Hot topics click link for more
The charm of the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC), largely, is the serendipity. Nobody knows which tunes will reach the top. Millions of die-hard ESC fans want to know. The shows - two semi-finals and the main event - can be fun, too. Sometimes not so much.
The ultimate arbiter of the ESC is a committee of European Broadcasting Union public broadcasting members. They make and enforce the rules, in the spirit of fair play of course. In keeping with the desire for order - not to forget generating big TV audiences - the committee has re-written the rules on judging the contestants. (See more about the Eurovision Song Contest here)
From the 2023 event forward, public voting from anywhere in the world will select qualifiers for the final round. A jury of “music industry professionals” had contributed mathematically to scores from the public since 2017. This rule was implemented due to an overabundance of public votes from certain countries suggesting, well, cheating. So, the semi-final rounds will be scored only by the public vote, the jury scores added in for the grand final. Once again, the country-specific juries in certain countries were suspected of “irregular voting patterns.” The public voting will be tallied through a "secure online platform using a credit card from their country."
Last year Kalush Orchestra from Ukraine took the grand prize for the folk/rap song Stefania, with an overwhelming public vote. The jury of professionals voted for a different tune. By tradition the ESC live performances move to the country of the previous year’s winner. Alas, that EBU committee decided danger would be too great with Russian bombing continuing. In cooperation with UK public broadcaster BBC Liverpool was selected for the 2023 ESC.
Giorgia Meloni was but the leader of a small far-right Italian political party and member of parliament when daily newspaper Domani reporter Emiliano Fittipaldi wrote an investigative piece about a political appointee misappropriating coronavirus emergency relief. The article, published in October 2021, raised questions about Ms Meloni’s influence with Domenico Arcuri, then charged with State procurement of health system materials, and textile business owner Fabio Pietrella. One day after the publication, Ms Meloni filed a criminal defamation lawsuit against reporter Fittipaldi and editor Stefano Feltri. In October this year Ms Maloni was named prime minister of Italy. Her elevation was welcomed by Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban and right-wing French politician Marine Le Pen.
The initial hearing for the case was held in Rome on November 15. A trial is scheduled to commence in July 2024. PM Maloni is seeking €20,000 for damages, not to forget pain for the publication and publicity for herself. No previous Italian prime minister have pursued defamation claims against news outlets, noted journalism portal Giornalettismo (November 22). (See more about media in Italy here)
Yet, for PM Maloni this was not the first defamation lawsuit targeting of an investigative reporter. In December 2020 TV channel La7 interview program Piazzapulita host Roberto Saviano, within a segment on migrant deaths at sea, referred to politicians Maloni and Matteo Salvini as “bastards” for criticising intervention. “I consider it strange that a writer is tried for the words he spends, however harsh they are, while defenseless individuals continue to suffer atrocious violence,” said Sr Saviano as the trial commenced, quoted by Corriere della Sera (November 15). (See more about defamation law here)
Press freedom advocates, noting both cases, reiterated the need for reform of Italian law on defamation, particularly SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). “Our organisations acknowledge with growing concern the rising number of SLAPP cases against journalists brought by public officials in Italy against those who express dissent or inform the public on contentious issues, question their work or, as in the present case, expose alleged wrongdoing,” said a statement by International Press Institute (IPI), ARTICLE 19 Europe, European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and OBC Transeuropa (OBCT) (November 25). "Until a law on reckless litigation is approved, lawsuits and civil suits remain the sword of Damocles for freedom of information in the country,” wrote Domani (November 22) in an editorial.
Chinese authorities are, arguably, in the midst of a most difficult period of civil unrest in decades. Citizens across several cities are rioting over COVID lockdowns. This is a conundrum for the authorities who expect order.
International news correspondents were on the spot over the weekend, those who hold required accreditation. BBC photojournalist Ed Lawrence was in Shanghai when arrested covering the riots. “He was beaten and kicked by the police,” said the BBC statement, reported by the Guardian (Noveember 28). Mr. Lawrence was later released. (See more about press freedom here)
In addition to the BBC and the Guardian, CNN, VOA, Reuters, Bloomberg, Sky News (Australia), Evening Standard (UK), Anadolu Agency (Turkey), Daily Mail (UK), Al Jazeera, TGcom24 (Italy), TV5Monde (France) and scores others reported the incident. That’s the point. Anything about China is a story. COVID reemerging in China is a big story. Riots in China are a huge story. With a massive show of force Chinese authorities appear to have quelled the riots, noted CNN (November 28). We refer to China as an authoritarian state because the authorities are always in control. (See more about media in China here)
Less noted by news outlets was the arrest, also Sunday evening, of Swiss public broadcaster RTS China correspondent Michael Peuker. He was busted by local police, equipment confiscated, and briefly held. He even reported on the incident. “The tension is at its peak here,” he said live. “Proof of this is that I am now surrounded by three police officers, After this report I will be taken to the police station.”
|
