Hot topics click link for more
When the Kalush Orchestra won the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) this past May with “Stefania”, fans cheered that Ukraine would host the 2023 event, which is the tradition. Several locations in every part of the country, were suggested. “We will do our best to one day host the participants and guests of Eurovision in Ukrainian Mariupol. Free, peaceful, rebuilt!,” said Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky at the time. Reality bites.
The European Broadcasting Union, keeper of the flame and, of course, the rules, weighed in on the venue for the 2023 ESC, in a statement (June 17). “Given the ongoing war since the Russian invasion of this year’s winning country, the EBU has taken the time to conduct a full assessment and feasibility study with both (Ukraine public broadcaster) UA:PBC and third-party specialists including on safety and security issues. The Eurovision Song Contest is one of the most complex TV productions in the world with thousands working on, and attending, the event and 12 months of preparation time needed.” Certainly, insurance underwriters weighed in on the decision to choose a different location. (See more about the Eurovision Song Contest here)
This has not gone down well in Ukraine. "Ukraine does not agree with the nature of the decision of the European Broadcasting Union, when we were confronted with the fact without discussing the possibility of other options,” said a joint statement from Minister of Culture and Information Policy Oleksandr Tkachenko and previous Ukrainian ESC winners Ruslana Lyzhychko (2004) and Kalush Orchestra frontman Oleh Psiuk, quoted by Ukraine media news portal Detector Media (June 17). “Ukraine believes that it has every reason to hold further negotiations and find a joint solution that will satisfy all parties. Holding Eurovision 2023 in Ukraine would be a strong signal to the whole world. We will demand that this decision be changed.”
The EBU statement indicated “discussions” are beginning with UK public broadcaster BBC to host the event. UK TikTok sensation Sam Ryder placed second in Turin. Participation in the 2022 ESC by Russian Federation contestants was prohibited due to the invasion. In retaliation, so to speak, Russian state broadcasters withdrew from the EBU.
UPDATE: UK prime minister Boris Johnson has weighed in on where the 2023 ESC is held. “The Ukrainians won the Eurovision Song Contest,” he said to a press gaggle on returning from Kyiv, reported Reuters (June 18). “I know we had a fantastic entry, I know we came second and I’d love it to be in this country. But the fact is that they won and they deserve to have it. I believe that they can have it and I believe that they should have it. I believe Kyiv or any other safe Ukrainian city would be a fantastic place to have it.”
The BBC reported PM Johnson’s comment without an official response. The EBU has not commented further. UK cities Glasgow, Manchester, Leeds, and London have “expressed an interest in hosting” the event, noted the BBC (June 18).
Public interactions between reporters and their subjects are increasingly tense. Once painfully diplomatic - and rarely newsworthy - the press gaggle can degenerate into more than a squabble. Reporters and press spokespersons come armed, figuratively.
CNN senior international correspondent Fred Pleitgen faced off yesterday (June 16) with Russian Federation Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova. The venue was the St Petersburg International Economic Forum touted by Russian authorities as a rebut to the annual World Economic Forum meeting of international business leaders. The St Petersburg event was generally ignored by the world’s economic elite, most notable attendees being representatives of the Taliban.
During a press conference Ms Zakharova called on Mr. Pleitgen, perhaps expecting an opening to a glowing assessment of the event at hand. He asked, instead, about last weeks statement from Russian Federation president Vladimir V. Putin referencing the territorial pursuits of Tsar Peter the Great, Russian Emperor in the 18th century. Mr. Pleitgen asked, very simply, what other territories might Mr. Putin invade.
“Why do you talk to us in this tone when you question our government, but not when it comes to your own," she fired back, reported German newspaper Tagesspiegel (June 17). Visibly annoyed, she reverted to claims oft repeated by Russian officials without answering the question. So, Mr. Pleitgen makes it simple: "If the Russian president says that what is happening in Ukraine is the legitimate reconquest and strengthening of Russian territories, can you please explain to me: What does this mean, where does it end and is it not a violation of international law?” Again, Ms Zakharova attempts to change the subject, even making a strange reference to the US state of Alaska. Headline writers at CNN referred to it as a “testy exchange.”
Frederik (Fred) Pleitgen has worked with CNN since 2005, becoming senior international correspondent in 2015. He is a German national, primarily living in Berlin, and previously worked as a reporter for German TV channels ZDF and RTL. He has family ties to journalism. Fritz Pleitgen, his father, now retired, attended to regional public broadcaster WDR, national public television network ARD and served as European Broadcasting Union general director.
At the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ms Zakharova was sanctioned by the European Union as "a central figure of the government propaganda.” Subsequently, she has been sanctioned by the governments of Australia and Japan. US sanctions were applied in June. She has held various government public affairs roles since 2003.
With critical independent news coverage disseminated worldwide, authoritarians take a dim view of outlets that just might threaten their pedestal. Local reporters and outlets are easily spied upon, intimidated, arrested and worse. Those based in other countries are a bit more difficult to trample, except in China or the Russian Federation. And those examples are being replicated.
Hungary’s right-wing, nativist, xenophobic Fidesz political party, essentially the country’s government, is taking seriously potential disruption from foreign media, said parliamentary leader Maté Kocsis, to independent news outlet Telex (June 13). “Organizations that want to gain a non-democratic domestic political influence with the money of a foreign state based on legitimacy, must be examined,” he said, noting the 2018 Stop Soros initiative that placed billboards across the country to demonize philanthropist George Soros, conflating with xenophobia and antisemitism. “It is a simple matter of protection of sovereignty.” (See more about media in Hungary here)
It is certainly a paranoid view. “Foreign states sometimes form (political) parties in other smaller countries, trying to gain influence through large corporations, media conglomerates, or by means of secret service, blackmail.” Of course, the Hungarian government of prime minister Viktor Orban, close to Russian Federation president Vladimir V. Putin, has dabbled in domestic affairs of neighboring nations. When asked to identify a suspicious media target, Mr. Kocsis became cryptic. “In this case it matters what I think.” (See more about press/media freedom here)
The Hungarian authorities have considerable recent experience spying on local reporters and outlets. An Atlantic Council report (June 6) outlined the country’s wide use of the infamous Pegasus spyware. “Well, I freaked out,” said Direkt36 investigative journalist Szabolcs Panyi when discovering he was a target more than a year ago. A number of independent Hungarian media workers have filed a lawsuit against Israeli officials for approving the sale of the spyware to the Hungarian government. “If a relatively unknown journalist from a small country can become a target, you can imagine what can happen to others.”
Every editor counts on revealing copy about hucksters and grifters. Readers, viewers and listeners are endlessly drawn to their exploits. True crime is always a popular journalistic destination.
London High Court justice Karen Steyn dismissed the high profile defamation lawsuit brought by politically involved UK businessman Arron Banks against writer Carole Cadwalladr, reported Press Gazette (June 13). Mr. Banks claimed damages over 2019 statements in a TED Talk and, subsequently, a social media post. Suggesting intent, he did not include the Guardian and the Observer, which contracted Ms Cadwalladr as she reported on his trail of exploits, including principal funding for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) that campaigned by dubious means on separating the UK from the European Union (Brexit). That reporting noted a particular alignment between UKIP/Brexit and the Russian Federation. (See more about elections and media here)
The trial, held this past January, dutifully heard allegations and evidence. Defamation law in the UK (Defamation Act of 2013) requires claimants show “serious harm” by “publication” results in “serious financial loss.” In the UK defamation was decriminalized in 2010. (See more about defamation here)
Mr. Banks argued, in court, that the presence of the TED Talk video, posted on line and viewed about five million times, reported the BBC (June 13), had affected his business. “From a corporate standpoint, we were less successful in obtaining approval of funding than we had been previously and I consider that the Ted Talk and the fact that Carole had claimed she could prove what was said was true [contributed] to this.” Justice Steyn adduced “negligible” evidence of such.
Ms Cadwalladr’s defence succeeded on the law’s provision for public interest. "I accept the TED talk was political expression of high importance,” said Justice Steyn in her decision, “and great public interest (in the strictest sense), not only in this country but worldwide.” Justice Steyn also ruled “credible” Ms Cadwalladr’s journalistic research into Mr. Banks’ dealings with dodgy characters.
“Accordingly,” concluded Justice Steyn, “the case is dismissed.” Said Mr. Banks: “It’s likely I’ll appeal.”
|
