01 Oct 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Egypt, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship condemns the sentence handed down to Amal Fathy – an Egyptian woman who made a video about her experience of sexual harassment.
Fathy, an actor and former activist, was given a suspended sentence of two years in prison and fined on charges of “spreading false news” after uploading a video to her Facebook account describing how she was sexually harassed during a visit to her bank.
Two days after the post, Egyptian security forces raided her home and arrested Fathy along with her husband and young son.
Fathy, whose husband Mohamed Lotfy is co-founder of the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms (ECRF), faces a second trial in which she is accused of being a member of a terrorist organisation.
“This sends a terrifying message to young women in Egypt: speak about abuse and you’ll be the one imprisoned, not your abuser,” said Index on Censorship chief executive Jodie Ginsberg. “Index, along with international human rights lawyers Doughty Street Chambers and ECRF – the 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards fellow for campaigning – have lodged complaints about Amal Fathy’s treatment with the UN rapporteurs on freedom of expression and human rights defenders, as well as the UN working group on arbitrary detention.”[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1538397460495-cbacd412-d443-9″ taxonomies=”147, 25926, 24135″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
26 Sep 18 | Bulgaria, Campaigns -- Featured, Statements
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Mr. Boyko Metodiev Borissov
Prime Minister
Republic of Bulgaria
1594 Sofia, 1 Dondukov Blvd
26 September 2018
Dear Prime Minister Boyko Borissov,
The undersigned press freedom organisations are writing to you today to express our concern over the treatment of a team of journalists investigating corruption in Bulgaria, and to urge you to ensure their safety.
Dimitar Stoyanov, a reporter for the Bulgarian investigative journalism website Bivol, and Attila Biro, editor of the Romanian investigative website RISE Project, were taken into custody on Thursday, 13 September 2018, while attempting to prevent and document the destruction of evidence allegedly showing corruption in EU-funded projects in Bulgaria.
Bivol and Rise Project had reported on the alleged corruption just days earlier as part of an investigative project financially supported by the #IJ4EU programme, which is funded by the European Commission through the International Press Institute (IPI) and the European Centre for Press and Media (ECPMF).
According to information we received, local police arrested both journalists and refused to release them despite being presented with press cards. Police also confiscated their mobile phones and did not allow them to make any calls. They were eventually released after several hours. We are troubled by this incident, which suggests a lack of sensitivity on the part of the authorities for the work of journalists. The reactions of top officials to this case so far also indicate a missed opportunity for the government to show its strong support of investigative journalism.
What’s more, we have learned that the Bulgarian authorities are focused on uncovering the source behind the journalists’ investigation and that officials have made statements seen as potentially endangering the safety of the journalists involved.
The report published by Bivol and Rise Project – both highly respected journalistic organisations – on 10 September contained serious allegations of corruption and fraud involving EU funded projects worth hundreds of millions of BGN. By publishing that report on a matter of undisputed public interest, the journalists involved carried out their democratic duty as a watchdog over wrongdoing and abuse of power.
We strongly urge your government, in line with Bulgaria’s international human rights obligations, to ensure that the reporters investigating this case can continue their work free from any intimidation or threat and to guarantee their physical safety as well as that of all journalists in Bulgaria. We also urge you to make clear that authorities themselves should be investigating the alleged wrongdoing uncovered by Bivol and Rise Project instead of harassing the journalists, who have performed a valuable public service.
Sincerely,
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Index on Censorship
International Press Institute (IPI)
OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
Ossigeno per l’Informazione
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Press freedom violations in Bulgaria verified by Mapping Media Freedom since May 2014″ font_container=”tag:h3|text_align:left” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_raw_html]JTNDaWZyYW1lJTIwd2lkdGglM0QlMjI3MDAlMjIlMjBoZWlnaHQlM0QlMjIzMTUlMjIlMjBzcmMlM0QlMjJodHRwcyUzQSUyRiUyRm1hcHBpbmdtZWRpYWZyZWVkb20udXNoYWhpZGkuaW8lMkZzYXZlZHNlYXJjaGVzJTJGNzUlMkZtYXAlMjIlMjBmcmFtZWJvcmRlciUzRCUyMjAlMjIlMjBhbGxvd2Z1bGxzY3JlZW4lM0UlM0MlMkZpZnJhbWUlM0U=[/vc_raw_html][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1537954879223-4f6e311c-2a8a-4″ taxonomies=”1667″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
10 Sep 18 | Magazine, News and features, Volume 47.03 Autumn 2018
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Using fiction and stories to influence society is nothing new, but facts are needed to drive the most powerful campaigns, argues Rachael Jolley in the autumn 2018 Index on Censorship magazine” google_fonts=”font_family:Libre%20Baskerville%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700|font_style:400%20italic%3A400%3Aitalic”][vc_column_text]
Poster for the 1948 film adaptation of Charles Dickens Oliver Twist (Photo: Ethan Edwards/Flickr)
My friend’s dad just doesn’t believe that UK unemployment levels are incredibly low. He thinks the country is in a terrible state. So when I sit down and say unemployment in 2018 is at 4.2%, the joint lowest level since 1971, he doesn’t really argue. Because he doesn’t believe it.
Well, I say, these are the official figures from the Office for National Statistics. His response is: “Hmm.” Clearly my interjection hasn’t made any difference at all.
He raises an eyebrow to signify, “They would say that, wouldn’t they?”.
This figure, and the picture it sketches, doesn’t chime with his national view, which is that things are very, very bad. And it doesn’t chime with the picture sketched in the newspaper that he reads every day, which is that things are very, very bad.
So, consequently, whatever facts or figures or sources you might throw at him to prove otherwise, nothing makes an impression on him. He believes that the world is the way he believes it is. No question.
Like many people, my friend’s dad reads news stories that reflect what he believes already, and discards stories or announcements that don’t.
And in itself, that is nothing new. For decades people have trusted their neighbours more than people far away. They have read a newspaper that echoed their political persuasion, and sometimes they have felt that the society they lived in was worse than it used to be, even when all the indicators showed their lives had improved.
Often humans believe in ideas by instinct, not because they are presented with a graph. In 2005, Drew Westen, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University, in Atlanta, USA, published The Political Brain. In it, he argued that the public often made decisions to support political parties based on emotions, not data or fact.
The book struck home with activists, who tried to utilise Westen’s thinking by changing the way they campaigned. Politicians had to capture the public’s hearts and minds, Westen said. He talked about the role of emotion in deciding the fate of a nation and gave examples. When US President Lyndon Johnson proposed the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which outlawed racial discrimination at the US ballot box, he used personal stories to make his points stronger, said Westen, adding that this was a powerful tool. In doing so, Westen was ahead of his time in acknowledging just how strongly humans value emotion, and how an emotional action can be driven by feeling and desire rather than the latest data from a governmental body.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-quote-left” color=”custom” align=”right” custom_color=”#dd3333″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”The articulation of ideas through emotional stories, though, is really no different from Charles Dickens sketching the harsh world of the children in workhouses in Oliver Twist” google_fonts=”font_family:Libre%20Baskerville%3Aregular%2Citalic%2C700|font_style:400%20italic%3A400%3Aitalic”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Westen used his thesis to show why he felt US Democratic candidates Al Gore and Michael Dukakis had failed to get elected, and why George W Bush had. Bush, he felt, was in touch with his emotional side while Dukakis and Gore tended to turn to dry data and detail.
That argument about how emotional beliefs or gut feelings are being used to influence important decisions has raced up the agenda since President Donald Trump arrived in the White House, the UK voted for Brexit and with the use of emotionally driven political campaigns to shift public opinion in Hungary and Poland.
Suddenly this question of why people were responding to appeals to emotion and dismissing facts was the debate of the moment. In many ways this is nothing new but the methods of receiving ideas and information are different. Now we have Facebook and Instagram posts, and zillions of tweets to spin and challenge.
One part of it, the articulation of ideas through emotional stories, though, is really no different from Charles Dickens sketching the harsh world of the children in workhouses in Oliver Twist, or Victorian writer Charles Kingsley’s story The Water Babies. Kingsley’s tale of child chimney sweeps helped to introduce the 1864 Chimney Sweepers Regulation Act, which improved the lives of those children significantly.
Fictional stories, like these, have always played a part in changing attitudes, but also draw on reality. Dickens and Kingsley were outraged by the living and working conditions they saw, so they chose to try to effect change by using fictional stories to engage a wider public. And personal stories are also used to illuminate wider factual trends. For years journalists have used a case study as an explainer for something more detailed.
Facts and figures undoubtedly must have a role. Even when it appears there is public resistance to acceptance of data, something such as the fact that if you wear a seatbelt when driving a car you will have a better chance of surviving an accident becomes an accepted truth over time. Public information and published statistics clearly play a part in that shift.
That’s why it is so vital that public access to information is protected and that incorrect facts are challenged. This month, 28 September is the international day for universal access to information, something that concentrates the mind when you look at places where access is limited, or where government data is skewed to such a level that it becomes almost pointless.
Journalists reporting in countries including Belarus and the Maldives tell us their quest for trustworthy sources of national information are almost impossible to find as their governments refuse to respond to media requests or release untrue information. Officials also use smear tactics to undermine reporters’ reputations, so their accurate journalism is not believed. Governments know that by keeping information from the media they hamper a journalist’s ability to report, and in doing so may keep a scandal from the public. If facts and data didn’t make a difference, those governments would have no reason to restrict access.
Freedom to access information goes hand in hand with freedom of the media and academic freedom in creating an open democratic society. But at Index, we constantly see signs of governments, and others, trying to prevent both access to facts and to suppress writing about inconvenient truths.
In this issue of the magazine, we explore all aspects of this struggle to balance facts and emotion, the quest to find the truth, how we are influenced, and why arguments, debates and discussions are so vital.
There’s lots to read, from Julian Baggini’s piece (p24) on why people might fear a disagreement to tips on how to have an argument from Timandra Harkness (p31). Then there’s Martin Rowson’s Stripsearch cartoon (p26). Our interview with British TV presenter Evan Davis discusses whether lies tend to be found out over time, and the likelihood that people will select facts that support their political position.
What’s it like to be a scientist in the USA right now? Michael Halpern from the Union of Concerned Scientists in the USA says scientists are suddenly getting active to push back against a political climate attempting to take the factfile away from important government departments.
Almost every day a new story pops up outlining another attack on media freedom in Tanzania, and in this issue Amanda Leigh Lichtenstein reveals how bloggers are being priced out of the country (p70) as the government uses new fees to close down independent voices.
Then there’s Nobel prize winner Herta Müller on her experiences of censorship as a writer living in communist Romania (p67), and Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s poems written in prison (p86).
And finally, look out for our Banned Books Week events coming up at the end of September – find out more on the website. You’ll also find the magazine podcast, with interviews with broadcaster Claire Fox and Tanzanian blogger Elsie Eyakuze, on Soundcloud, and watch out for your invitation to the upcoming magazine event at the Royal Institution in October.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Rachael Jolley is editor of Index on Censorship. She tweets @londoninsider. This article is part of the latest edition of Index on Censorship magazine, with its special report on The Age Of Unreason.
Index on Censorship’s autumn 2018 issue, The Age Of Unreason, asks are facts under attack? Can you still have a debate? We explore these questions in the issue, with science to back it up.
Look out for the new edition in bookshops, and don’t miss our Index on Censorship podcast, with special guests, on Soundcloud.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row content_placement=”top”][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_custom_heading text=”The Age Of Unreason” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2F2018%2F09%2Fage-of-unreason%2F|||”][vc_column_text]The autumn 2018 issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores the age of unreason. Are facts under attack? Can you still have a debate? We explore these questions in the issue, with science to back it up.
With: Timandra Harkness, Ian Rankin, Sheng Keyi[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”102479″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2018/09/age-of-unreason/”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/3″ css=”.vc_custom_1481888488328{padding-bottom: 50px !important;}”][vc_custom_heading text=”Subscribe” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:24|text_align:left” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fsubscribe%2F|||”][vc_column_text]In print, online. In your mailbox, on your iPad.
Subscription options from £18 or just £1.49 in the App Store for a digital issue.
Every subscriber helps support Index on Censorship’s projects around the world.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
07 Sep 18 | Event Reports, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
From left to right: Dionne Walker, Elizabeth Pears, Kunle Olulode, Ethel Tambudzai, Toyin Agbetu. (Credit: Long Dang/Index on Censorship)
Is free speech a way to promote unheard and under-represented voices and perspectives, or is it a tool wielded by extremists and supremacists? So discussed a panel at the BFI Southbank on Thursday 6 September. Chaired by the director of Voice4Change Kunle Olulode, panellists included activist and filmmaker Toyin Agbetu, Buzzfeed News editor Elizabeth Pears, activist and charity director Ethel Tambudzai and filmmaker Dionne Walker.
The lively discussion covered topics ranging from the use of “the n-word”, what free speech means and drawing the line between free speech and abusive speech.
“I think free speech is such a complex issue,” Pears, the former news editor at The Voice, Britain’s only black newspaper, told the audience. “How do we balance free speech with someone’s human rights, someone’s rights to exist?”
Asked whether the repeated use of the “n-word” by musicians and artists can take the power away from it, Agbetu said: “It has a lot to do with commerce and little with desensitisation. Some commercial artists deploy it to make money. I’m not saying there’s not some conscious recognition [about its offensiveness], but they can’t take out the toxic element because it always has a toxic connotation.
“History is important, context is always important, but [as a British African] I’m always at the mercy ideologically and statistically of the ethnic majority,” he added. “If the ethnic majority says that the n-word is a cool word, [unlike myself, many] would continue to use it.”
On the topic of former foreign secretary Boris Johnson’s comments about Muslim women looking like ”letterboxes”, Pears said: “As a consequence…a kind of free pass has been given to the man on the street or woman on the street to repeat it in order to harm people. We’ve seen reports that islamophobic attacks went up. I don’t think you should use that platform to attack people.”
“This is what happens when you blur the line between what is taboo and what is sacred, what is free speech and what is abusive,” said Agbetu.
While everyone has access to free speech, Pears adds, not everyone has access to a platform. “Not all free speech comes at the same price, not all free speech has the same consequences,” she said.
Former vice president of Westminster University’s student union Ethel Tambudzai also spoke on hate speech and the idea of banning speakers in universities. “Regulations might be too heavy-handed, and depending on who’s making that regulation it becomes dangerous because who are we allowing to speak, or not to speak, and why?” she asked.
“Whatever happens in a university is also happening on the streets. We’re all silenced somehow. If you said everything you wanted to say all the time, I don’t think any of us have that privilege. Boris Johnson might more often, but I don’t think all of us do, and we have to think what does that look like and what does that mean.”
“The moment the government are controlling what academics are researching, studying, teaching and even allowed to think about in a classroom or how students express themselves, there are limits on where free speech becomes hate speech,” she added.
The visibility of minority communities was an issue for the panel. Walker, the director of the documentary film The Hard Stop, which focuses on the 2011 London riots, spoke about the importance of film in raising these voices in today’s society.
“[The film] covered such a controversial topic. It was a quite sensitive portrayal of stories of the black community. The idea of free speech comes in. It was quite important to tell a nuanced story. Oftentimes there’s a sense of being very black and white,” she said. “Argument becomes a kind of beaten over the head, you’re either for or against a particular motion. For Hard Stop we went for somewhere in the middle.”
The chair left the audience with a thought-provoking question: “Is free speech a way to promote unheard and underrepresented voices and perspectives, or is it a tool wielded by extremists and supremacists?”
Additional reporting by Long Dang. [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1536747948713-02464451-bc02-0″ taxonomies=”12953, 518, 6840″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
