With Australian journalist Peter Greste and his colleagues heading off to an Egyptian jail “Freedom of the Press” continues to be a hot topic. How much freedom should they have though?
It’s very easy to get idealistic and offer them full freedom but, freedom is power and, as Spiderman says “With great power comes great responsibility”. (Curious such a wise saying comes from a cartoon.)
Let’s first of all contemplate who it is we are talking about. What’s your definition of “the Press”? Who are they and what is their job?
My definition:
People and companies who publish or broadcast in any shape or form “news”. News being recent events, shifts or happenings which affect those connected with/surrounding that event and may be of interest to me. In reporting these events they either
- research and give me all the facts known – i.e. the truth – in an unbiased, non-judgemental way or
- they report on opinions of first hand witnesses or credible experts offering at least two perspectives from different points of view in an unbiased, non-judgemental way.
If they do both, that’s a bonus.
This, I believe, is what used to be taught as basic training to all new journalists entering the industry. This I believe is worth fighting for. If the Press are giving all the facts, the truth and multiple perspectives on each story then I’ll fight tooth and nail for their freedom.
However, do you think that is what the Press are giving you? If we followed my definition, how many people who label themselves “the Press” have the right to call themselves that and therefore the right to full freedom?
It’s a very powerful and influential place to put yourself and, if you don’t trust yourself, its all too easy to leave facts out, bend the facts or just tell blatant lies to alter the opinion of your audience to match what you’d like them to conclude. When you deliberately set out to influence the opinion of the audience, that becomes propaganda.
Take a magazine who shoots an image of a scowling celebrity. It’s possible she accidentally swallowed a fly but, with full freedom of the Press, they can dream up any story about how she just had a fight with her husband, she just caught him cheating, she just had a fight with Rihanna, she’s about to go bankrupt or that she’s just plain nasty. There is no accountability held and the potential for much damage to be done.
Very few cases are taken to court. Even if the magazine is charged and a public apology is offered, the rumour is started. No amount of money paid in compensation will mend a broken reputation or loss of trust.
Added perspective
As I mentioned above, “at least two different perspectives” is part of my definition for the Press. I want to give you an example of how perspective can change your viewpoint.
Imagine getting down on one elbow and looking straight at the front of a chair. Look at it like you’ve never seen one before so you make no assumptions.
From this one perspective you are looking at a chair in 2D so you see two tall parallel lines and let’s say 3 horizontal lines. Simple enough.
It’s not until you shuffle around a bit to the side that you realise this is a 3D object. Oh! This is so much more than you thought before. There are in fact 4 legs, not 2. It has depth.
So there is certainly truth to the 2D image but you add just one more perspective and you see a far different picture.
As you raise yourself up a bit you now see the lowest horizontal line is something else again. A square shaped seat that you could not see before. Move around the back and you discover there is beautiful carved detail on the back rest or maybe the graffiti of a Nazi sign. The more perspectives you take to look at this object the more you understand about it.
Does the News give you enough perspective on what is happening for you to fully understand it? Because, when you start to see all the facts about events, you’ll be surprised at the conclusions you jumped to based on a limited perspective.
Many in the Press know this and abuse it everyday. Facts are removed and the limited perspective can easily be offered as “the truth”. Who makes them responsible for that abuse?
Sometimes the limited perspective comes from inadequate research trying to keep up with the pressure of breaking a news story before someone else. That, to me, is irresponsible.
The Advertising world has their Ombudsmen in many countries where you can go to complain if you feel an advertising piece is misleading. Is there such a process for the Press to make them accountable as well?
I hear the cynics already saying “Ah yes, but who judges the judges? Who bends what judgements are made once you put the Press on trial?”
I agree this has always been a problem but believe me, a major shift is already happening. Look for the evidence and you will find people all over the world bending towards finishing the games and turning their focus towards the truth, accountability and responsibility.
Businessmen, politicians and Union officials are not immune to the process and being charged every day. 30-40 year old murder mysteries are being solved.
We, the majority, want accountability.
Whatever you put your focus on is what you create.
Whatever a big amount people put their focus on, creates a big amount of change.
I cannot really tell what Peter Greste did. The media will only give me a 2D chair perspective and shout “Freedom of the press!” at least once in each article. I did however, meet a newly migrated Egyptian just moved to Australia who said he’d read Greste’s articles. His view was that Greste was writing for the Muslim Brotherhood, designed to generate hatred amongst the readers and he deserved to be held responsible. Now that’s a different perspective.
Is the opinion valid or not? I don’t know. You can bet I’ll not find one article Greste wrote anywhere on the internet that I could use as evidence against him if he’s guilty. After all, he has the Press on his side and the Press had more than adequate time to remove or edit anything unhelpful prior to the story breaking if there was anything to remove. This is why, without enough perspective, I refuse to come to any conclusion or form an opinion on his case.
I do see the Egyptian courts making the leaders the Muslim Brotherhood accountable though so, as expected, their shift is happening just like everywhere else in the world. Their populace has been stirred into a tremendous amount of hatred, prejudice and separation which must be addressed. Whether that has anything to do with Greste’s case or not, we shall see.
All secrets will be revealed.
Let’s get the discussion started though. Who is the Press to you? Which parts of the Press deserve freedom? Those who report the facts and valid opinions in an unbiased, non-judgemental way? Or just anyone who publishes and broadcasts what they call News? Where do you draw the line?
Want to join the discussion? Visit the article link here on Facebook or Google Plus and share your opinion of who deserves that freedom.
Like this article? The Kitegirlcoach blog is dedicated to collecting info on the World Shift of Consciousness Law of Attraction and the building of creative careers. SHARE it with like minded people, FOLLOW on WordPress for a regular feed or SUBSCRIBE for a monthly update of articles.