10:58 AM |
You are viewing a feed that contains frequently updated content. When you subscribe to a feed, it is added to the Common Feed List. Updated information from the feed is automatically downloaded to your computer and can be viewed in Internet Explorer and other programs. Learn more about feeds.
By: terry
a newspaper's editorial is the newspaper's opinion. It doesn't need to carry a name (or photo). The editor and publisher are answerable to its content. And this crosbie idiot is suppose to be a journalism professor? Lord knows what sort of standards he's setting for USP journalism courses..
This fool is a disgrace..
By: Ulli Weissbach
As a journalist I can only applaud Crosbie's criticism of the undemocratic practice of anonymous editorials in this country. They are nothing but a tool to manipulate readers and brainwash them into followers of a certain one-sided opinion. This undemocratic and unjournalistic practice was one of the reasons why I cancelled my subscriptions to the NZ Herald and the Sunday Star Times. If I lived in Wellington, it would have been the Dominion Post. Where does this habit come from and what justifies it? Opinion is an opinion is an opinion – and we are entitled to know who has that opinion. Anything else is as undemocratic as the dictatorship in Fiji. People who read and buy these opinions are like lambs, shepherded by mainstream sheepdogs, who claim to know better, what they should think. I appeal to all NZ readers, to boycott papers that publish anonymous editorials. That would be a truly democratic uprising. Because, after all, it's the people who rule in a democratic country.
By: Liu Muri
In the Senate sitting of 18 May, 1993 (pages 731 to 748), Senator Manu Korovulavula moved a motion for the Senate to call on Government to carry out an investigation into the method adopted by the Board of the Fijian Holdings Limited to allow limited liability companies to buy shares into the company (FHL) without the knowledge of 14 Provinces. Senator Korovulavula had stated that the motion was brought on a point of principle to reveal less than honest dealings of people in position of power, knowledge and trust.
Vee, before telling me to read the Qoliqoli Bill, you need to realise that the mere Bill had already prompted greedy sea-shore owners to demand tourism resorts and other beach users unreasonable monetary demands.
Also, I suggest you read the above Senate report and find out who are the REAL BENEFICIARIES of Fijian Holdings. Find out who own Sticks Investment (Weleilakeba), Q Ten (Qarase), KJY Investments ( K. Yabaki) K.B Investments ( Bakani) and 5X Investment and other companies named in the report who are big shareholder of preference A shares which were really meant to help poor Provincial councils and poor indigenous people. Qarase regime was perhaps the most corrupt in Fiji where the fat cats became rich and poor indigenous people remained poor and Indo Fijians were shown as the red-herring by the divisive racist politics and policies of SDL.
By: Vee
Vinaka Liu Muri … yr pseudonym is truly self-fulfilling and you do show yourself in your true vulagi colours.
Why do you also presume that I was doing the tauratale or vala a teke in 1987 and 2000 ? I reside in Fiji and am a full blooded Fijian . I have protested long and hard against all the coups in Fiji and am not about to change my tuiboto in this regard.
Whats yr beef against Qarase other than a sweeping statement accusing him of ethno-nationalism ? Give us proof of the pudding honey. Lord only knows, we have been waiting 3 long years for the regime to give us proof. Its all a great sham to stay in power and you have bought it all. Fool.
Also speaking of the great "Lauan mafia", you obviously must be great friends with the great Lauan mafia aka as Rokoului, Koila, Ateca, Teletubby et al – who are all lining their pockets under the guise of protecting themselves from us, the leper population.
Also I really would urge you to read up on the Qoliqoli Bill – which in all honesty you have probably never read. It is absolutely nothing like you say it pertains to be. Come back when you have read it.
By: Liu Muri
Vee, agreed, a coup is a coup. Where were you in 1987 and 2000? If you are an indigenous Fijian, then you would have danced and had orgies on effigy of democracy because it was a fight for indigenous supremacy over a greedy migrant race who have done better than the original people through their hard work. Bugger all to democracy then. Now, when the gun is turned, you are now crying for the foreign flower that Ravuvu and other ethno nationalist like Rabuka classed democracy as. So how come the scent of that foreign flower is so much wanted in Fiji?
What is best for Fiji? Democracy? So that ethno -nationalist like Qarase and the Lauan mafia could squander public money, line their pockets under guise of affirmative action and treat half the population like lepers.
Come real Vee, democracy is not always good and coups are not necessarily bad. Which people of Fiji are you speaking for? People are generally happy except those fat cats and ethno nationalist who has the democratic government and democracy in their pockets via divisive racist policies.
As for Australia and New Zealand, they would not give a damn to Fijians if they killed each other as long as they were under the banner of so-called democracy. Helen Clark threw away the Foreshore and Seabed law in the rubbish bin, claiming that sea, foreshore and beaches were gifts from God to all its people. Yet they remained criminally silent when Qarase introduced vote-buying Qoliqoli Bill to push common people, especially Indo Fijians, out of the sea and beaches. Do you really blame Bainimarama from rescuing Fiji from a sham of democracy?
By: Vee
Oh puhlease Crosbie … you are very painful with your full-on support for the regime in Fiji. What part of the equation do you not understand ?
A coup is a coup is a coup – it is wrong, it is illegal and any immoral, and any amount of posturing and frothing at the mouth won't change that.
You seem to think you have more qualifications that most about Fiji, and that qualifies you to be the one that is 'right;' about Fiji and the Fijians ? How dare you presume to speak for most of us Fijians about what is good for us or not good for us.
Your pathetic support for Bainimarama and his regime is well known. You are welcome to the brown-nosing – its your choice but don't presume that the country of Fiji shares your views.
As for Keys and Rudd. They are on the right path – the sanctions ARE working despite what you say.
From: Pacific Media Watch nius <pacific_media_watch@lists.apc.org.au>
Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:55 PM
Subject: [Pacific_media_watch] 6580 FIJI: Comment - On media abuse of power and influence
To: Pacific Media Watch <pacific_media_watch@lists.apc.org.au>
Title – 6580 FIJI: Comment - On media abuse of power and influence
Date – 5 January 2010
Byline – Crosbie Walsh
Origin – Pacific Media Watch
Source – CW's Fiji blog 5/1/10
Copyright – FB
Status – Unabridged
----------------------------
* Pacific Media Watch Online - check the website for archive and links:
www.pacmediawatch.aut.ac.nz
* Post a comment on this story at PMW Right of Reply:
www.pacificmediacentre.blogspot.com
pmc@aut.ac.nz
Opinion:
ON ABUSE OF POWER AND INFLUENCE IN A DEMOCRACY - NZ'S DOMINION POST
http://crosbiew.blogspot.com/2010/01/o-on-media-abuse-of-power-and-influence.html
By Crosbie Walsh
HOROWHENUA (CW's Fiji blog/Pacific Media Watch): I've always thought there's something more than a little undemocratic and cowardly that those writing editorials do not reveal their identity, especially in a proudly democratic country like New Zealand.
All we know is that an editorial contains opinions (not always backed by facts or fully researched thoughts) that are usually written by the publisher, the editor or one of the editorial team. I see no good reason why these people, and journalists in general, who so often demand access to private information, hide behind anonymity. Why are so many media sources "usually reliable" or "our correspondent in X." Why does the law permit them to publish anonymous "leaked reports," even of personal emails? Why do we allow them these powers when we, their readers, do not even know who they are?
I'm also unsure why they think we should be interested in their anonymous opinions when we know nothing about their knowledge of the topics they discuss? We would not accept this from a doctor, a lawyer or accountant, so why should it be acceptable from journalists who play with our minds, mould our opinions, and set the boundaries of our democracy?
If the so-called Fourth Estate is entitled to a special, protected, place in our society, searching out hidden truths and using its "freedoms" to keep citizens and voters properly informed, then the media must be far more open, accountable and known.
The latest Dominion Post editorial, "Dictators must not hold sway in the Pacific" (www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/editorials/3204024/Dictators-must-not-hold-sway-in-Pacific) is a case in point. We know nothing of the writer who presumes to advise Prime Minister John Key what to do about our relationship with Fiji other than that he, she or it thinks it wrong for us to ease up on Bainimarama who "took power at the point of a gun and deposed a democratically elected government" and who since then has "tightened his grip on the country." Et cetera. Et hackneyed cetera. Nothing was written on anything even remotely wrong with the old "democracy" and nothing about anything good on the de facto government.
"Whatever else he does [the editorial states] ... Mr Key should not accept advice such as that from Auckland academic Dr Hugh Laracy" - or, presumably, anyone else who thinks the travel ban and other measures have failed. Yet these measures, imposed three years ago, have brought about no change in Bainimarama's position; they are hurting many innocent Fiji citizens, and they've prevented many qualified people applying for civil service positions, even in positions not remotely political. The editorial thinks Mr Key is "right to try to make a new start with the commodore [but] that does not mean forgetting that he is a dictator. The aim must be that dictatorships do not become the 'Pacific way.'"
With this sort of inane, patronising advice Key could well fall back on Laracy: afterall, he is not anonymous; he's studied the Pacific for close to 40 years and, although not enamoured with coups, he does have a plausible alternative to our initially well intended but now obviously failed policy.
I'm sure Professor Laracy will join me in issuing a public challenge to the Dom Post editor (s).
• Come out from behind your masks.
• State your qualifications and Pacific experience.
• Publish balanced statements on Fiji's past and present.
• Provide your readers with sufficient background for them to form their own independent judgments.
• Comment on at least some of the positive actions taken by the Bainimarama government.
• Take the trouble to find out what is really happening in Fiji.
And if you can't -- or won't -- do any of these, at least make an intelligent and realistic suggestion to help John Key formulate a workable policy towards Fiji.
Hugh and I may lose the debate, of course, but we would at least know who you are -- and your readers and John Key may learn something they did not know before.
* Dr Crosbie Walsh is emeritus professor of the University of the South Pacific and retired founding director of USP's Development Studies programme.
* Comment on this item www.pacific.scoop.co.nz
+++niuswire
PACIFIC MEDIA WATCH ONLINE
www.pacmediawatch.aut.ac.nz
PACIFIC MEDIA WATCH is a media and educational resource compiled by the AUT Pacific Media Centre for the Pacific region.
(c)1996-2009 Creative Commons
http://creativecommons.org
Items are provided solely for review purposes as a non-profit educational service. Copyright remains the property of the original producers as indicated in the header. Recipients should seek permission
from the copyright owner for any publishing. Copyright owners not wishing their materials to be posted by PMW please contact us. The views expressed in material listed by PMW are not necessarily the views
of PMW or the Pacific Media Centre.
For further information or joining the Pacific Media Watch listserve, visit:
http://lists.apc.org.au/listinfo.cgi/pacific_media_watch?apc.org.au
Email:
pmc@aut.ac.nz
Fax: (+649) 921 9987
SnailMail: Pacific Media Centre, School of Communication Studies, AUT
University, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Website: www.pacmediawatch.aut.ac.nz
_______________________________________________
Pacific_media_watch mailing list
Pacific_media_watch@lists.apc.org.au
_______________________________________________
Pacific_media_watch mailing list
Pacific_media_watch@lists.apc.org.au
0 comments:
Post a Comment