N0116.
By Crosbie WalshWhat veteran journalist Michael Field (photo) can't teach you about reporting on Fiji isn't worth knowing. Take his latest Sunday Star-Times article on the Fiji Rugby Union crisis, Fiji Leader Doesn't Care for NZ. It's 282 words long and has 82 words of new information. Most of the rest was published last week by the the same journalist in the same weekly paper.
First, we need to look at the heading because it gets the message across even to those who don't read the article. It says Bainimarama doesn't like us and we reply: Up yours! We don't like you either. It's a good way to get readers tuned in to what you want them to believe, even if it was not quite what Bainimarama said.
Then, it's important to typecast the main actors so that readers are left in no doubt about who the baddies are. Bainimarama, of course, is the “Fiji coup leader.” He's the guy we usually see on TV in his unchanged military uniform. And another key actor is “his brother-in-law Francis Kean, a convicted killer.” No explanation, just a convicted killer which would leave readers unfamiliar with the case wondering whether it was a brutal and gruesome murder or an unintentional manslaughter. It was the latter. Kean was convicted by the court and served part of his prison sentence. I agree with others that he should have served all his sentence, but a “convicted killer” of the type wishfully projected by Field he was not.
Now, having got the readers well primed, we can start on the supposed scheming by these villains. Bainimarama and Kean are “taking over the union to secure VIP access [to the Rugby World Cup in NZ], guaranteed under the hosting agreement.”
Actually, Kean's name has been put forward unopposed for chairman of the union and it is possible that Bainimarama, a former president, may again become president, but this has nothing to do with supposed freebees to the World Cup. Both are military men on the NZ travel bans and, as Minister McCully repeated, they will not be allowed to come to NZ. Bainimarama and Kean would not be seeking freebees they knew they could not collect.
McCully had been sought out by the media to comment on the story the media had created: that Bainimarama wanted to come to NZ. And Bainimarama's response was a reaction to this story. So the media got two for the price of one. A sort of double negative where no news plus no news equals news. A mountain had been made out of two non-existent molehills.
Finally, all we need to do now is to stretch a fact or two. So, the two International Rugby Board representatives were in Suva last week to tell Fiji its membership “would be further at risk if the union bowed to the regime and dumped its board for state-supported appointees.”
This is what Field said, not the IRB men. Government had said it would not release $3 million of government funding for Fiji's participation in the World Cup if the FRU Board did not resign. Government wanted their resignation because of alleged misuse of funds and a botched lottery. For Field's “state-supported appointees,” read people who were unlikely to flog further funds. For the IRB statement, read: We must be convinced the new Board is not subject to government political influence and is freely elected by the FRU's constituent members.
Stretch number two: “Bainimarama is refusing to rule out taking key union positions and his bid to get Suva Rugby Union boss Kean into the top post continues.” What this means is that Bainimarama refused to comment to a media enquiry: I don't want to say anything more at this stage. It was Field who was doing the not “ruling out.”
And stretch number three, totally unrelated the the FRU situation: “The coup leader's control over his country's sporting groups (why on earth would he want control over sporting bodies?) strengthened last month when he made his daughter the head of the state-funded Sports Council.” He did not make his daughter the head of the Sports Council. The position was advertised and the Council, not Bainimarama, decided she was the best applicant. It is, of course, possible the Council could have been influenced by the fact that she is Bainimarama's daughter, but he had no direct part in her appointment, and her qualifications for the position, which I have seen, look very credible. See my posting on this (N0097). As far as one can reasonably tell, her appointment was completely above board.
The only new news in Field's re-ploughed article is that IRB-Government discussions were fruitful, that a way out of the dilemma may be to appoint a temporary administrator for Fiji, and that Fiji and Namibia's World Cup participation may also be in doubt.
It seem ironic the two countries should be put together. The IRB has taken over the administration of the Namibia union amid allegations of corruption and members not being paid. In Namibia it's the union that stands accused of corruption and the IRB that's seeking a way out. In Fiji, it's also the union, or more precisely senior executives on the FRU Board, that stands accused, but it is the Bainimarama government (whose actions the IRB is questioning because of complains from those accused) that is trying to stop the corruption. Had he chosen, Field could have explored this irony.
When a journalist writes a news article that so clearly intends to persuade a reader to form opinions that are propped up by leading headlines, typecasting, and unsupported and misleading “facts”, this is not news; it is opinion that editors should not allow to masquerade as news. What is admissible in an opinion piece is not admissible in a news item. My heading gives you my opinion of Michael Field's coverage of news from Fiji. He is a journalist who is now so partisan that he seems unable to report news to the standard normally considered acceptable in the industry. It is time the industry woke up.
Earlier comment on the FRU situation was made in N0069 and N0078.
15 comments:
croz
Stop whinging. You and the dictator were snookered again by a real journalist. You and the dictator have as much chance of silencing the international media as the latter has of ever having any international credibility. Build a bridge and grow up.
Again rather dismissive that a convicted criminal serving as commander of fijian navy. Is this the standard that fiji applies? And yes it is peculiar that fiji is looking like a family dynasty with the daugher , brother inlaw and interim PM all either having or seeking significant posts in fiji sport. If it happened in other countries i the region, even melanesian ones, local media would still be claiming nepotism and rightly so. No deceison can claim to be independant when it is the regime that is in toatl control of decion making and funding. The next step is allowing ministers to serve on company boards who in turn make decisions affecting those companies. Unopposed?? All decisons and appointments in this country go unapposed as far as the local media and regime are concerned.BTW has anyone been convicted of the alleged crimes yet... natural justice anyone...or did the boards have to cave in to the Government blackmail anyway to make way for some new military talent.Pseumably if these posts were advertised, the board would give the commodore and his brother in law their 'most earnest consideration' , with no thought at all given to their positions. Oh really?
Kean was convicted of manslaughter following a common brawl. He certainly intented to cause physical damage - that is what punches are all about. He was convicted and given a light prsion sentance but spent no time in Goal - instead he stayed at the Navy base, the same plac he worked. He continued to recieve full pay and released quietly and quickly (part sentance as you say). And of course he returned to his role as head of the Navy.
And people wonder why Franks credibility is shot when he lectures us. Others before and after have done proper prison time for the same time. He should have lost his job period and not be allowed to return. Apart from Franks promise of no convicted men involved ingovernment there is a real leadership question here. Frank is saying it is OK to enagge in a common brawl and kill someone. Kean should have served his time in prison. There is no doubt there are different rules for family and the military and Kean is both.
Qarase has ben out of a job for nearly five years and still not conicted of anything. He is not being paid.
Kean killed a man (by way of a fist fight), never did any real time, kept his pay and returned to his position.
Like governments before this government gives special treatment to their own. The law to everyone else (or degree in this case).
All this aside why is our PM even considering any involvement in Rugby. It's sport and with his multiple portfolios I can't imagine he even has time for those. He certianly can't claim to be on top of sugar or finance. I was involved with Suva Rugby when he was and he couldn't even read the simple P&L.
Dear Croz,
Agree field loves to bend the truth to crate a story. So good is he at it he could even teach Sharon and team at the ministry of information or those lovely folk at the Fiji sun.
Croz,
You are really going for Michael Field. I would say his interpretation of events is just as valid as yours.
1- Frank did conduct a coup and I am sure on NZ TV you see him in military uniform more than in a bula shirt. Field speaks the Truth
2- Francis Kean is a convicted killer. “No explanation, just a convicted killer which would leave readers unfamiliar with the case wondering whether it was a brutal and gruesome murder” Well by my definition killing someone whilst they sit in a car with a punch is brutal. Field speaks the Truth
3- Government has said that the FRU will only get $3m if the board resigns. I grant you they don’t say you will get $3m dollars if you appoint the following. However, as we all know Frank is not above using his influence to get his cronies in any position he wants. Field speaks the Truth
4- Frank’s daughter was made CEO of the Sports Council. You state “He did not make his daughter the head of the Sports Council. The position was advertised and the Council, not Bainimarama, decided she was the best applicant” The board of the council contains a number of military officers. The Chairman, Peter Mazey was appointed by Frank. Of course they are not going to oppose her if they want to keep their positions. Free seats at every rugby match are a great perk. Field speaks the Truth
5- Additionally Mary Bainimarama is involved in Netball. Wainikiti Bogidrau, the wife of a senior military office and Mary’s best friend, is running Netball in Fiji. She has not picked up netball competitively in years but yet she has been nominated as Fiji’s sportsman of the year.
I had not seen Michael Field’s story until reading about it in your blog. I think your attacks on journalists backfire because it gives them publicity. It also degrades your own credibility. The fact that you dare to right Michael Field was wrong lest we think Francis Kean is brutal. Francis Kean is brutal and that killing was not the first time that Francis had got into a fight when he was drunk.
You go on to say that “Kean's name has been put forward unopposed for chairman of the union” Well who is going to openly oppose him. Who wants to put themselves in Frank’s sights? Who wants to be in Francis Kean’s sights? You both might be at a party and Kean gets drunk. We know what happens then.
Croz do yourself a favour. Report the facts but keep your commentary to yourself. Blindly accepting the Government’s view without questioning it makes for a very poor commentator. By the way did you try and contact Field for a comment on your piece?
Croz,
You are really going for Michael Field. I would say his interpretation of events is just as valid as yours.
1- Frank did conduct a coup and I am sure on NZ TV you see him in military uniform more than in a bula shirt. Field speaks the Truth
2- Francis Kean is a convicted killer. “No explanation, just a convicted killer which would leave readers unfamiliar with the case wondering whether it was a brutal and gruesome murder” Well by my definition killing someone whilst they sit in a car with a punch is brutal. Field speaks the Truth
3- Government has said that the FRU will only get $3m if the board resigns. I grant you they don’t say you will get $3m dollars if you appoint the following. However, as we all know Frank is not above using his influence to get his cronies in any position he wants. Field speaks the Truth
4- Frank’s daughter was made CEO of the Sports Council. You state “He did not make his daughter the head of the Sports Council. The position was advertised and the Council, not Bainimarama, decided she was the best applicant” The board of the council contains a number of military officers. The Chairman, Peter Mazey was appointed by Frank. Of course they are not going to oppose her if they want to keep their positions. Free seats at every rugby match are a great perk. Field speaks the Truth
5- Additionally Mary Bainimarama is involved in Netball. Wainikiti Bogidrau, the wife of a senior military office and Mary’s best friend, is running Netball in Fiji. She has not picked up netball competitively in years but yet she has been nominated as Fiji’s sportsman of the year.
I had not seen Michael Field’s story until reading about it in your blog. I think your attacks on journalists backfire because it gives them publicity. It also degrades your own credibility. The fact that you dare to right Michael Field was wrong lest we think Francis Kean is brutal. Francis Kean is brutal and that killing was not the first time that Francis had got into a fight when he was drunk.
You go on to say that “Kean's name has been put forward unopposed for chairman of the union” Well who is going to openly oppose him. Who wants to put themselves in Frank’s sights? Who wants to be in Francis Kean’s sights? You both might be at a party and Kean gets drunk. We know what happens then.
Croz do yourself a favour. Report the facts but keep your commentary to yourself. Blindly accepting the Government’s view without questioning it makes for a very poor commentator. By the way did you try and contact Field for a comment on your piece?
Croz,
You sadly continue to miss the fact that more people have faith in Michael Field's reporting on Fiji than you. Field is reporting what the illegal regime does not want reported as it is the truth.
You instead are well known as an apologist for a repressive regime whose fate will be no different to similar ones now being toppled in the middle east and Africa. Yet you persist in propping up the lies and repression they perpetrate on the people of Fiji.
Leave Fiji to those of us who are from here and don't need your pontificating from afar while pocketing a handsome sincure.
Moce Ratu Croz.
Croz, congratulations on a forensic, utterly credible demolition of Michael Field's latest attempt to mould events in Fiji to his own agenda. The only sanction open to you is to launch a formal complaint to the NZ Press Council, which costs nothing and would hit Field where it hurts by involving his employer, Fairfax Media. Its Australian owners may not even be aware right now of the controversy that accompanies almost all of Field's forays into Fijian affairs. But they'll soon sit up if there's a formal complaint made to the Press Council, let alone an adverse finding against Field and Fairfax Media. In any event, such complaints are usually the best way to hit back at wayward reporters because of the amount of time and effort they need to dedicate to answer the charges against them. Yours is hardly a vexatious complaint under the circumstances. You may be identified by some as a coup sympathiser but there's plenty of evidence of your own balanced coverage of Fiji based on established fact. Anyway, this is not about whether Croz Walsh agrees with Michael Field or not but whether the NZ public deserves to be presented with the facts as opposed to the polemic they're now getting from an Australian-owned business that usually prides itself on the integrity of its journalism. Field's prejudices are already known to Fairfax's editors in Australia, which is why they tend to ignore his rants in favour of more balanced offerings from the likes of the Sydney Morning Herald's Asia Pacific Editor, Hamish MacDonald. It's high time to end Field's stranglehold on the NZ psyche as the eminence grise of Pacific journalism. Because to paraphrase the title of his book, when you swim with Michael Field, you swim with sharks.
...don't fall into the same trap Croz - kean did his part sentance at the navy base ! He continued to be paid and stepped straight back into his job...even got a promotion recently. Another poor fella went to goal for 12months for the sme crime.
'Convicted killer' is only half the story.
@ All ... I made several comments on the Field post. Kean was just one of them. What do readers think of my other criticisms? Forget what you think of the Coup or me. Focus on what Field said and then ask is this really the standard of journalism we should expect in the mainstream media?
Croz,
Perhaps these comments on kean show that despite the PER and front by government that everything is well and they are the new fair and transparent government people know otherwise.
Quite frankly the PM can't afford even the suggestion he provides favourable treatment to family and that his military team are above the law. But the facts suggest he provides and tolerates both.
As to the article - yes a reasonable peice but I dare say many saw it as you defending the likes of Kean.
I find it hard to beleive if Lietenant General Rhys Jones or one of his team got drunk and punched a man and killed him you would be OK with him staying in his job, doing no prison time and being promoted and possibly rewrded wih board positions ?
What's Francis Kean got to do with all of this? I don't know anyone who thinks he should have been released from jail, let alone reinstated as head of the navy. This isn't about him but the way Michael Field twists everything around for his own purposes. He pretends to be an independent journalist but is still getting back at Frank for kicking him out of the country. Croz is right about his bias. It's very damaging for all of us. If he told the truth, we'd have nothing to complain about. But this guy is waging a personal vendetta and that's not acceptable. The anti-regime critics support him because it suits their purposes. They deserve each other.
I have been thinking about Croz's questions further. Whether or not Field is a good journalist is not really the point. Anyway, it seems a bit hypothetical for the situation in Fiji - we have censorship so the choice doesn't actually exist: it is "illegal".
I should also make the point that in normal societies there is a constant tension between the freedom of press, the "truth" and the laws on privacy. It is not a simple yes/no answer and legal minds have struggled with concepts of trying to reign in irresponsible journalism without stifling public debate or the dissemination of information.
Every now and again in democratic nations there are legal debates over regulation of the media and the right to privacy. Time and time again legislators have erred on the side of caution on this issue and have NOT drawn draconian legislation to "control" the media. There is a good reason for this as the media is essentially the watchdog for our freedoms: it keeps people honest. Bad ideas are always defeated by better ideas.
The laws of libel and defamation have stood the test of time. If a journalist or private citizen publishes falsehoods that damage a persons reputation - they can be held liable for it.
The only weapon against falsehood is the truth.
If the Fiji government was honestly concerned about the truth in Field's opinions I am sure that they could mount a civil claim against him. Perhaps they might consider mounting their own media campaign, or better, as Croz has suggested, to remove the PER and media censorship. The ball is in their court.
The current censorship in Fiji reflects the military regime's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.
Post a Comment