Hot topics click link for more
Those darned Russian trolls are still at it. This week they have turned their sights - most likely bots - on media outlets in Finland, reported daily newspaper Helsingin Sanomat (May 4). In typical form, names of prominent media executives were posted to a Russian language Telegram channel with their contact information. St. Petersburg, Russia independent news portal Fontanka uncovered the scam linked to the infamous Internet Research Agency, long part of disinformation campaigns. Fontanka revealed that the Russian bot-bros are paid about US$600 a month for 200 trolls per day.
This particular troll - Cyber Front Z - posted the names with social media contact information recruiting followers to blast-post to the named individuals about a debunked conspiracy theory from Russian Ministry for Foreign Affairs spokesperson Maria Zakharova claiming “Western media have banned interviews with Russian representatives,” noted Finland’s public broadcaster YLE (May 5). Cyber Front Z has actively trolled Western media since Russian Federation forces invaded Ukraine in later February. This was the first coordinated attack on Finnish media. Several years ago a cyber attack was mounted against a Finnish journalist. (See more about media in Finland here) (See more about disinformation here) (See more about social media here) (See more about conflict zones here)
In addition to YLE executives, the troll targeted editorial executives at newspapers Keskisuomalainen and Etelä-Saimaa, as well as the simplified Finnish-language news service Selkokeskus. YLE observed that “Finnish media outlets, editors and journalists could face a lengthy campaign of online harassment and shaming following the publication of the messages, as the amount of Finnish outlets listed was second only to the United States in terms of sheer numbers.” Finland shares a long border with the Russian Federation and the government is actively debating NATO membership since the invasion of Ukraine.
Cryptocurrencies have become all the rage among a certain set, not limited to Elon Musk. They swoon at the thought of having a means of financial exchange unencumbered by regulators, national and international, perhaps extraterrestrial. Most truly they want privacy, usually to avoid taxation and other legal entanglements. Think money laundering.
This week the Wikimedia Foundation, which publishes the various Wikipedia portals, decided to “discontinue direct acceptance of cryptocurrency as a means of donating,” said its statement, reported financial publication Fortune (May 2). Its BitPay account has been shuttered. Wikipedia editor Molly White proposed shunning cryptocurrencies earlier this year as tacit endorsement of “risky investment” and “inherently predatory” technologies, not to forget “extremely damaging to the environment” and risks of reputational damage. Two weeks ago about 200 Wikipedia editors endorsed the proposal.
Wikimedia giving up on crypto attracted some attention among true believers, who argue, speciously, that bitcoin and ethereum mining can really be environmentally friendly. Cryptocurrencies and its various spins have an entire universe of supportive trade and fan publications and portals. Conferences are organized and well-attended. CoinDesk, one of the best known, will have its Consensus Experience festival in Austin, Texas in June. They are expecting 15 thousand to attend. (See more about digital transitions here)
Crypto fans were incensed this week when legendary investor Warren Buffett slammed their icon as “magic,” reported digital news portal Gizmodo (May 2). “If you told me you own all of the bitcoin in the world and you offered it to me for $25, I wouldn’t take it because what would I do with it? I’d have to sell it back to you one way or another. Maybe it’d be the same people, but it isn’t going to do anything. It’s got a magic to it and people have attached magic to lots of things.” Elon was not amused.
Publishing is not for the feint of heart… or bank balances. Smaller and more local outlets often exist by a, sometimes hour to hour. Add to that the dulling effect state capture of revenue sources brings and this is less business, more masochism.
The publisher of left-leaning Hungarian current events 168 Ora (168 Hours) ended the employment of its entire 15 member editorial team this past week. Pal Milkovics, chief executive and partner in Michaeli, Schwartz & Brit Media Zrt, said to Hungarian media news portal Media1 HU (April 30), keeping 168 Ora alive required drastic action. Contractors would now produce all editorial content. “They will buy content from more authors than before, and because they always buy from the best experts in their fields, readers will be able to find more diverse opinions in 168 Óra than before, said Mr. Milkovics, who added that the separate web portal 168 HU would not be affected. By coincidence, 168 Ora chief editor Jozsef Makai resigned. Staff reductions at sister publication Pesti Hirlap are also expected after switching from daily to weekly publication. (See more about media in Hungry here)
Brit Media is “partially” owned by Telegraf Kft, noted news portal 24 HU (April 30), principally controlled by Slomo Köves, a supporter of nativist, populist Hungarian president Viktor Orban. In recent elections (April 3), Mr. Orban and his Fidesz party won decisively. Due to that victory, both sources suggest, the Orban government intends to significantly reduce spending for “pubic service” messaging on all media outlets, seen by OSCE as a factor contributing to Mr. Orban’s voter share. (See more about elections and media here)
Brit Media Group acquired 168 Ora in 2015 as well as a minority stake in radio broadcaster Klubradio, long a right-wing target. Two decades ago 168 Ora had a paid circulation of about 50,000. That dropped by two-thirds in 2012. Last September about 4 thousand copies were sold, then Brit Media Group stopped reporting circulation.
State financial aid to media outlets, directly or indirectly, rises and falls. Publishers and broadcasters, public and private, regularly make the case that media support is essential to fulfill different objectives. During the onslaught of the coronavirus - not that it has entirely abated - governments were aroused by calls to support media outlets providing related news and information, not to forget challenge fake news and disinformation campaigns. Then, too, ad spending fell apart. Spending on media support, generally, rose with little handwringing.
The city of Vienna, Austria is ending support for community TV channel Okto, which was operated since 2005. Word came down from the office of the Finance Chancellory, reported Weiner Zeitung (April 27). Okto had been receiving about €750,000 annually. Support ends at the end of June. “This completely unexpected decision is life-threatening and means the end of Austria's first and largest community television as we know and love it,” said a brief statement from the Okto team. (See more about media in Austria here)
The finance office explained the decision as part of change in direction for “community communications projects” from linear media to social media. In the blink of an eye, right-wing Austrian politicians expressed satisfaction with the decision. "Now the money should be used to renovate council housing,” said Vienna city councillor Dominik Nepp, who represents the right-wing populist Freedom Party of Austria (FPO). "Pushing millions to party-affiliated publishing houses through clandestine advertising deals and at the same time canceling subsidies for high-quality media" must come to an end, said Green party spokesperson Eva Blimlinger. (See more about media support here)
Okto is a community participation channel. Programs are produced by volunteers. "Okto focuses on diversity instead of genres and with its program depicts urban society in all its diversity,” says its mission statement. The channel has won awards for adult education and criticism for broadcasting bits produced by China Radio International, affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party. Whether or not the decision to remove funding for Okto is just another political battle over alternative media voices, always seen as threatening by right-wing populists, or a shift to social media for government messaging will play out in the coming weeks.
|
