The Radio NZInternational heading reads "Fiji Interim Government Sacks its Reformer from Sugar Ministry" but then reports that Parmesh Chand had been relieved of his permanent secretary for the Sugar industry duties in order to concentrate on the reform of the public service. How is this being sacked?
Half a world away media mogul Rupert Murdoch's Fox News has been banned from interviews at the White House because of persistent negative reporting. The TV channel's latest is that President Obama is a racist (!) and his acceptance of the Nobel Prize for Peace proof that he puts the globe before his country.
And while you're recovering from that nonsense, ask which paper in Fiji is most hostile to the Interim Government, and before that most hostile to the Labour Coalition Government deposed by the Speight Coup. Yes. The Fiji Times. And who owns the Times? News Ltd, a subsidiary of News Corp. And guess who owns* News Corp? Rupert Murdoch.
Murdoch has a half-century record of political involvement, more often than not to advance his business interests on a quid pro quo basis. During the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, all 175 Murdoch-owned newspapers worldwide editorialized in favour of the war. During the US Presidential election campaign Obama said Murdoch's media portrayed him "as suspicious, foreign, fearsome - just short of a terrorist." Murdoch's empire is world-wide. In Australia it includes The Australian, The Daily Telegraph and The Herald; in NZ The DominionPost. In the UK the list includes the Times, the Sun and SkyTV; and in the US, the New York Post, Boston Herald, Twentieth Century Fox, Chicago Sun-times, the Wall Street Journal, Fox News and numerous TV channels. Given their common ownership --although editorial independence is claimed-- and the syndication of news, the extent of their power to influence global public opinion is mind boggling. -- Based partly on Wikipedia that raises issues about media ownership.
Two recent addresses about the media and democracy in Fiji and the Pacific are by USP academics Prof. Biman Prasad and Shailendra Singh. Prasad calls for the lifting of PER; Singh highlights the economic costs of censorship. Their points are valid but neither mentions media ownership. One wonders why ownership has received so little attention from those concerned about media freedom. In the US, TV stations can only be owned by US citizens. Perhaps Fiji needs some controls over the foreign ownership of its media?
* Murdoch is personally worth an estimated US$4 billion; his empire US$48 billion. His "ownership," therefore, is limited to his personal shares in his companies, his directorships and CEO positions. Photo: Wikipedia.
4 comments:
This is why media freedom is a farce.
Agreed, media freedom generally belongs to those who own the media. In case of Murdoch, he manufactured news on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and even made the gullible Americans believe that Iraq has a hand in 9/11 terrorism. Remember, same Murdoch owns Fiji Times and he is known to select Publishers and editors who sing in "HIS MASTER'S VOICE"
Rupert has the nerve to demand google to pay for news content.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/10/2710367.htm
There is a new dawn coming where, News corp will simply meet a natural death because the general public will find freebies more attractive than pay price models.
Up yours News corp!
When Jim Anthony conducted his media inquiry in Fiji, Parkinson, Tarte and Rika wanted to know what media ownership had to do with media freedom!! Oilei. Read this blog on Murdoch.
Post a Comment