Tag: times of malta

Categories
Mediawatch Rule of Law

Train wrecks don’t need derailing

Adrian Delia has dismissed reports on messages between him and Yorgen Fenech as “a mudslinging attempt aimed at derailing his work“. The Sunday coffee table news was dominated by an apparent ‘scoop’ from the Times of Malta uncovering the supposed ‘exchange’ of Whatsapp messages. There had even been a dramatic build up with an earlier confrontation by a Times journalist.

Like some latter-day Saint Peter, Delia was repeatedly asked to deny whether he had ever had any form of relationship with Fenech by a journalist who was obviously already in possession of the ‘incriminating’ evidence (that would be kept on hold till the convenient Sunday publication date for full effect. No cocks crowd on the day of the interview but the Times made a big deal of the issue today.

Having seen the supposed Whatsapp exchange (and only on the basis of what has been shown), I think that I can safely conclude that this was a case of harassment by Fenech. Delia seems to have little time for his entreatments and rarely replies until what seems to be a fob off by passing Fenech on to Pierre Portelli to fix a dinner/lunch which we are not even sure ever happened.

The thousands of sleuths who grace the Maltese Republic were all over the social media condemning Delia for this latest “lie”. In his earlier interview with the Times journalist Delia had wriggled and writhed to try to give a legalistic reply – one that implied that if by communication there was meant some sort of dealing then no he did not communicate with Yorgen. Delia might have had this Whatsapp harassment in mind. Surely in normal circumstances nobody in their right mind would consider Yorgen’s pseudo-sycophantic messaging as a basis of some form of effective communication with Delia.

Surely. But this is not normal. In a world of Whataboutism gone mad we have the Sunday papers dominated by a very weak exchange that is neither here nor there while trying to build a very spurious link to Delia being another of Yorgen Fenech’s political relationships. For some context. Labour’s cabinet is still labouring (sorry) under the heavy accusation of having a member who had a much more than platonic relationship with Fenech. Another one is deep in business dealings with Fenech (not the Arrigo style). Yet here we are trying to cause a storm for a one-way set of messages.

You’d think that the Times would have a much higher standard in its quest of fulfilling the fourth estate’s role in a democracy. As things stand it seems to be a weak platform for the disgraced Labour government’s use to disseminate confusion. Worse still it leads to situations where Delia, of all people, can cling to a victim’s alibi of attempts at derailing him.

Now that’s a first. Delia has already long proven to be unfit for political action let alone leadership. His time as PN leader has proven to be a train wreck. To derail a train that is already wrecked and picking up the pieces is something that only a paper desperate for a distraction from the real issues can achieve.

Categories
Mediawatch

Fear and Loathing in tal-Qroqq

fearqroqq_akkuzaIn his speech as outgoing rector of the University, Professor Juanito Camilleri addressed the issue of migration, instructing students to make good use of the knowledge and skills they acquire at University. It could not and should not have been otherwise. The University should be churning out informed citizens who are better equipped to face the realities of this world. What struck me though was the distinct difference in emphasis that the editors of two English dailies made – at least in the online headlines – when reporting this speech (the third, MaltaToday, seems to have limited itself to reporting the number of students that have been added to the Uni count).

The Times of Malta ran with “Fight hatred and intolerance through knowledge, rector tells university students” – a direct reference to one of the problems that afflict the country. Only last week we were chronicling this on this blog and mentioning the importance of fighting misinformation with knowledge. Ignorance begets darkness and informed campaigns beget light. The Times editor/reporter made the right choice here, emphasizing the crux of what Professor Camilleri was on about in his last address to the students on opening day. The message was picked up and carried by the paper – not that it had to  of course, but it is arguably part of the mission of the press on this island where bigotry too often raises its voice to the detriment of sane discussion.

The Malta Independent on the other hand opted for a more sensational approach. In doing so it went rather in the opposite direction of what Professor Camilleri was advocating. The headline on the Independent read: University rector says migration in the Med so far ‘not even an appetizer of things to come’ . Did Prof Camilleri say that? Well of course he did. He spoke of the geopolitical realities of the African continent and that demographic and political pressures could eventually lead to more population movements and increases in population density in the Mediterreanan region. Why he said that seems to have been completely overlooked by the Indy reporter – in deference to the need to shock and pander to the gods of sensationalism and feed the gullible. Instead of focussing on the tools that Prof Camilleri was offering and highlighting, instead of stressing the need to be informed and fight hatred and intolerance through knowledge, the Indy headline (food for the lazy browsers) feeds the ugly part of the “threat of an invasion that is to come” by picking the armageddon-like statement out of context.

Is it fair journalism? Debatable. Is it right for J’accuse to make such a fuss out of this. Well, to be honest yes. This is just the kind of lazy labelling that feeds into the mouths of the “patrijotti maltin”. It is the kind of reporting that is based on terror-mongering rather than a quest for reasoned solution and discussion of the situation. It ends up with the leader of a nation taking up his time at the UN (between photo shoots with celebs along with the caravan of freeriders) closing ranks with rightist leaders like Viktor Orban calling for global quotas on migrants – taking his coffee smelling business into the halls of the world. In short, it all ends in a humanistic disaster.

“If he were allowed contact with foreigners he would discover that they are creatures similar to himself and that most of what he has been told about them is lies. The sealed world in which he lives would be broken, and the fear, hatred, and self-righteousness on which his morale depends might evaporate. It is therefore realized on all sides that however often Persia, or Egypt, or Java, or Ceylon may change hands, the main frontiers must never be crossed by anything except bombs.”- George Orwell, 1984

Categories
Mediawatch

This wall is on fire

Kurt Sansone’s Sunday morning article introducing the Times’ (of Malta) new premium scheme kicks off with a tenuous comparison to the introduction of the Rediffusion a good 77 years ago. Biblical scholars tell us that the number 77 signified a very large number as in Jesus’ affirmation “I tell you, not just seven times, but seventy seven times!”. Aeons if you like. The introduction of the rediffusion is in fact not just the matter of another century but in technological terms it is comparable to prehistory. You can get radio anywhere now – especially via internet. I recently discovered the strange experience of driving through forests in Luxembourg while listening to eight-ninety-seven-bay… thanks to an internet connection hooked onto the car sound system.

What rediffusion did was bring wireless entertainment to many homes. I’m not sure whether Kurt opted for the aesthetic/nostalgic approach before dropping the bomb and announcing that “It is within this scenario that timesofmalta.com will from to­morrow offer its readers premium content against payment, a first for any Maltese news website.” That’s another record broken, or should I say broken record? Kurt moves on to examine the “ruffled feathers” and follows this up with the question: ” Should news content delivered by media organisations over the internet remain free?”

It turns out that breaking news will still be accessible (that’s the top part of the TOM page – the one most prone to errors caused by expediency) but the rest will be accessible only once you pay to get through the firewall*. So in actual fact what you would have to pay for is the analysis and blogs and maybe the odd bit of odd news – the rest you could read anyway. Which is just as well given how the Independent has upped its updating frequency and seems to be serving the purpose of immediate news provision just fine – which would make the Times charging for the very same news ridiculous (also considering the other news websites available for public consumption).

So what can we really make of this premium site move? To begin with you do get a feeling that the guys at the Times think a tad bit too much of themselves and their content. The suspicion that you get is that the Times had lured the multitude of commentators (that it insists on calling bloggers) into some form of addiction and is now hoping that they will be willing to pay to sustain their habit. In recent months it was also evident that the Times was delaying the uploading of most content that was not breaking news even more. Sunday articles would only be up on Monday – giving us online commentators a hard time to keep up with the “opinion” corners.

Did the Times gain anything economically from this move? I wouldn’t know. What I can say is that the move is a huge gamble – one that could deliver a sucker punch to the ego of the whole set up at Allied Newspapers. Unlike the printed paper that many faithful readers would buy out of habit on any given Sunday, the payment for online content seems to require a different level of commitment. When one considers the alternatives online and the actual quality of what is being offered by the Times itself it is hard to see how easily internet users would part with even a tiny sum to fall in line with the Times new premium policy.

The Times also forgets one major detail. The “breaking news” bit that is free is a common currency that can be found elsewhere. If anything the Times should have been using its additional “exclusive” content to lure more readers while boosting its advantage through the sale of advertising. The dastardly combination of addicted commentators and free riders should have meant that the Times was steadily building a huge audience – one that should be translated to advertising revenue. What the Times seems to be preferring to do is to slay the goose – sure you get rid of the “scum” (and avoid having to employ a comments censor) but you are risking to get rid of the whole base upon which your online business should have been built.

Much of what is happening can be attributed to a very Maltese way of thinking about knowledge and power when it comes to the media. The traditional media houses still think very much in term of controlling the way information comes out and is presented. From the Times to MaltaToday to the Malta Independent it is the same story that only varies very slightly. The Times has gone one step ahead – charging for what it deems to be premium news. The mentality is sadly very much in the style of Rediffusion  seventy-seven years back – the notion of one-way traffic of information controlled at source that is deemed by the provider to be the “best possible wireless entertainment”. We beg to differ.

Come to think of it there’s a lesson that Times readers could learn from a great wall builder. When the Chinese built their Great Wall most thought that it was meant to keep invaders out. In actual fact its main purpose was to keep the Chinese in.

* It has been pointed out to me by experts in the field that the term “firewall” is not an accurate description of the Times’ premium scheme. The actual name is a paywall. I wrote the article labouring under the illusion that a paywall is a type of firewall that requires payment to be overridden – much like the troll-ridden toll bridges of lore. In this case it turns out that payment for access to a troll-ridden site means that it is a paywall. Apologies for the confusion.

Categories
Mediawatch

Swedes for Europe

Reading the Times of Malta nowadays is as much a guessing game as it is informative. More often than not it is more a case of the former than the latter. Take this article that was uploaded at a quarter to eight in the evening on Sunday:

Alleanza Liberali to field Swedish candidate for 2014 EP elections

Alleanza Liberali this evening announced that it will be fielding Swedish Peter Lowe as one of its candidates for the 2014 European Parliament elections. On twitter, Mr Lowe describes himself as an urban European fighting for human rights and a better, stronger and larger EU.

The article was accompanied by a photo of a beaming man who presumably is the Swede (not the Swedish) Peter Lowe. Whoever filed this article must have been on a trip and so must any person who proof read or approved it for immediate uploading. Why? Do we need to explain?

First of all there is a glaring lack of facts. What is the Alleanza Liberali? Who spoke for it? Where? Did the heavens above the Times part and did a voice suddenly “announce” that Alleanza were fielding a candidate? It is not like Alleanza Liberali are in the news everyday – I for one thought that whatever Liberal formation existed in Malta had long disbanded. Was it a press conference? Was it a press release issued on Sunday afternoon – as an afterthought following a Sunday lunch that was heavy on the grappa?

Then there is “Swedish Peter Lowe”. It’s either Swedish national or Swede Peter Lowe (with the unfortunate consequences of associations to cousins of turnips). The second (and final) sentence of this enigmatic appendage on the timesonline pages is actually part of Peter Lowe’s twitter blurb about himself. Lazy journalism? You bet.

GIGO proceeds: What the root vegetable is an “urban European” who “fights for human rights”? Why did the Times print this bullshit?

Well ok, the Alleanza Liberali exists and it is a band of nutjobs. So far so good. Only a band of nutjobs would announce their candidate for an election two years in advance (woosh – see that? there goes the element of surprise). As for the Times lazily copying a press release into their paper… well trashofmalta anyone?

A quick internet search led me to ProKredit a property financing firm in Germany. Peter Lowe is the CEO of this firm that, among other things, translates the German “Menschen” to “Human Beings” in the English version of their website.

Categories
Mediawatch Satyre

Trashofmalta

Looks like it’s getting worse. The comments on the Times that is. When Eastwood famously said (or famously did not say) “Opinions are like balls, everybody has them” he had summarised a universal truth (although he would have probably been admonished in today’s world for not choosing a more gender neutral metaphor). In Maltese we say “mitt bniedem mitt fehma” (a hundred persons, a hundred opinions). What many do not seem to be getting is the fact that the simple matter of having an opinion does not automatically make it right. Just because it sounds good, doesn’t make it right (pace Skunk Anansie).

Sure, it’s hard to draw a line for online editors eager not to scare away the commenting masses and it probably all boils down to education. Or rather the lack of it. You risk becoming a wankellectual snob saying this but hell, that’s an opinion that I am prepared to defend.

The problems of this country are also down to the fact that uninformed and badly expressed opinions are not only multiple but encouraged to prosper – and in some cases rewarded.

So here. For your perusal is one of the first “shithitsthefan” posters for facebook.

Categories
Mediawatch

Jeffrey “il-Matur”, Mustafa “Kemal” and the “Non-European” Turks

The Chronicle

On the plane back to Luxembourg I was browsing through the Times of Malta and got to read my favourite section (a section that is sadly not reproduced on the internet version). The “A Century Ago” corner reproduces randomly selected articles from the “Daily Malta Chronicle” edition a hundred years back. Yesterday’s selection was entitled “Maltese emigration to the State of Sao Paolo” and was basically an editorial comment on the emigration of a 100 Maltese who were moving to Brazil “in the hope of faring better there than they can now expect to do in their own land“.

Although the editorialist acknowledges the necessity for Maltese to look for brighter pastures he expresses more than a simple reservation about the cultural differences into which the Maltese are throwing themselves – particularly when they opt to move away from beneath the protecting eyes of the British flag: “because we know that there is no better flag for them to be under“. In fact the article advocates for easier channels of emigration to the likes of Australia and New Zealand and not to Brazil where “the second generation of even European born parents have not in Brazil either the physical, or the moral characters of their race“. If that is not enough to astound you just read the conclusion:

“The great drawback with regard to emigration to Brazil is that our people must, upon going there, be thrown in with blacks and half breeds”.

I kid you not. That was an article in a Maltese newspaper appearing on Tuesday, April 16th, 1912. It would be shocking today but I would hazard a guess that that kind of lingo was common parlance in the early part of the twentieth century – to put it in perspective Rosa Parks wouldn’t be born for another 10 months.

Kemal

Somebody who was already born by that time was Mustafa “Kemal” – a thirty year old Ottoman who was to become father of the Turkish nation. Over the next few decades the man who would come to be known as Atatürk would shepherd a nation and its people and transform it into a most modern of democracies (not without his share of controversies).

Atatürk (then) embarked upon a program of political, economic, and cultural reforms, seeking to transform the former Ottoman Empire into a modern, westernized and secular nation-state. The principles of Atatürk’s reforms, upon which modern Turkey was established, are referred to as Kemalism. – Wikipedia

Undoubtedly controversial, Atatürk supervised much of the modernisation of his nation and this included the strengthening of the language, an important emphasis on educational reform and an expansive arts and cultural program. Importantly Atatürk  made Turkey one of the first nations to recognise the importance of women’s rights and their emancipation. Furthermore he was adamant about the importance of a secular state . Here is Ataturk speaking in 1926:

“We must liberate our concepts of justice, our laws and our legal institutions from the bonds which, even though they are incompatible with the needs of our century, still hold a tight grip on us.”

For the first time in history Islamic law was separated from secular law.

Jeffrey

Mustafa was given the nickname “Kemal” by his mathematics teacher. It means “perfection” or “maturity”. His “reign” over the newly born state was not without controversy but there is no denying that post-Ottoman Turkish history can claim great parallels with those of other European states with its own lessons and mistakes. The unravelling of that history is of a fledgling democracy in the early ’10s that interacted with the other democratic (and non-democratic) realities around it. This account is also a poor one since it fails to acknowldge the huge role the Ottoman empire had in European politics for a very long time and it also neglects the geographic origins of modern Europe – both historically and spiritually.

What would the Greek states have been without Troy? Where would Saint Paul have wandered without Antioch and Ephesus? What of the Byzantine heart of the Eastern Roman Empire? Can Constantinople be erased with the stroke of a political pen?

Well Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando seems to think so. His emancipated, “liberal” statement that “Turks are not Europeans” gives me the shivers. If, as it seems, the Islamic creed of the majority of Turks seems to be one of the major hurdles that JPO has to consider than he really has no idea about who or what he is criticising.  This is an MP in a parliament that made divorce available to its citizens in 2011 and still has evident problems distinguishing between political obligations and religious proselytising. He is an MP in a country whose President is off to Peru on a missionary trip and where the Attorney General has no qualms invoking deities upon appeal from a court sentence.

And what is JPO’s major excuse? The Turks are culturally different. It must be a strange coincidence that the Times’ Century Ago piece reminded us that this kind of mentality – fear and snobbism in face of difference – existed in Malta in 1912. Thanks to people like Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando the front pages of our papers (and the red faces we should have when speaking to Turks) remain a stark reminder of just how little progress we have made in our interaction with the outside world.

With politicians like this you can only wish to hop onto the next plane to Sao Paolo, Istanbul or Luxembourg – there to submit to the “cultural shock” that the JPO’s of this world seem so intent to shield us from.