(o+-) Pro- and Anti- Observations on the Draft Media Decree
The draft Decree may be read here through this Mediafire link or through the same link provided in a previous post. Photo: gocek.org
Hear CCF's Mosmi Bhim speaking on the democratisation of Fiji - how to achieve it and how to cope with the present situation. Mosmi, speaking as an individual, was attending the conference of the Australian Association for the Advancement of Pacific Studies at Victoria University, Melbourne. The Presenter is Bruce Hill.
Interviewed by Radio Tarana PM Bainimarama said he's looking forward to the outcome of the consultations and thinks the media industry will now have an "appreciation of how government wants to engage in building a responsible media that will move the country forward." He said Government cannot and will not allow vested interests to take over the national interest. He refused to speculate about the future of the Fiji Times. Journalist Michael Field had earlier said "it is clear that coup strongman Voreqe Bainimarama is seeking to take over the Fiji Times." Clear to Field perhaps; other prefer not to prejudge outcomes.
Spot the Difference.This email from White Frangipani:
Croz, Which report is more accurate, or should I say “spot the difference”?
Fiji Times in "Media Freedom is Vital" says Professor Satendra Nandan said he believes the freedom of the press is very important, it plays an important role in moving this country forward and the role of the media is very essential.
Fiji Sun in "Academic Wants Balance" says that Professor Satendra Nandan said there should be a balance between the public interest and the people in power, public interest came first, the role of the media in developing societies and countries is essential, the role of the media is very essential, and media played a vital role but license could not be given in the name of freedom.
Interesting to compare the reports. Balance and public interest were not mentioned by Fiji Times which emphasizes freedom of the press while the Fiji Sun emphasizes the public interest. Comparing the emphasis in the headings is also interesting.
A-G Says Overseas Reactions Bordering on Hysterical and Unbalanced. Sayed-Khaiyum says the reaction and reporting by the overseas media on the Decree was not balanced. No one has clarifying that the Decree is still a draft, and not single overseas media organization has contacted him since the Decree was released, to get government’s side of the story.
What Happens After 2014? The A-G also said concern had been expressed at the consultations about the Authority's powers once politicians returned in 2014. He said these would be addressed to prevent "manipulation." The draft decree will now go back to the drawing board, and the decree implemented as soon as possible.
The Singapore Model. The A-G says this is the sort of media law that applies in several other countries, citing Singapore but Prof. Gary Rodan, of the Asia Research centre at Australia's Murdoch University, thinks Singpore is not a good model. Listen to what he has to say.
See Link to the Singapore Model. An very informative article "Singapore Baseline Study" may be downloaded through this Mediafire link. Simply click on download.
AUT Journalism Professor, David Robie expresses deep concern about parts of the draft Decree.
The Future of PINA. David is also concerned about its implications for the PI News Association (PINA) based in Suva. And PINA calls for softer Media Decree penalties.One might have thought it would have had more to say than this.
'Old' Media Council Seeks Meeting with Government. Link.