22 Mar 18 | Awards, Fellowship 2018, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_video link=”https://youtu.be/WzJkJikmYe8″][vc_column_text]Abbad Yahya is a 29-year-old Palestinian novelist whose fourth novel Crime in Ramallah was banned by the Palestinian authority in the West Bank in 2017. The novel includes depictions of gay sex, as well as political commentary about fanaticism and religious extremism — subjects largely considered taboo in the region. All copies of the book were confiscated by the attorney general in February this year, on the grounds it contained texts that threatened public decency.
When the controversy arose, Yahya was abroad in Qatar. He was so afraid for his life that he did not to go back to his native Ramallah and spent time in other countries in the Middle East and Europe. Threats were issued to him and his family via social media and copies of the book burnt on the Gaza strip. The Public Prosecutor issued a summons for questioning against Yahya and detained the distributor of the novel.
Despite this, Yahya has spent the last year giving interviews to the international and Arab press and raising awareness of freedom of expression and the lives of young people in the West Bank and Gaza, particularly in relation to their sexuality.
“In my point of view, the most important impact of all of this, was raising the awareness amongst the youth and their decisions that are related to their sexual lives, as well as making a public discussion about the issue,” says Yahya.
Crime in Ramallah follows the lives of three young Palestinian men and the different ways they cope with living in the claustrophobic society of Ramallah. The passage in the novel most cited as causing outrage is when one of the characters sees a picture of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat with a gun and imagines it as a penis.
The novel was criticised by some of Yahya’s own colleagues. According to AP, the head of the Palestinian Writers Union, Murad Sudani, said it was a: “silly novel that violates the national and religious values of the society in order to appease the West and win prizes.”
“The job of the writer in our occupied country is to raise the hope and enlighten people — not to break the national and religious symbols,” Sudani added. “My freedom as a writer ends when the freedom of the country begins.”
But Yahya does not agree. “Censors proclaim themselves to be the representatives of the public and their opinion, while present us as an obscure minority, insignificant in its voice and influence,” Yahya tells Index on Censorship. “This nomination proves the exact opposite, as it comes as a recognition of what we do and the things we stand for, and a proof that our voice is indeed heard. Freedom is contagious, and being one of the nominees strengthens my unshakable conviction in the ideals of freedom and freedom of expression.
See the full shortlist for Index on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards 2018 here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row_content” equal_height=”yes” el_class=”text_white” css=”.vc_custom_1490258749071{background-color: #cb3000 !important;}”][vc_column width=”1/2″][vc_custom_heading text=”Support the Index Fellowship.” font_container=”tag:p|font_size:28|text_align:center” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2Fsupport-the-freedom-of-expression-awards%2F|||”][vc_column_text]
By donating to the Freedom of Expression Awards you help us support
individuals and groups at the forefront of tackling censorship.
Find out more
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/2″ css=”.vc_custom_1521478525252{background-image: url(https://www.indexoncensorship.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2017-awards-fellows-1460×490-2_revised.jpg?id=90090) !important;background-position: center !important;background-repeat: no-repeat !important;background-size: cover !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1521806417232-57215ec6-b0de-4″ taxonomies=”10735″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
01 Mar 18 | China, News and features
With the historic announcement at the weekend that China would end the two-term limit on presidents, meaning the current leader Xi Jinping could be president for life, it created an online storm.
People took to the popular Chinese social media apps Weibo and WeChat to express either disdain and outrage. It didn’t take too long for the country’s well-oiled censorship apparatus to swing into action and ban all of the obvious terms related. Within hours, you couldn’t say “I don’t agree”, “migration”, “emigration”, “re-election”, “election term”, “constitution amendment”, “constitution rules”, “proclaiming oneself an emperor”, “Yuan Shikai (Former Emperor)” and “Winnie the Pooh” (more on this soon).
At the same time, Chinese citizens created and widely shared a series of memes. Most of these have since been removed, but not before enough people saw them, screenshots were taken and they were spread on media beyond the censor’s reach. Here’s an overview of some of the best:
King Winnie
The world’s favourite cuddly teddy bear, unless you’re a Chinese leader. After a meme likened the cartoon character with the Communist Party leader went viral in 2013, Winnie the Pooh became a popular meme when riffing Xi – and arguably the world’s most censored children’s book character. That has not stopped people persisting with the animated representation of the leader. In response to the new proposal, several of the following memes circulated:
The original meme that prompted the government to ban Pooh in 2013.
Another oldie but goodie expressing Xi’s disdain for Pooh, created by cartoonist Badiucao in the China Digital Times.
Emperor Xi
An obvious one here. Graphics emerged with references to past emperors of China, emphasizing the point that this new proposal is reminiscent of past Chinese rulers and dictators. Some of these graphics censored include:
Cartoon created on political activism website, ChannelDraw.
Graphic created after the announcement by Badiucao, prolific political activist and cartoonist.
Silver lining?
Perhaps the best of the memes, combining as it does a joke about Xi’s term extension and a joke about the common Chinese pressure to get married. It reads: “My mom said that I have to get married before Xi Dada’s term in office ends. Now I can breathe a long sigh of relief.”
Don’t forget the bunnies
While the latest news is sure to keep the censors busy for some time, they’ve been waging another war in China this year against #Metoo, which has recently come to the country and has not been well-received by a government uncomfortable with any form of protest (read our article on protest in China here). Initially the hashtag #woyeshi went viral, which literally means “me too”. When that was banned, people got creative. Introducing the rice bunny. Rice in Mandarin is mi and bunny tu, pronounced basically “me too”. Now China’s internet is awash with images of bunny and rice combos, that is until the censors catch up. Bunnies and Pooh bears – China’s internet might be censored, but it’s never boring.
The Rice Bunny is against sexual harassment. Image from @七隻小怪獸 on Weibo
12 Feb 18 | Events
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
(Photo illustration: Shutterstock)
Celebrate fifty years since the abolishment of theatre censorship in Britain and the Hays Code in American cinema.
To commemorate these anniversaries, join cultural professionals, including Index on Censorship CEO Jodie Ginsberg, academics and artists for an exploration into the ways in which the arts have both conformed, and actively confronted censorship. You’ll discover how codes of what constitutes immoral or obscene material have shifted over time – looking at examples of film, theatre, performance, paintings, prints, and the role of museums and galleries.
This day-long event takes place at the Victoria and Albert Museum.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
When: Saturday, 21 April 2018 10:00–17:00
Where: Hochhauser Auditorium, Victoria and Albert Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 2RL
Tickets: £15.00 – £25.00 via V&A
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
04 Jan 18 | Media Freedom, media freedom featured, News and features, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”97191″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]“News is something which somebody wants suppressed: all the rest is advertising.”
Variations on this quote, originally attributed to William Randolph Hearst, have echoed around newsrooms for decades, with advertising and editorial kept separate. Nowadays, though, the line is becoming more blurred for the UK’s regional media.
And it is driving journalists away from the jobs they love. One former local paper editor told Index she bowed out after commercial influence became the last straw.
“The last 10 years have seen increasing pressure from commercial departments to not use, or minimise, any story which has the potential to upset an advertiser – or even a potential advertiser,” she said. “While working as an editor I was told, in no uncertain terms, we were not to run a court story involving an advertiser breaching health and safety legislation. And that is just one example.
“My instincts were to fight every inch of the way, but the reality was that the dice were loaded in favour of those bringing in revenue, the ad team, not those irritating journalists who believed in printing news, whatever it was and whoever it involved.”
An increasing number of media CEOs have commercial roots rather than editorial backgrounds, with publishers sometimes accused of arguing that commercial needs can override journalistic integrity because advertisers pay the wages.
Print circulation is falling – as is advertising revenue. Enders Analysis predicts that by 2019, the UK newspaper industry’s revenue will be nearly £1bn a year less than in 2011, and eMarketer’s latest UK media ad-spending forecast predicted newspapers would see their income fall by 9% in 2017.
Regional papers have a smaller pool of advertisers to draw on than their national competitors, so commercial directors are keen to court businesses in the hope they may become advertisers, or to keep their budgets on par with previous years.
Reporters complain that they spend too much time rehashing press releases with little news value, and sub-editors regularly come across “stories” on commercial events with instructions not to edit them. Often, a paid-for supplement will follow, linked to an agreement for editorial coverage.
Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors, says this closer relationship is important but needs to be handled with care.
“Editors left their ivory towers a few years ago now, and any editor or news editor who doesn’t understand that the continued existence of their publication is tied to its commercial success won’t last long in the job,” he said. “But whereas it is acceptable for an editor to agree to, say, a new section on a topic that will attract or support advertising, it remains their role if not their duty to ensure commercial interests do not affect genuine news reporting.”
This is a tightrope Nigel Pickover has negotiated in his four decades in the regional press. The former editor of the Ipswich Star and the Eastern Daily Press believes editorial staff need a sixth sense regarding potentially undue influence.
“If there is a newsroom campaign or a royal wedding supplement, it’s entirely appropriate to link with colleagues to see if there are commercial opportunities. Producing newspapers and websites is an expensive business,” he said.
“The biggest danger to me – in a time of tight resources and open pages – is clever PR firms delivering well-written copy, pictures and even video into the editorial system. Again, these stories must pass muster and not be used as space fillers if they are just free puffs.”
Many PR companies, aware of the muddying of the waters, see benefits for all parties.
Maw Communications has clients including GoCompare, DPD and Virgin Money. Founder Gordon Maw says it is now common to have editorial coverage, traditional adverts, sponsorship, online links and inclusion in more general features in one managed campaign rather than dealing with separate departments.
“As amazing as your story or ad is, there’s a massive chance people will miss it. But with this sharing of media, everything can be done as mini campaigns – it can go everywhere,” he said. “It’s still about the story and the message but it works in different ways.”
But while some newsdesks are instructed to blur the boundaries, Iliffe’s new Bishop’s Stortford Independent sets firm limits. News editor Sinead Corr’s brief is to provide genuine local news which inspires confidence in both readers and advertisers.
“We are trying to be independent, and you can’t be that if you are in someone’s pocket,” she said. “Our ad reps sell on the quality of our editorial content. There are no mates’ rates, no puff promises.”
She says advertisers believe too much cross-contamination can damage their brands. “People aren’t falling for it… It’s the whole ethos of trust. Adverts are placed in a context where they have credibility by association.”
But what happens if advertisers do try to call the shots? They may demand inclusion in a story or threaten to withdraw advertising if an adverse story is printed.
This is where editors have to be strong, fighting their corner if needs be and employing that “sixth sense”, says Pickover.
It is this approach which will, ultimately, benefit both commercial and editorial sides, adds Murray.
“In my experience, and through anecdotal evidence from today’s editors, they remain committed to standing up for editorial independence and integrity. Management also, I believe, understand that a publication’s integrity with both readers and then advertisers will not survive the loss of real editorial standards.”
This is good news, but it still rings hollow in the ears of journalists such as the former weekly editor, who spoke to Index, who believes the daily struggle is still real – especially for smaller publications.
“I am sure there are papers out there which take no prisoners and run stories unfettered by the chains of the ad team – and I salute them. But equally, there are also plenty of stifled editorial teams being bent by the commercial will of the ad teams – be it not running a story altogether, or over-writing some PR puff to a page lead to please an advertiser.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Survey: How free is our press?” use_theme_fonts=”yes” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.indexoncensorship.org%2F2017%2F12%2Fsurvey-free-press%2F|title:Take%20our%20survey||”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_icon icon_fontawesome=”fa fa-pencil-square-o” color=”black” background_style=”rounded” size=”xl” align=”right”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]
This survey aims to take a snapshot of how financial pressures are affecting news reporting. The openMedia project will use this information to analyse how money shapes what gets reported – and what doesn’t – and to advocate for better protections and freedoms for journalists who have important stories to tell.
More information[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”81193″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2017/12/jean-paul-marthoz-commercial-interference-european-media/”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
Commercial pressures on the media? Anti-establishment critics have a ready-made answer: of course, journalists are hostage to the whims of corporate owners, advertisers and sponsors. Of course, they cannot independently cover issues which these powers consider “inconvenient”.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”96949″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://www.opendemocracy.net/openmedia/mary-fitzgerald/welcome-to-openmedia”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
Forget fake news. Money can distort media far more disturbingly – through advertorials, and through buying silence. Here’s what we’re going to do about it.
This article is also available in Dutch | French | German | Hungarian | Italian |
Serbian | Spanish| Russian[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”Don’t lose your voice. Stay informed.” use_theme_fonts=”yes”][vc_separator color=”black”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship is a nonprofit that campaigns for and defends free expression worldwide. We publish work by censored writers and artists, promote debate, and monitor threats to free speech. We believe that everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of harm or persecution – no matter what their views.
Join our mailing list (or follow us on Twitter or Facebook) and we’ll send you our weekly newsletter about our activities defending free speech. We won’t share your personal information with anyone outside Index.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][gravityform id=”20″ title=”false” description=”false” ajax=”false”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_separator color=”black”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”12″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1515055423699-6d3c86d3-086a-2″ taxonomies=”8996″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
