3 Oct 2018 | Event Reports, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”103062″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]“Critical thinking is important, but we should also be teaching scientific literacy and political literacy so we know what knowledge claims to trust,” said Keith Kahn-Harris, author of Denial: The Unspeakable Truth, at a panel debate during the launch of the autumn 2018 edition of Index on Censorship.
The theme of this quarter’s magazine, The Age of Unreason, looks at censorship in scientific research and whether our emotions are blurring the lines between fact and fiction. From Mexico to Turkey, Hungary to China, a whole range of countries from around the globe were covered for this special report, featuring articles from the likes of Julian Baggini and David Ulin. For the launch, a selection of journalists, authors and academics shared their thoughts on how to have better arguments when emotions are high, while exploring concerns surrounding science and censorship in the current global climate.
Aptly taking place at the Royal Institution of Great Britain, the historical home of scientific research for 14 Nobel Prize winners, Kahn-Harris was joined by BBC Radio 4 presenter Timandra Harkness and New Scientist writer Graham Lawton. The discussion was chaired by Rachael Jolley, editor of Index on Censorship magazine.
“Academics and experts are being undermined all over the world,” said Jolley, setting the stage for a riveting conversation between panellists and the audience. “Is this something new or something that has happened throughout history?”
When Jolley asked why science is often the first target of an authoritarian government, Lawton proposed that the value of science is that it is evidence-based and subsequently “kryptonite” to what rigid establishments want to portray. He added: “They depend extremely heavily on telling people half-truths or lies.”[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”103066″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]Harkness led a workshop highlighting the importance of applying critical thinking skills when deconstructing arguments, using footage of real-life debates, past and present, to investigate such ideas. Whether it was the first televised contest between presidential candidates John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960, or a dispute between Indian civilians over LGBT rights earlier this year, a wide variety of topics and discussions were analysed.
Examining a debate between 2016 presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, Harkness asked an audience member his thoughts. Focusing on Trump’s approach, he said: “He’s put up a totally false premise which is quite a conventional tactic; you put up something that is not what the other person said, and then you proceed to knock it down quite reasonably because it’s unreasonable in the first place.” Harkness agreed. “It’s the straw man tactic”, she said, “where you build something up and then attack it.”
Panellists began discussing how to argue with say those who deny climate change, with Kahn-Harris contending that science has become enormously specialised over the past centuries, which means people cannot always debunk uncertain claims since they are not specialists. He said: “There’s something tremendously smug about the post-enlightenment world.”
Harkness said “robust challenges” should be sought-after rather than silencing those who share different views, while Lawton added that “storytelling and appealing to emotions are perfectly valid ways of arguing.”
For more information on the autumn issue, click here. The issue includes an article on how fact and fiction come together in the age of unreason, why Indian journalism is under threat, Nobel prize-winning novelist Herta Müller on censorship in Romania, and an exclusive short story from bestselling crime writer Ian Rankin. Listen to our podcast here. Or, try our quiz that decides how prone to bullshit you are…[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1538584887174-432e9410-24f0-4″ taxonomies=”8957″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
2 Oct 2018 | Event Reports, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”103055″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]When Sunny Singh was writing her last novel, “Hotel Arcadia,” featuring an Indian protagonist caught in a terrorist siege, she received a response from a publisher she didn’t expect: “We already have our female war correspondent novel of the year.” They didn’t need another one.
“I didn’t know there was a category for female war correspondent novels, but there you go,” she said.
The crowd laughed at the anecdote, but within the tale was a serious problem — the self-censorship of the publishing industry.
On Friday evening, Banned Books Week UK held a panel discussion on the ways the publishing industry systemically silences voices from marginalised groups, and how to resist this unofficial censorship.
The panel was hosted by Index on Censorship, Media Diversified, Author’s Club, and Jhalak Prize — a literary award for book of the year by a writer of colour. It featured Singh, Sarah Shaffi, literary editor and journalist, Catherine Johnson, author and Jhalak Prize inaugural judge, and Jamilah Ahmed, author and literary agent.
The talk focused on the point of books that don’t have the privilege of being banned, whose ideas aren’t allowed to make it to that stage.
“What we’re banning is experiences and voices,” Shaffi said. “Essentially what we’re doing is we’re not letting voices come to the fore.”
The panel called it “soft censorship,” the ways in which the industry bans books from marginalized and minority groups through subtle, structural methods.
This is particularly harmful to children of colour, who only see stories revolving around white children and grow up thinking that only white children are in books, Shaffi said. Singh, who teaches creative writing at the university level, said that she still has trouble getting her students to write about someone not named Mary.
But the panel was quick to point out that the problem is not with the writers, but the industry, which often only wants one version of a minority story — as with Singh’s “Hotel Arcadia” — and doesn’t want to work harder to sell a book they don’t already know how to sell.
This manifests in book covers — novels set in Africa always showing an elephant or a sunset, or novels set in India always showing a woman in a sari. Publishers often only want to depict a certain type of narrative of a place, because they know that story will make money. Singh had this problem with “Hotel Arcadia,” with a publisher finally telling her that if she went along with one of the stereotypical covers, the book would sell better.
Singh resisted, but many writers fall into the trap. Johnson said some writers will modify themselves and their stories to get published.
It’s also a privilege to write, and not everyone has the time to spend on writing, especially with no guarantee their work will get published or make any money.
“By the time you’ve got that book submitted, who’s going to publish that book, and is that book going to be worthy? Are the publishers going to put money so that it’s in the window in Waterstones?,” Johnson said. “And that’s a journey.”
It’s not a journey everyone is willing to take, especially when structural disadvantages make it more difficult for minority authors to get published.
Even book awards require fees, which act as a barrier. Publishers will only put that money down for stories they know will sell, which probably won’t be books from marginalized groups. So the books that become critically acclaimed are often already the ones that had that advantage.
The situation isn’t all bleak. Smaller, independent publishers are often better at seeking out lesser known voices, and sometimes reviewers can specifically request books by people of colour, LGBTQ folks and those with disabilities.
It’s also up to the readers, who Johnson said must be confident and interested enough to seek these marginalized stories out.
“We need to have a culture of informed and active readers,” she said.[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1538410490886-c1058b9e-6953-1″ taxonomies=”8957″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
1 Oct 2018 | 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 2018 | 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]