Increasingly the media is being used as an imperialistic tool and that affects the overall freedom of the press. In 2002 Reporters Without Borders published its first world press freedom ranking. The rankings were based on a questionnaire given to “people who have a deep knowledge of the state of press freedom in a country or a number of countries : local journalists or foreign reporters based in a country, researchers, jurists, regional specialists and the researchers working for Reporters Without Borders' International Secretariat,” according to the Reporters Without Borders web-site. The questionnaire was based on, “53 criteria for assessing the state of press freedom in each country. It includes every kind of violation directly affecting journalists (such as murders, imprisonment, physical attacks and threats) and news media (censorship, confiscation of issues, searches and harassment). It registers the degree of impunity enjoyed by those responsible for these press freedom violations. It takes account of the legal and judicial situation affecting the news media (such as the penalties for press offences, the existence of a state monopoly in certain areas and the existence of a regulatory body) and the behaviour of the authorities towards the state-owned news media and international press. It also takes account of the main obstacles to the free flow of information on the Internet. Reporters Without Borders has taken account not only of abuses attributable to the state, but also those by armed militia, clandestine organisations or pressure groups that can pose a real threat to press freedom”
In the October 2002 rankings Finland was first, Canada ranked fifth, and the US seventeenth. Most EU countries did reasonably well. Countries from the former Soviet Union did poorly, as did most Middle Eastern Countries. Iraq, then under the control of Saddam Hussein, ranked 130th.
The rankings for 2003 are slightly different. Most EU countries stayed close to where they were previously. Canada dropped to tenth. The US was given two rankings, as was Israel. The dual ranking was given to address behaviour domestically and abroad. The US placed in thirty-first domestically and 135th in Iraq, five places lower than Iraq had placed under the control of Saddam Hussein and lower than Afghanistan (134), The United Arab Emirates (122), Iraq itself (124) and many other states not known for their enlightened attitudes toward the press.
The US drop in rankings, both at home and abroad, is a result of attempts to control the press. Bombing al Jazeera offices hurts rankings, so does arresting reporters. Attacking those who offer dissenting opinions does not help promote press freedom. The results are reflected in the rankings of Reporters Without Borders.
Attempts and actions that limit press freedom are not the only issues affecting the press. There is also the very effects that the press have on us through their reporting. Consider the massive number of Americans that believed that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were working together, and that Iraq was directly involved in the attack on the World Trade Center. Consider the number of Americans that believe that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. Compare the attempts, including embedding reporters, to limit the news coming out of the invasion of Iraq. Those are all very real results of the media not doing its job.
Those are symptoms of a larger problem though. As media ownership has become more concentrated and media companies have developed interests in areas other than news gathering, analysis, and dissemination the news available to many has become quite one-sided.
For example, protestors against globalization, at least in its present form, are generally presented by the press as being Molotov cocktail wielding anarchists bent on the wanton destruction of private property. Less likely to make the news are the average citizens, many from developing countries, some who are risking their lives by speaking out, who are concerned with the very real issues surrounding the matter. What we see most is politicians and business leaders in very controlled situations appearing to have their pictures taken shaking hands.
How are those average citizens from the developing world represented when we bother to represent them at all? More often than not, the media shows them as poor people who have been whipped into submission and are being taken advantage of by those our governments oppose or as proof as the failure of socialism, or the ineptitude of non-western societies. Their only hope is that we in the west swoop down and save them with our offers of trade deals, financial backing from the IMF, and privatisation schemes.
This distorted view serves the western corporations well. It gives a reason for them to continue eroding workers’ rights in the developed world, offers an extremely cheap source of labour and resources from developing nations, and opens up captive markets for the delivery of essential services such as water. When it comes to globalization, media control is a must.
Not that there is a group of men in suits gathered in a dark room someplace plotting the takeover of the world. There is no overt conspiracy. There are a limited and ever shrinking number of people who control the news though. They are wealthy. They are overwhelmingly from the west. They are familiar with and share the views and concerns of the upper classes and business. According to a 2001 article by Robert McChesney, seven multi-national conglomerates dominate global media. Disney, AOL Time Warner, Sony, News Corporation, Viacom, Vivendi, and Bertelsmann control the vast majority of what we see, hear and, through that, think. There is a second tier of media power control by a few dozen companies. These few dozen companies and the seven big players own parts of one another and shore economic interests in unrelated companies. They are all dependent on advertising revenues, often from corporations with shares in their company, to turn a profit.
It does not take a vast conspiracy for the corporate-controlled media to present only what promotes the interests of corporations at this point. Several individuals working towards a similar goal...deregulation and unfettered capitalism...will have the same effect. Stories that present alternate views or may be unpopular with advertisers make their way to the cutting room floor. Journalists who insist on doing such stories find themselves working in the alternative press.
A homogenous society dedicated to consumption is in the best interests of the corporate media. Globalization is their friend. As usual in the modern world, trade and profits are put before the needs of people or the greater good. The internet and the alternative press offer some hope, but their scope and influence is still limited and the corporate media is not without influence in these areas, especially on the internet.
Most news agencies have a daily business report, but there is no corresponding time dedicated to labour issues. Most people are more directly and immediately effected by labour issues than business issues though. Perhaps the first step on getting the media back on the right track is to convince some of the large media sources that it would be in their best interests to provide equal time to labour issues. Perhaps the first step is stop buying their news.
Read more:
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=8248
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/McChesney/GlobalMedia_Neoliberalism.html
http://www.jaxeed.com/uk/imperial.htm
http://www.macroscan.com/cur/may03/cur220503Media_Imperialism.htm
---
Reverend Blair was raised in Saskatchewan and currently lives in Winnipeg, Manitoba. He comes from a long line of social activists and cried on Tommy Douglas before his first birthday. His column appears biweekly on Vive le Canada.
Note: http://www.rsf.org/arti...
http://www.jaxeed.com/u...
http://www.macroscan.co...
Stumble It!
i.e. \"David Dodge says, interest rates up, borrowing down.
followed weeks later by: \"Simon says interests rates down, borrowing up. Don\'t want no damn yankee thinking our economy is worth something.\"
-what do you expect when Mulroney\'s boy (Paul Tellier) is running a company?
Of course, they won\'t actually CLOSE the plant, but they\'ll cut and cut. If they ACTUALLY CLOSED the plant, Toronto would kindly be shopping for subway cars elsewhere.
Unions SUCK !!!!!!
Now that I have your attention, I\'m not really serious about that comment. What I do mean, however, is that the unions have brought their problems on themselves over the years, by fighting for ridiculous wage and benefit increases.
Even Paul Hellyer says exactly the same thing, they started to fight for wage increases that far oustripped productivity.
In a perfect world, everyone would get a raise every year, at the rate of inflation, so their buying power would still keep up to the cost of living.
Only when you get a promotion should you get a raise above inflation, and that would be a one-time increase.
I used to know a union scrapper personally, and he had a cast on his arm on more than one occasion. He talked tough, and his attitude was that \"They owe us\" !!
Violence on the picket lines has always put the unions in disrepute. The leaders can take the blame for this, since how much do they earn when the masses are picketing ? Do they stop taking their salaries when the members are earning nothing but pennies while walking the line ?
Unions have themselves to blame, and they wonder why corporate Canada and corporate America are trying to bust the unions.
Look at Wal-Mart. They are now in the food business, big time, and they see more potential ahead. Safeway is trying to convince the unions that they are pricing themselves out of the market again !!
There is a drive under way to unionize Wal-Mart in certain areas, and even McDonald\'s is facing a challenge in this respect.
How do you suppose McDonald could out-source jobs to China ? Pretty hard to stand in China and sell a Mcburger to a Canadian. That would be the mother of all order counters !!
Raise the minimum wage to the poverty line, and let the companies that can\'t compete fall by the wayside.
They are part of the problem, they didn\'t do the proper research or draw up the best business plan, so why should workers keep on subsidising a bad idea ?
There are businesses out there that are not EVER going to make a profit. Shut them down. They are a bad idea, unless you are running it as a sole proprietor and you are the only worker.
If you can make a profit this way, kudos to you.
Otherwise, let\'s bring some businesses into the 21st century.
Dickens is dead, and his time has past.
We should be a more civlized society by now, but I don\'t see it happening.
---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca
We can\'t even get it right on equal pay for work of equal value. Women still lag far behind men for doing the same level of work.
My point is people should be paid based on productivity, whether in government or the private sector, no more and no less.
Unions have a place, but they have skewed the system too far, and the pendulum is swinging back. They don\'t like it, but they caused it.
As I said in a previous post, I have 2 sons that work at GM in Oshawa, and they both earn more than $100,000 per year, for installing a seat every 45 seconds, or a few nuts and bolts, or perhaps a windshield, you get the point. I think the rate is some $35 an hour, including benefits.
There are many who work much harder for a lot less that don\'t have the benefit of a rich, powerful union behind them. Let\'s not forget that Ford has already shifted one or more production plants to Mexico, and you know full well what their wages are.
All I am asking for is a little common sense, and a little balance on payroll.
Corporate Canada will not do it on their own, they need to be regulated. Ask Tom Kent about his views on globalization.
Bigger government, more regulations, and forget about tax cuts !!
That should be the future. Compare that with Belinda Baby\'s platform; Cut taxes, cut the size of government, spend more on social programs.
I wonder what she smokes...
---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca
Canada being one of the more wired countries has an advantage in that the citizens can seek out alternative news sources if they so choose. This is very important in times like we are heading into - elections. The mass media is broken into two camps - pro-Liberal and pro-Conservative. The CBC is middle road with just a few other players. No large media outfit can be said to be pro-left, and why is that?
I would answer my above question by saying it has much to do with $$. Leftists traditionally challenge corporations and government on issues that cost said advertisors and investors. What profit seeking media outfit is going to chose to alienate their money supply?
Clearly there is growing room for alternative news sources like Vive. There is most certainly a need to address the media deficiet in Canada, especially in matters such as the elections to come.
please excuse any spelling or grammer mistakes - I only have a few minutes for lunch today!
---
If there was ever a time for Canadians to become pushy - now is the time - for time is running out on this nation called Canada.
---
Dave Ruston
The truth is somehwere in between. It depends how much people like their jobs. I have sympathy for those non-unionized workers who get injured on the job.
P.S. My firend works at the Famous Players Cinema (I think, or maybe Cineplex Odeon) at Yorkdale mall in Toronto, and their entire compnay GAVE UP THEIR UNION FOR FREE MOVIE TICKETS. CRAZY!!!