figure maintenant au-dessus de cosy corner du patron de Médiapart.

    Décryptons donc comme le fait si bien Jean-Michel Apathie, l’un des invités de François de Rugy. Car le scoop de « Médiapart » entend nous convaincre d’une information incroyable : l’indépendant -et pas paysan- Jean-Mimi se serait laissé aller à partager la soupe d’un politique ! Etonnant ! Non ? Je tombe de l’échelle de Richter. Que va-t-il nous rester pour dire le vrai si Apathie participe aux festins des maîtres ? Je suis très déçu. Question ? Qui veut aujourd’hui la peau de celui qui a autorisé la chasse à la glue et autres barbaries ? Sûrement un ami, un collègue de gouvernement ? Un néo-Benalla agissant sur ordre du Palais ? Découvrir que, même chez les Z’en Marche il existe des fourbes, c’est triste même pour moi l’avant dernier de cordée (en alpinisme le « dernier de cordée » étant le numéro deux de l’équipée). Le bonheur de notre monde a bien des accros, et des acros au maintien des privilèges monarchiques. C’est vrai qu’il ne l’a pas fait exprès mais Robespierre, en mettant la bourgeoisie au pouvoir, devait s’attendre à une revanche de François Goullet de Rugy. Pour les « nobles », le retour des privilèges passait par la casserole du homard.

    Moi-même piqué par le pléonasme à la mode, celui du « journalisme d’investigation », je suis en mesure de vous révéler que Vialatte, post tombe, savait tout des intentions de Plenel, ne terminait-il pas ses « Chroniques du Homard » pas un définitif « Et c’est ainsi qu’#Allah est grand » ?
    Jacques-Marie BOURGET

    #humour #mollahs #mollah #Homard #festin #privilèges #cuisine #guerre_aux_pauvres #presse #journalistes #médias #écologie #islamisme #Edwy_Plenel #Tintin #Médiapart #Rugy #investigation #gastronomie

  • "On n’a jamais vu ça" : des journalistes accusent les forces de l’ordre de les avoir empêchés de travailler lors de l’#occupation du siège d’#Amazon

    Quelques dizaines de militants écologistes ont occupé, mardi, le siège du géant de la vente en ligne. Des journalistes affirment avoir été évacués manu militari par des gendarmes.

    https://mobile.francetvinfo.fr/meteo/climat/on-n-a-jamais-vu-ca-des-journalistes-accusent-les-forces-de-l-or
    #journalisme #presse #médias #police #censure #travail #évacuation

  • View from Nowhere. Is it the press’s job to create a community that transcends borders?

    A few years ago, on a plane somewhere between Singapore and Dubai, I read Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities (1983). I was traveling to report on the global market for passports—how the ultrawealthy can legally buy citizenship or residence virtually anywhere they like, even as 10 million stateless people languish, unrecognized by any country. In the process, I was trying to wrap my head around why national identity meant so much to so many, yet so little to my passport-peddling sources. Their world was the very image of Steve Bannon’s globalist nightmare: where you can never be too rich, too thin, or have too many passports.

    Anderson didn’t address the sale of citizenship, which only took off in earnest in the past decade; he did argue that nations, nationalism, and nationality are about as organic as Cheez Whiz. The idea of a nation, he writes, is a capitalist chimera. It is a collective sense of identity processed, shelf-stabilized, and packaged before being disseminated, for a considerable profit, to a mass audience in the form of printed books, news, and stories. He calls this “print-capitalism.”

    Per Anderson, after the printing press was invented, nearly 600 years ago, enterprising booksellers began publishing the Bible in local vernacular languages (as opposed to the elitist Latin), “set[ting] the stage for the modern nation” by allowing ordinary citizens to participate in the same conversations as the upper classes. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the proliferation (and popularity) of daily newspapers further collapsed time and space, creating an “extraordinary mass ceremony” of reading the same things at the same moment.

    “An American will never meet, or even know the names of more than a handful of his 240,000,000–odd fellow Americans,” Anderson wrote. “He has no idea of what they are up to at any one time.” But with the knowledge that others are reading the same news, “he has complete confidence in their steady, anonymous, simultaneous activity.”

    Should the press be playing a role in shaping not national identities, but transnational ones—a sense that we’re all in it together?

    Of course, national presses enabled more explicit efforts by the state itself to shape identity. After the US entered World War I, for instance, President Woodrow Wilson set out to make Americans more patriotic through his US Committee on Public Information. Its efforts included roping influential mainstream journalists into advocating American-style democracy by presenting US involvement in the war in a positive light, or simply by referring to Germans as “Huns.” The committee also monitored papers produced by minorities to make sure they supported the war effort not as Indians, Italians, or Greeks, but as Americans. Five Irish-American papers were banned, and the German-American press, reacting to negative stereotypes, encouraged readers to buy US bonds to support the war effort.

    The US media played an analogous role in selling the public on the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But ever since then, in the digital economy, its influence on the national consciousness has waned. Imagined Communities was published seven years before the fall of the Berlin Wall, twenty-two years before Thomas Friedman’s The World Is Flat, and a couple of decades before the internet upended print-capitalism as the world knew it (one of Anderson’s footnotes is telling, if quaint: “We still have no giant multinationals in the world of publishing”).

    Since Trump—a self-described nationalist—became a real contender for the US presidency, many news organizations have taken to looking inward: consider the running obsession with the president’s tweets, for instance, or the nonstop White House palace intrigue (which the president invites readily).

    Meanwhile, the unprofitability of local and regional papers has contributed to the erosion of civics, which, down the line, makes it easier for billionaires to opt out of old “imagined communities” and join new ones based on class and wealth, not citizenship. And given the challenges humanity faces—climate change, mass migration, corporate hegemony, and our relationships to new technologies—even if national papers did make everyone feel like they shared the same narrative, a renewed sense of national pride would prove impotent in fighting world-historic threats that know no borders.

    Should the press, then, be playing an analogous role in shaping not national identities, but transnational ones—a sense that we’re all in it together? If it was so important in shaping national identity, can it do so on a global scale?

    Like my passport-buying subjects, I am what Theresa May, the former British prime minister, might call a “citizen of nowhere.” I was born in one place to parents from another, grew up in a third, and have lived and traveled all over. That informs my perspective: I want deeply for there to be a truly cosmopolitan press corps, untethered from national allegiances, regional biases, class divisions, and the remnants of colonial exploitation. I know that’s utopian; the international working class is hardly a lucrative demographic against which publishers can sell ads. But we seem to be living in a time of considerable upheaval and opportunity. Just as the decline of religiously and imperially organized societies paved the way for national alternatives, then perhaps today there is a chance to transcend countries’ boundaries, too.

    Does the US media help create a sense of national identity? If nationalism means putting the interests of one nation—and what its citizens are interested in—before more universal concerns, then yes. Most journalists working for American papers, websites, and TV write in English with a national audience (or regional time zone) in mind, which affects how we pitch, source, frame, and illustrate a story—which, in turn, influences our readers, their country’s politics, and, down the line, the world. But a news peg isn’t an ideological form of nationalism so much as a practical or methodological one. The US press feeds off of more pernicious nationalisms, too: Donald Trump’s false theory about Barack Obama being “secretly” Kenyan, disseminated by the likes of Fox and The Daily Caller, comes to mind.

    That isn’t to say that global news outlets don’t exist in the US. When coaxing subscribers, the Financial Times, whose front page often includes references to a dozen different countries, openly appeals to their cosmopolitanism. “Be a global citizen. Become an FT Subscriber,” read a recent banner ad, alongside a collage featuring the American, Chinese, Japanese, Australian, and European Union flags (though stories like the recent “beginner’s guide to buying a private island” might tell us something about what kind of global citizen they’re appealing to).

    “I don’t think we try to shape anyone’s identity at all,” Gillian Tett, the paper’s managing editor for the US, says. “We recognize two things: that the world is more interconnected today than it’s ever been, and that these connections are complex and quite opaque. We think it’s critical to try to illuminate them.”

    For Tett, who has a PhD in social anthropology, money serves as a “neutral, technocratic” starting point through which to understand—and tie together—the world. “Most newspapers today tend to start with an interest in politics or events, and that inevitably leads you to succumb to tribalism, however hard you try [not to],” Tett explains. “If you look at the world through money—how is money going around the world, who’s making and losing it and why?—out of that you lead to political, cultural, foreign-policy stories.”

    Tett’s comments again brought to mind Imagined Communities: Anderson notes that, in 18th-century Caracas, newspapers “began essentially as appendages of the market,” providing commercial news about ships coming in, commodity prices, and colonial appointments, as well as a proto–Vows section for the upper crust to hate-read in their carriages. “The newspaper of Caracas quite naturally, and even apolitically, created an imagined community among a specific assemblage of fellow-readers, to whom these ships, brides, bishops, and prices belonged,” he wrote. “In time, of course, it was only to be expected that political elements would enter in.”

    Yesterday’s aristocracy is today’s passport-buying, globe-trotting one percent. The passport brokers I got to know also pitched clients with the very same promise of “global citizenship” (it sounds less louche than “buy a new passport”)—by taking out ads in the Financial Times. Theirs is exactly the kind of neoliberal “globalism” that nationalist politicians like Trump have won elections denouncing (often hypocritically) as wanting “the globe to do well, frankly, not caring about our country so much.” Isn’t upper-crust glibness about borders, boundaries, and the value of national citizenship part of what helped give us this reactionary nativism in the first place?

    “I suspect what’s been going on with Brexit and maybe Trump and other populist movements [is that] people. . . see ‘global’ as a threat to local communities and businesses rather than something to be welcomed,” Tett says. “But if you’re an FT reader, you see it as benign or descriptive.”

    Among the largest news organizations in the world is Reuters, with more than 3,000 journalists and photographers in 120 countries. It is part of Thomson Reuters, a truly global firm. Reuters does not take its mandate lightly: a friend who works there recently sent me a job posting for an editor in Gdynia, which, Google clarified for me, is a city in the Pomeranian Voivodeship of Poland.

    Reuters journalists cover everything from club sports to international tax evasion. They’re outsourcing quick hits about corporate earnings to Bangalore, assembling teams on multiple continents to tackle a big investigation, shedding or shuffling staff under corporate reorganizations. Perhaps unsurprisingly, “more than half our business is serving financial customers,” Stephen Adler, the editor in chief, tells me. “That has little to do with what country you’re from. It’s about information: a central-bank action in Europe or Japan may be just as important as everything else.”

    Institutionally, “it’s really important and useful that we don’t have one national HQ,” Adler adds. “That’s the difference between a global news organization and one with a foreign desk. For us, nothing is foreign.” That approach won Reuters this year’s international Pulitzer Prize for uncovering the mass murder of the Rohingya in Myanmar (two of the reporters were imprisoned as a result, and since freed); it also comes through especially sharply in daily financial stories: comprehensive, if dry, compendiums of who-what-where-when-why that recognize the global impact of national stories, and vice versa. A recent roundup of stock movements included references to the US Fed, China trade talks, Brexit, monetary policy around the world, and the price of gold.

    Adler has led the newsroom since 2011, and a lot has changed in the world. (I worked at Reuters between 2011 and 2013, first as Adler’s researcher and later as a reporter; Adler is the chair of CJR’s board.) Shortly after Trump’s election, Adler wrote a memo affirming the organization’s commitment to being fair, honest, and resourceful. He now feels more strongly than ever about judiciously avoiding biases—including national ones. “Our ideology and discipline around putting personal feelings and nationality aside has been really helpful, because when you think about how powerful local feelings are—revolutions, the Arab Spring—we want you writing objectively and dispassionately.”

    The delivery of stories in a casual, illustrated, highly readable form is in some ways more crucial to developing an audience than subject matter.

    Whether global stories can push communities to develop transnationally in a meaningful way is a harder question to answer; it seems to impugn our collective aptitude for reacting to problems of a global nature in a rational way. Reuters’s decision not to fetishize Trump hasn’t led to a drop-off in US coverage—its reporters have been especially strong on immigration and trade policy, not to mention the effects of the new administration on the global economy—but its stories aren’t exactly clickbait, which means ordinary Americans might not encounter them at the top of their feed. In other words, having a global perspective doesn’t necessarily translate to more eyeballs.

    What’s more, Reuters doesn’t solve the audience-class problem: whether readers are getting dispatches in partner newspapers like The New York Times or through the organization’s Eikon terminal, they tend to be the sort of person “who does transnational business, travels a good deal, is connected through work and media, has friends in different places, cares about what’s going on in different places,” Adler says. “That’s a pretty large cohort of people who have reason to care what’s going on in other places.”

    There are ways to unite readers without centering coverage on money or the markets. For a generation of readers around the world, the common ground is technology: the internet. “We didn’t pick our audience,” Ben Smith, the editor in chief of BuzzFeed, tells me over the phone. “Our audience picked us.” He defines his readers as a cohort aged 18–35 “who are on the internet and who broadly care about human rights, global politics, and feminism and gay rights in particular.”

    To serve them, BuzzFeed recently published a damning investigative report into the World Wildlife Fund’s arming of militias in natural reserves; a (not uncontroversial) series on Trump’s business dealings abroad; early exposés of China’s detention of Uighur citizens; and reports on child abuse in Australia. Climate—“the central challenge for every newsroom in the world”—has been harder to pin down. “We don’t feel anyone has cracked it. But the shift from abstract scientific [stories] to coverage of fires in California, it’s a huge change—it makes it more concrete,” Smith says. (My husband is a reporter for BuzzFeed.)

    The delivery of these stories in a casual, illustrated, highly readable form is in some ways more crucial to developing an audience than subject matter. “The global political financial elites have had a common language ever since it was French,” Smith says. “There is now a universal language of internet culture, [and] that. . . is how our stuff translates so well between cultures and audiences.” This isn’t a form of digital Esperanto, Smith insists; the point isn’t to flatten the differences between countries or regions so much as to serve as a “container” in which people from different regions, interest groups, and cultures can consume media through references they all understand.

    BuzzFeed might not be setting out to shape its readers’ identities (I certainly can’t claim to feel a special bond with other people who found out they were Phoebes from the quiz “Your Sushi Order Will Reveal Which ‘Friends’ Character You’re Most Like”). An audience defined by its youth and its media consumption habits can be difficult to keep up with: platforms come and go, and young people don’t stay young forever. But if Anderson’s thesis still carries water, there must be something to speaking this language across cultures, space, and time. Call it “Web vernacular.”

    In 2013, during one of the many recent and lengthy US government shutdowns, Joshua Keating, a journalist at Slate, began a series, “If It Happened There,” that imagined how the American media would view the shutdown if it were occurring in another country. “The typical signs of state failure aren’t evident on the streets of this sleepy capital city,” Keating opens. “Beret-wearing colonels have not yet taken to the airwaves to declare martial law. . . .But the pleasant autumn weather disguises a government teetering on the brink.”

    It goes on; you get the idea. Keating’s series, which was inspired by his having to read “many, many headlines from around the world” while working at Foreign Policy, is a clever journalistic illustration of what sociologists call “methodological nationalism”: the bias that gets inadvertently baked into work and words. In the Middle East, it’s sectarian or ethnic strife; in the Midwest, it’s a trigger-happy cop and a kid in a hoodie.

    His send-ups hit a nerve. “It was huge—it was by far the most popular thing I’ve done at Slate,” Keating says. “I don’t think that it was a shocking realization to anyone that this kind of language can be a problem, but sometimes pointing it out can be helpful. If the series did anything, it made people stop and be conscious of how. . . our inherent biases and perspectives will inform how we cover the world.”

    Curiously, living under an openly nationalist administration has changed the way America—or at the very least, a significant part of the American press corps—sees itself. The press is a de facto opposition party, not because it tries to be, but because the administration paints it that way. And that gives reporters the experience of working in a place much more hostile than the US without setting foot outside the country.

    Keating has “semi-retired” the series as a result of the broad awareness among American reporters that it is, in fact, happening here. “It didn’t feel too novel to say [Trump was] acting like a foreign dictator,” he says. “That was what the real news coverage was doing.”

    Keating, who traveled to Somaliland, Kurdistan, and Abkhazia to report his book Invisible Countries (2018), still thinks the fastest and most effective way to form an international perspective is to live abroad. At the same time, not being bound to a strong national identity “can make it hard to understand particular concerns of the people you’re writing about,” he says. It might be obvious, but there is no one perfect way to be internationally minded.

    Alan Rusbridger—the former editor of The Guardian who oversaw the paper’s Edward Snowden coverage and is now the principal at Lady Margaret Hall, a college at Oxford University—recognizes the journalistic and even moral merits of approaching news in a non-national way: “I think of journalism as a public service, and I do think there’s a link between journalism at its best and the betterment of individual lives and societies,” he says. But he doesn’t have an easy formula for how to do that, because truly cosmopolitan journalism requires both top-down editorial philosophies—not using certain phrasings or framings that position foreigners as “others”—and bottom-up efforts by individual writers to read widely and be continuously aware of how their work might be read by people thousands of miles away.

    Yes, the starting point is a nationally defined press, not a decentralized network, but working jointly helps pool scarce resources and challenge national or local biases.

    Rusbridger sees potential in collaborations across newsrooms, countries, and continents. Yes, the starting point is a nationally defined press, not a decentralized network; but working jointly helps pool scarce resources and challenge national or local biases. It also wields power. “One of the reasons we reported Snowden with the Times in New York was to use global protections of human rights and free speech and be able to appeal to a global audience of readers and lawyers,” Rusbridger recalls. “We thought, ‘We’re pretty sure nation-states will come at us over this, and the only way to do it is harness ourselves to the US First Amendment not available to us anywhere else.’”

    In employing these tactics, the press positions itself in opposition to the nation-state. The same strategy could be seen behind the rollout of the Panama and Paradise Papers (not to mention the aggressive tax dodging detailed therein). “I think journalists and activists and citizens on the progressive wing of politics are thinking creatively about how global forces can work to their advantage,” Rusbridger says.

    But he thinks it all starts locally, with correspondents who have fluency in the language, culture, and politics of the places they cover, people who are members of the communities they write about. That isn’t a traditional foreign-correspondent experience (nor indeed that of UN employees, NGO workers, or other expats). The silver lining of publishing companies’ shrinking budgets might be that cost cutting pushes newsrooms to draw from local talent, rather than send established writers around. What you gain—a cosmopolitanism that works from the bottom up—can help dispel accusations of media elitism. That’s the first step to creating new imagined communities.

    Anderson’s work has inspired many an academic, but media executives? Not so much. Rob Wijnberg is an exception: he founded the (now beleaguered) Correspondent in the Netherlands in 2013 with Anderson’s ideas in mind. In fact, when we speak, he brings the name up unprompted.

    “You have to transcend this notion that you can understand the world through the national point of view,” he says. “The question is, What replacement do we have for it? Simply saying we have to transcend borders or have an international view isn’t enough, because you have to replace the imagined community you’re leaving behind with another one.”

    For Wijnberg, who was a philosophy student before he became a journalist, this meant radically reinventing the very structures of the news business: avoiding covering “current events” just because they happened, and thinking instead of what we might call eventful currents—the political, social, and economic developments that affect us all. It meant decoupling reporting from national news cycles, and getting readers to become paying “members” instead of relying on advertisements.

    This, he hoped, would help create a readership not based on wealth, class, nationality, or location, but on borderless, universal concerns. “We try to see our members. . . as part of a group or knowledge community, where the thing they share is the knowledge they have about a specific structural subject matter,” be it climate, inequality, or migration, Wijnberg says. “I think democracy and politics answers more to media than the other way around, so if you change the way media covers the world you change a lot.”

    That approach worked well in the Netherlands: his team raised 1.7 million euros in 2013, and grew to include 60,000 members. A few years later, Wijnberg and his colleagues decided to expand into the US, and with the help of NYU’s Jay Rosen, an early supporter, they made it onto Trevor Noah’s Daily Show to pitch their idea.

    The Correspondent raised more than $2.5 million from nearly 50,000 members—a great success, by any measure. But in March, things started to get hairy, with the publication abruptly pulling the plug on opening a US newsroom and announcing that staff would edit stories reported from the US from the original Amsterdam office instead. Many of the reasons behind this are mundane: visas, high rent, relocation costs. And reporters would still be reporting from, and on, the States. But supporters felt blindsided, calling the operation a scam.

    Today, Wijnberg reflects that he should have controlled the messaging better, and not promised to hire and operate from New York until he was certain that he could. He also wonders why it matters.

    “It’s not saying people who think it matters are wrong,” he explains. “But if the whole idea of this kind of geography and why it’s there is a construct, and you’re trying to think about transcending it, the very notion of Where are you based? is secondary. The whole point is not to be based anywhere.”

    Still: “The view from everywhere—the natural opposite—is just as real,” Wijnberg concedes. “You can’t be everywhere. You have to be somewhere.”

    And that’s the rub: for all of nationalism’s ills, it does instill in its subjects what Anderson calls a “deep, horizontal comradeship” that, while imagined, blossoms thanks to a confluence of forces. It can’t be replicated supranationally overnight. The challenge for a cosmopolitan journalism, then, is to dream up new forms of belonging that look forward, not backward—without discarding the imagined communities we have.

    That’s hard; so hard that it more frequently provokes a retrenchment, not an expansion, of solidarity. But it’s not impossible. And our collective futures almost certainly depend on it.

    https://www.cjr.org/special_report/view-from-nowhere.php
    #journalisme #nationalisme #Etat-nation #communauté_nationale #communauté_internationale #frontières #presse #médias

  • #Global_media_Monitoring_Project (#GMMP)

    Who makes the news? is a knowledge, information and resource portal on applied media research. Our work focuses on gender and other axes of discrimination in and through media and communication.

    In 1987 a series of regional consultations on ‘women and media’ convened by the communication rights’ organisation WACC-UK culminated in the first-ever global conference on ‘Women Empowering Communication’ held in Bangkok in February 1994. Convened in co-operation with Isis International - Philippines and the International Women’s Tribune Centre-New York, the conference brought together over 430 people from 80 countries. At the conference, women from all over the world developed a series of strategies and resolutions for empowering women in and through the media in the ‘Bangkok Declaration’.

    The Bangkok Declaration and the recommendations contained in Section J on “Women and the media” of the Beijing Platform for Action of the 1995 UN Fourth World Conference on Women have provided a blueprint for our interventions. In March 2017 the Bangkok Declaration was revised with input from participants at a WACC pre-Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) symposium in New York. Dubbed The New York Declaration, the new text reflects pertinent gender issues in the current media landscape. The document articulates a feminist agenda for the media and charts a path for action by various actors.

    We promote critical media research to generate evidence for education, awareness, training and advocacy, supporting women’s use of media for their own empowerment and for the development of their communities. It advocates full and equal participation of women in public communication so that their multiple and complex interests, experiences and realities become part of the public agenda. It also supports civil society evidence-building on media and marginalized sectors of society in order to advance social justice goals for all in and through the media.

    Our work has resulted in an extensive network of individuals and organizations concerned about gender, media and critical communication broadly, from grassroots activists to academics and development organisations.


    http://whomakesthenews.org
    #femmes #genre #médias #presse

  • Presse locale: la grande hémorragie
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/france/300619/presse-locale-la-grande-hemorragie

    Chute impressionnante des effectifs, fermetures d’agences à la pelle, accentuation des monopoles : la presse régionale s’est considérablement affaiblie depuis 2009. Notre partenaire Mediacités dresse un état des lieux plus qu’inquiétant de l’évolution du journalisme local sur dix ans.

    #Enquête #presse_locale,_PQR,_presse,_PHR,_médias

  • Taire la nationalité des prévenus ?

    Afin d’éviter les amalgames, une majorité du parlement est favorable à interdire à la #police genevoise de communiquer à la presse la nationalité des délinquants présumés.

    La #motion, soutenue par la majorité des partis, a de grandes chances d’être adoptée par le parlement cantonal. Elle vise à modifier la pratique de la police genevoise lorsqu’elle communique avec la presse sur des délits commis à Genève ou sur des interpellations.

    A l’avenir, la nationalité des délinquants présumés pourrait ne plus du tout être mentionnée. L’auteure de la motion, la députée verte Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini, entend ainsi lutter contre les amalgames xénophobes.

    Le texte est aussi soutenu par Ensemble à gauche, le PS et le PDC, et doit encore être voté en séance plénière. « La nationalité n’apporte pas d’informations pertinentes sur la question du délit », a justifié Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini en commission.

    Elle cite une étude, menée par le professeur en criminologie André Kuhn, qui montre que des facteurs comme l’âge, le niveau socio-économique, le sexe ou encore le niveau de formation sont les plus déterminants. « La mention de la nationalité ne fait qu’attiser la haine », poursuit l’élue écologiste. Elle estime que ces données peuvent être instrumentalisées par certains groupes à des fins politiques.
    La pratique actuelle

    La motion s’inspire de la pratique mise en place dans les villes de Zurich et de Berne. Elle prévoit des exceptions « si cette information est pertinente dans une situation spécifique ». Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini précise que la police genevoise serait tenue de taire la nationalité, non seulement dans ses communiqués, mais également si des journalistes questionnent son service de presse. « Il faut avoir un cadre strict. »

    Actuellement, la publication de la nationalité des prévenus dans les communiqués de la police est la norme, suivant les recommandations de la Conférence des commandants des polices cantonales de Suisse. Il mentionne aussi l’année de naissance et le sexe des personnes. « Sur demande, il est possible de confirmer une origine étrangère », précise aussi le Service de presse de la police genevoise.

    Toutefois, ce dernier ne communique de loin pas sur toutes les affaires. Dans son bulletin journalier, il fournit des informations sur les cas « de moindre importance », le plus souvent en rapport avec des vols, des infractions à la loi sur les stupéfiants ou au code de la route.

    La police s’abstient lorsqu’il s’agit de délits plus graves, comme les homicides, ou des affaires qui se déroulent dans la sphère privée ou qui concernent des mineurs. Cette communication partielle n’est pas anodine : dans certains domaines, comme celui du trafic de drogues, la part des infractions répertoriées impliquant des étrangers est plus élevée.
    Une proposition « contre-productive »

    La proposition des Verts ne fait pas l’unanimité au Grand Conseil. En commission, les groupes de l’UDC, du MCG et du PLR s’y sont opposés. Pour le député UDC Marc Fuhrmann, dont le parti est connu pour pointer le lien entre populations étrangères et criminalité, « il s’agit d’une obstruction à la liberté de la presse ».

    Il estime que la population a le droit, au nom de la transparence, de connaître ce type d’informations. « Cette motion veut manipuler le public afin de le détourner de la réalité », écrit le député. Il relève notamment que les prisons suisses sont occupées majoritairement par des détenus étrangers. Un constat qui doit être expliqué en prenant en compte d’autres critères (comme l’âge, le sexe, ou la situation socio-économique), rétorque Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini.

    Pour beaucoup d’opposants, le fait de taire l’information de la nationalité serait contre-productif. Une partie du public pourrait avoir l’impression qu’on lui cache quelque chose, ce qui renforcerait des sentiments xénophobes. « Notre culture du fait divers est à revoir, répond Delphine Klopfenstein Broggini. Si une partie de la population recherche ces informations, c’est aussi que les médias les ont fournies pendant longtemps. C’est pour cette raison que la pratique doit changer et que les mentalités doivent évoluer. »

    https://lecourrier.ch/2019/06/18/taire-la-nationalite-des-prevenus
    #nationalité #presse #criminalité #médias #Genève

    Et Le Courrier met quoi comme image ? Photo d’un homme noir...

  • Question du jour : y a-t-il une modération à La Dépêche du Midi ? Commentaires racistes, violents, ragots, #complotisme, publiés sur le site de @ladepechedumidi en toute tranquillité... Un exemple. #presse #racisme #pqrpic.twitter.com/SXTQhPwE0z
    https://twitter.com/vslonskamalvaud/status/1141273088761442310

    Question du jour : y a-t-il une modération à La Dépêche du Midi ? Commentaires racistes, violents, ragots, #complotisme, publiés sur le site de @ladepechedumidi en toute tranquillité... Un exemple. #presse #racisme #pqr pic.twitter.com/SXTQhPwE0z

  • Qui est Magali Tabareau, la #juge attaquée chez elle au #LBD ? – Désarmons-les !
    https://desarmons.net/index.php/2019/06/18/qui-est-magali-tabareau-la-juge-attaquee-chez-elle-au-lbd

    Mais revenons au sujet initial. Que sait-on de Magali Tabareau ?

    La #presse_de_préfecture s’est empressée ces derniers jours de présenter la juge comme une pourfendeuse de personnages peu fréquentables : un animateur périscolaire accusé de viol, un ex policier condamné à 10 ans de prison pour avoir tué sa femme avec son arme de service, une affaire de trafic de cocaïne à l’encontre de Jean-Luc Delarue, etc. Bref, des faits-divers sordides pour lesquels on a du mal à éprouver de l’empathie.

    Magali Tabareau, c’est aussi cette juge qui avait condamné à 7 ans de prison un dealer présumé, Mohamed Fodil, sur la base de faux en écritures, encourageant ainsi une pratique courante chez les policiers consistant à se couvrir en produisant des procès verbaux mensongers.

    Magali Tabareau est aussi cette magistrate qui, lorsqu’elle était juge d’instruction dans l’affaire de la mort de Lakhamy et Moushin en 2007 à Villiers le Bel, avait prononcé en 2009 un non-lieu en faveur des policiers impliqués, dont le conducteur du véhicule de police qui avait renversé la moto sur laquelle se trouvaient les deux jeunes, Franck Viallet.

    Enfin, Magali Tabareau est cette juge qui, comme pour jeter de l’huile sur le feu, avait renvoyé cinq jeunes de Villiers le Bel devant la Cour d’Assises en 2010 sur la base de témoignages anonymes, les accusant d’avoir organisé les émeutes qui ont suivi le meurtre de Lakhamy et Moushin. Parmi ces accusés, les frères Kamara avaient été finalement condamnés à 12 et 15 ans de prison ferme.

    Magali Tabareau n’est donc pas étrangère à des décisions emblématiques ayant considérablement conforté l’#impunité_policière et la #répression_d’Etat. Elle a contribué à mettre au pas un quartier par des décisions judiciaires lourdes, avec cette logique implacable : « en viser un pour faire peur à tous les autres ».