(o) The Fiji Media Council and Government

The Fiji Media Council has 19 members comprising a representative of each contributing media organisation, an equal number of public members appointed by the Council, and an independent Chair. The Government is represented through the Department of Information. In February this year the FMC commissioned Australian Jack Herman, and Fiji citizens Suliana Sitawibau and Barrie Sweetman (l-r, photo) to review its work and make recommendations for improvement. The Review team received written submissions from 26 media, government and non-government organizations; interviews were conducted with a further 16, and an extraordinary meeting was held with the Media Council attended among others by Riyaz Sayed Khaiyum, CEO, Fiji Broadcasting Corp., and Peni Nonu and two associates of the Department of Information. Government representation is deliberately stressed. The Review report was released last week. (see full report here.)

The critical question was whether the media should be self-regulated or regulated by some arm of government. The Report concluded "The media have to be free to be critical of government and, while a media council is not the same thing as the media, it too needs to be free of government control. Any media regulatory body controlled by government runs the risk of government appointees who will see themselves as responsible to the government, not the people."

Most recommendations referred to the Council itself : the need for a higher profile; to be more active in promoting media standards ("it has appeared more frequently to be vocal about the need for media freedom, without a concomitant voice on media responsibility."); more commitment by media organizations ("need to commit themselves to a stronger observation of the Council’s pronouncements on questions of ethics and standards and to publish or broadcast outcomes of the Council’s complaints process promptly, and with due prominence.") The Report complimented FMC Chairperson Daryl Tarte and other unpaid volunteers for their excellent work in trying circumstances. It recommended the apointment of a paid administrator; the leasing of an office of its own; and the retention of both industry and non-industry representation on the Council.

The Review’s recommendations for the retention of, and improvements to, the Media Council are based on its understanding of the importance to civil society of a free and a responsible media. It believes that all campaigners for human rights should support a media free from government or other interference and free to report on matters of public interest and concern, as long as that media are subject to a regime of ethical principles that will ensure that their journalism is carried out in a responsible fashion, and that efforts are made constantly to raise those standards to a level commensurate with the place of the media in a free and civil society.

See also Josephine Latu's (Pacific Media Watch) commentary on the report.

Government and Media Need to Work on Relationship: Report Extract

"The relationship between a government and a free media is never an easy one. The adversarial nature of the relationship is exacerbated in Fiji where political instability has been a feature of the environment over the past twenty-five years. There is, as a result, a heightened sense of hostility between the government and the media, particularly when the media are seen as vocal opponents of government proposals.

"It is not the job of a media council to be a partisan of either side in this relationship. While it is connected to the media industry through its funding and membership, it has to be seen to be independent of it, arguing for both the freedom and the responsibility of the media. To achieve its object of keeping the media free, a media council needs to cultivate relationships with the executive, the legislature and the bureaucracy and use those relationships to be a strong advocate of press freedom. It needs the continued cooperation of the media industry to further its aim as a proponent of media responsibility.

"As an independent media council represents both the media industry and the general public who consume the media, it needs to be seen as a genuinely independent voice. To the extent that it may not have projected itself as a truly independent voice, pressing for both media freedom and an improvement in media standards, the Media Council has been perceived as not projecting itself sufficiently as a credible advocate for a free and a responsible media.

"Despite the level of the rhetoric from partisans on either side of the media-government adversarial relationship, it is the view of the Review that the Fiji Media Council has maintained a proper relationship with government. Certainly it has made strong comments when it has seen threats to press freedom emerging from government sources - but that is an important part of its brief, a fact that government needs to recognise.

"Given that the Department of Information, as a publisher, is a constituent member of the Media Council, the government has a direct voice in the development of policy within the Council. There is a suggestion that the Department has not used this opportunity to the extent that it might. This has meant that the government has not fostered its relationship with the Media Council to the extent that it might have.

"Both the government and the Media Council need to work on the relationship and it would be unfair of this Review to say that the Council needs to take the initiative. It is the Review’s belief that the government has no place in the regulation of the media and should encourage as far as possible, through its existing membership of the Fiji Media Council, the improved profile and more active attention to press responsibility recommended in this report."