Communiqué de presse / Reporters sans frontières    View this
email in your browser
<http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=5cb8824c726d51483ba41891e&id=36c3a82c6b&e=>
<http://fr.rsf.org/>
*Leaders who publicly threaten journalists*

There are heads of state and governments who publicly refer to journalists
in a contemptuous, insulting, defamatory or racist manner, violating the
principle of freedom of information and drawing attention to the terrible
pressure to which media personnel are often subjected just for doing their
job.
“If censorship reigns, there cannot be sincere flattery, and none but
little men are afraid of little writings,” Pierre Beaumarchais wrote in The
Marriage of Figaro. In this presentation, Reporters Without Borders
denounces the “little presidents” who publicly attack journalists and media
outlets instead of responding to their criticism.

Reporting is a dangerous job in some countries and journalists who ask
irritating questions or shine a light on government corruption often find
themselves the targets of presidential anger.

Some presidents tolerate no disagreement, not even the least debate. Others
routinely identify any expression of doubt as an act of opposition,
sedition or conspiracy, or as foreign interference. Others, the repeat
offenders, wage campaigns of harassment against the media outlets or
journalists they dislike.

And finally, there are those who say nothing because they already have such
an effective system of censorship that there is never any need to issue
reminders to already compliant media. From veiled allusions to open death
threats, the style varies from country to country but the goal remains the
same – to gag information.

“A threshold is crossed when a head of state lets loose a stream of verbal
abuse against media personnel who are just doing their work,” Reporters
Without Borders secretary-general Christophe Deloire said. “How can
journalists function normally if the state that is supposed to guarantee
their safety is headed by a person who holds them up to contempt, bullies
them and threatens them, opening the way to abuses against the media that
go unpunished.”

The examples chosen reflect the characteristics of the relationship between
the state and journalists in each region. Individually, some of these
comments may seem relatively harmless, but collectively they highlight the
shocking climate of tension to which journalists are exposed in certain
countries.


*Latin America*


Many Latin American presidents do not hesitate to berate the news media and
vilify journalism in their public addresses. Their attacks are frontal and
accusatory. Some incite hatred and even violence. This is very worrying.
Such insults coming from the highest level of the state can only further
undermine freedom of information, which is already under attack in Latin
America. And they are liable to be interpreted as a blank cheque for abuses
against journalists.

Some presidents choose to attack journalists to avoid debating ideas. In
very polarized countries where the media are often used for political ends,
accusing journalists of being biased or plotting against the government is
easier than responding to criticism. Instead of eliciting a response,
instead of prompting a debate, independent journalism just meets with
slander and insults. Any criticism of government policy is liable to be
branded as an attack on the country.

According to the Declaration on Principles of Freedom of Expression by the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), presidents are supposed
to guarantee the safety of their fellow citizens. Instead, verbal abuse of
the media by presidents such as Maduro, Correa and Hernández foster a
dangerous climate of censorship, self-censorship and impunity for violence
against journalists.

When Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro gives news conferences (at which
questions from journalists are never welcome), he rarely misses an
opportunity to accuse foreign news media such as CNN en Español and the
Miami Herald of waging an “international campaign” against Venezuela. When
inaugurating homes paid for by the government in September 2014, he
referred to a plan to “poison and dump their poison on Venezuela and
elsewhere in the world,” using virulent language to accuse the media of
being biased and pursuing a hidden agenda.

Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa uses the same methods in his weekly TV
broadcasts known as “Enlaces Ciudadanos” (Citizen Liaisons). In Enlace
Ciudadano No. 424 on 16 May 2015, he attacked the editor of the Crudo
Ecuador website, threatening to “respond with the same weapons.” And, in
reaction to TV presenter Alfonso Espinosa’s comments on plans to eliminate
term limits for elected politicians, he accused journalists of using “the
opposition’s dishonest discourse to demonize what is perfectly legitimate,
democratic and transparent.”

Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández paid tribute to journalists in
his own special way on 25 May 2015, celebrated as Day of the Journalist in
Honduras. Reacting to allegations of ruling National Party involvement in
embezzling social security funds, he lashed out as “pseudo-journalists
[who] dissemble, distort and invent."

*Eastern Europe and Central Asia*


Insulting journalists is an integral part of President Erdogan’s methods,
which are characterized by populism, conspiracy theories and intolerance.
In response to criticism, he usually tries to smear his critics. If they
are lucky, he just calls them “ignorant.” But he is more likely to brand
them as “agents of subversion,” “foreign spies” or even some kind of
“terrorist.” These verbal attacks are symptomatic of the authoritarian
tendencies of a leader whose vision of the world is becoming more and more
polarized and paranoid. The loss of his parliamentary majority should force
him to seek consensus. Will it also put a stop to his insults?

The all-powerful Chechen president’s crude language and inappropriate
comments help to sustain the climate of arbitrary rule and fear that
dominates his long-suffering republic. Mixing his private and public lives,
Ramzan Kadyrov posts praise and blistering attacks on Instagram along with
photos of his family, friends and associates. His nefarious reputation, the
summary methods employed by his militiamen, and the tragic fate suffered by
many of his opponents lend a great deal of weight to his words.

But verbal excesses are just one element in an extensive arsenal of
intimidatory methods. While allowing government propaganda to create an
increasingly hostile environment, Russian President Vladimir Putin usually
refrains from direct attacks on critical journalists, pretending to be
unaware of them. Central Asia’s eternal despots, ever mindful to maintain a
presidential stature often bordering on deification, are usually restrained
in their public statements. And anyway, the Turkmen, Uzbek and Kazakh
leaders have suppressed pluralism so effectively that virtually no critical
journalists are left.


*European Union and Balkans*


This was the response that President Milorad Dodik of the Republika Srpska,
the Serbian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, gave to a question from Gordana
Katana of the independent daily Oslobodenje during a news conference on 14
March 2015. She had asked him about a relative of his who had been given a
prison sentence and was on the run. Not content with these comments, Dodik
subsequently ordered all government departments to cancel their Oslobodenje
subscriptions.

Elected in 2010, the ultranationalist Dodik lords it over a country with
widespread corruption and clientelism, and reacts with hostility to
difficult questions from journalists, especially female ones. When a woman
journalist with the TV programme 60 Minutes asked him a question, he
replied: “You work for 60 Minutes? It’s a really lousy programme, it’s
complete crap (...) I see that you at least are presentable. But you’re not
pretty.” Such aggressiveness towards journalists is not unique in the
Balkans, where it is used to deter media interest in matters involving the
government and to divert attention by creating controversy.

The method is also used elsewhere in Europe including the European Union,
where more and more leading politicians are being aggressive towards
journalists. Last year, Hungary’s deputy prime minister described
investigative journalists as “traitors” and said they were working for a
“foreign power.” In France, the leaders of the far-right National Front
often insult and intimidate journalists, treating them with a hostility
that is increasingly seen across the entire French political spectrum.

*Africa*

Journalists in Africa are often treated as spies, terrorists or traitors,
and are subjected to threats and physical attacks (that are rarely
punished) and to judicial harassment designed to discourage them from
investigating potentially embarrassing stories. Protected by a compliant
judicial system and by security services that keep the pressure on
journalists who don’t toe the line, Africa’s presidents constantly proclaim
their undying attachment to media freedom and democracy. But from time to
time, the varnish cracks.

This is how Gambia’s President Yayah Jammeh spoke of journalists in 2011:
“The journalists are less than 1 percent of the population, and if anybody
expects me to allow less than 1 percent of the population to destroy 99
percent of the population, you are in the wrong place.” And he added: “I
don't have an opposition. What we have are people that hate the country,
and I will not work with them.”

Obviously there are politicized news media in Africa, but journalists who
do nothing more than call on the authorities to account for their actions
or draw attention to the population’s problems find themselves accused of
“hating their country and government.”

Guinea may be less dangerous than Gambia, but journalists (and those who
defend them) are treated no less dismissively there by President Alpha
Condé. Journalists, he said in November 2014,  “can do anything they like
(...) They can write what they want. It is of no importance. I don’t read
newspapers, I don’t go online and I don’t listen to radio stations.” And he
added: “I don’t give a damn what Reporters Without Borders writes (...)
they don’t rule Guinea. I’m not scared of international law or human rights
(...) Everyone will respect the law in Guinea.”

But if Guinea’s authorities are indifferent to what journalists say, why
did the High Authority for Communication ban live discussion programmes and
restrict press reviews in the national media in the run-up to this year’s
presidential election?
              Displaying complete contempt for journalists and their
“idiotic” questions is also Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe’s way of
dealing with the media. During an African Union summit in Cairo in 2010,
Mugabe’s bodyguards manhandled a British journalist who dared to ask on
what basis he considered himself president. “Are your security guards going
to hit me in front of the cameras?” the journalist asked. The enraged
Mugabe replied: “Stop asking stupid questions. You are an idiot.”

Mugabe brushed aside a journalist’s questions in a similar fashion in April
2014, saying: “I don't want to see a white face.” And he dislikes not only
seeing troublesome journalists but also being seen by them. His security
detail forced several journalists to delete the photos they had taken of
him falling as he left Harare airport in February 2015. When you’re trying
to portray a 91-year-old president as still indestructible, the public eye
can be a big nuisance.

*Asia*


Thailand’s prime minister, Gen. Prayut Chan-o-cha was asked at a news
conference on 25 March 2015 what the government would do to journalists who
do not stick to the official line. “We'll probably just execute them,” he
replied tersely.

Since imposing martial law in May 2014, Gen. Prayut has cracked down hard
on those who defy his policies and defend the fundamental right to
criticize. He has gagged reporters, bloggers and news outlets regarded as
overly critical of himself or his military government. The growing
hostility towards the media being voiced publicly by Prayut has drawn the
entire world’s attention to his contempt for freedom of information and its
defenders, regarded as a threat to the nation.

Prayut clearly does not think it is the job of journalists to question the
government. On the contrary, speaking on 5 March, celebrated as “Reporters
Day” in Thailand, he said journalists should “play a major role in
supporting the government's affairs, practically creating the understanding
of government's policies to the public, and reduce the conflicts in the
society.”

Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung’s policy with journalists is to
brand them as malevolent enemies and to dismiss revelations about communist
party corruption as “despicable stratagems by hostile forces.” When Dung
threatens outspoken bloggers with “severe punishments,” the deterrent
effect is guaranteed because no fewer than 27 citizen-journalists and
bloggers are currently detained in Vietnam. In 2012 alone, the Vietnamese
authorities prosecuted no fewer than 48 bloggers and human rights
defenders, sentencing them to a total of 166 years in prison and 63 years
of probation.

Chinese presidents rarely refer to media freedom. It took a joint news
conference with US President Barack Obama in November 2014 for Xi Jinping
to take a public position on the issue. The difficult question obviously
did not come from a Chinese reporter. Alluding to censorship of the New
York Times after it revealed the wealth of then Prime Minister Wen Jiabao’s
family in 2012, a New York Times reporter asked if Beijing was going to
lift its restrictions on foreign journalists working in China. Xi replied:
“In Chinese, we have a saying: ‘The party which has created the problem
should be the one to help resolve it.’ So perhaps we should look into the
problem to see where the cause lies.”
The Chinese president’s attempt to shift the blame on to the foreign media
did not unfortunately receive the international condemnation it deserved.
According to a survey by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China, nearly
one China-based foreign correspondent in 10 has been threatened with the
non-renewal of their visa because of what they have written. The New York
Times has not been able to appoint new China correspondents because the
government systematically refuses to give them visas.

When Burma’s President Thein Sein issued a warning to the media during a
radio address in July 2014, his words were not taken lightly. “If media
freedom threatens national security instead of helping the nation, I want
to warn all that we will take effective action under existing laws,” the
president said. Seven journalists have been jailed in Burma since the start
of 2014. Usurping the press council’s role, the authorities have taken it
upon themselves to act as the guarantors of journalistic ethics and to
severely punish media outlets deemed guility of professional misconduct.

Like the accusation of endangering national security or state interests,
the charge of “sedition” is one of the ways government leaders use to gag
the media. Malaysia’s Prime Minister Najib Razak often uses the
newly-reinforced Sedition Act to order prosecutions of journalists,
bloggers and other critics including the cartoonist Zunar. And Najib does
not hesitate to directly and publicly threaten media outlets with legal
action. He says he is ready to listen to “constructive criticism” from
journalists, but when they cover abusive government practices, he orders
police raids designed to censor and deter media from continuing to cover
Malaysian politics freely.

*Middle East and North Africa*

Instead of direct verbal attacks on journalists, Middle Eastern leaders
usually resort to illegal arrests, arbitrary prison sentences, torture and
enforced disappearances when expressing their contempt for the media.
 Middle Eastern journalists are often convicted on such charges as
“disseminating false information endangering state security,” “supporting
or condoning terrorism” or “disturbing public order.” Many have been
treated as spies, liars or idiots, but few presidents have publicly voiced
such accusations.

Most of the region’s leaders give few interviews and carefully vet the
media that are granted access. This is the case with Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad, who has been very inaccessible since the start of the
crisis in Syria although it is the world’s deadliest country for
journalists. It is also the case with Algeria’s President Abdelaziz
Bouteflika, who has rarely been exposed to the media since his health
deteriorated.              Ali Khamenei has never given an interview or
news conference since taking over as the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Supreme
Leader in 1989. In 2000, he described the pro-reform press that had emerged
since President Mohammad Khatami’s election in 1997 as “a base of
operations by foreign enemies inside our country.” The comment was
accompanied by an order to carry out raids on journalists and media outlets

Since then, at least 300 media outlets have been closed as “foreign enemies
within the country,” thousands of news websites have been censored and more
than 500 journalists, bloggers and other online information activists have
been arbitrarily arrested, tortured and given long jail terms, while many
others have had to flee abroad. New media and satellite TV stations
broadcasting to Iran from outside the country are the latest targets. Iran
is now one of the world’s biggest prisons for journalists, like Egypt,
where journalists who do not toe the government line are accused by
President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of being “terrorists.” Not that a great deal
is said on the subject. Sisi’s regime prefers imprisonment to insults.

As for the Gulf monarchies, they rarely address the national media and do
not insult journalists publicly because they are concerned about their
international image. Independent and critical media are nonetheless rarely
tolerated in these countries, where censorship and self-censorship prevail.
The only space that may still be found for freedom of expression and
information is online.
*Contact presse : *Anne-Charlotte Chéron / [log in to unmask] /  01 44 83 84 56
/ 07 82 37 23 12
        <https://www.facebook.com/Reporterssansfrontieres>
<https://twitter.com/RSF_RWB> <http://instagram.com/rsf_world>
<http://fr.rsf.org/>
            *Copyright © 2015 Reporters sans frontières, All rights
reserved.*
Vous recevez ce message parce que vous êtes journaliste.

*Our mailing address is:*
Reporters sans frontières
CS 90247
PARIS CEDEX 02 75083
France

Add us to your address book
<http://rsf.us7.list-manage1.com/vcard?u=5cb8824c726d51483ba41891e&id=d511df8fbd>

unsubscribe from this list
<http://rsf.us7.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=5cb8824c726d51483ba41891e&id=d511df8fbd&e=&c=36c3a82c6b>
update subscription preferences
<http://rsf.us7.list-manage2.com/profile?u=5cb8824c726d51483ba41891e&id=d511df8fbd&e=>

Pour vous désabonner de ce groupe et ne plus recevoir d'e-mails le concernant, envoyez un e-mail à l'adresse [log in to unmask]


¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤