UK Riots: CPJ 'alarm' at Cameron's call for broadcasters to hand over unedited film of rioters

The Committee to Protect Journalists says it is alarmed by Prime Minister David Cameron's statement calling for broadcasters to immediately provide unedited footage and for measures restricting social networking as a means to stem ongoing riots in the UK.



CPJ executive director Joel Simon said "Broadcasters must not be obliged to provide authorities with raw footage in the absence of any legal due process. Such demands directly endanger journalists and compromise their ability to report the news.



"Similarly, the possible blockage of social networking services currently under discussion would be a misguided and extreme measure. While it is the prime minister's duty to ensure citizen safety, he must not subscribe to the idea that censorship is an effective deterrent to social unrest. Freedom of expression and information is a fundamental democratic principle, and we expect the U.K. to uphold these values in all instances."

CPJ: 'Attacks on journalists covering riots are part of a pattern of hostility against media in Europe'

The attacks against journalists covering riots in the UK reflect a wider European pattern of hostility toward the media in the course of civil disturbances, according to a Committee to Protect Journalists blog.



Written by CPJ senior advisor Jean-Paul Marthoz, a Belgian journalist and academic, the blog says: "During the 2005 riots in the French banlieues, journalists in general and television reporters in particular were also targeted by rioters and looters. Journalists are often accused of being 'part of the system' and in cahoots with the Establishment."



He adds: "Some suspect the media may be giving over incriminating evidence to the police. In the U.K., under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, the police can obtain an order from a judge forcing the media to provide unpublished material."



Marthoz quotes media law consultant David Banks saying "the courts have not often been sympathetic to media arguments that handing over material prevents them from doing their jobs. This leaves journalists caught in the middle between the police, who regard them as a hindrance, and rioters, who regard them as evidence-gatherers."

CPJ: Iran and Cuba force journalists into exile

Nearly 70 journalists were forced into exile over the past 12 months, with more than half coming from Iran and Cuba, a new survey by the Committee to Protect Journalists has found.

CPJ says Iran has waged a two-year-long crackdown on the independent press, and Cuba has freed journalists from prison only to force them to leave their homeland. Each country sent 18 journalists into exile.

Imprisonment, or the threat being jailed, was the leading cause of journalists leaving their home countries during the period examined by CPJ—June 1, 2010, to May 31, 2011—accounting for 82 percent of cases.

Another 15 percent fled following physical attacks or threats of violence. Prolonged harassment such as frequent interrogations or surveillance drove 3 percent of journalists in the survey to leave their countries. At least 649 journalists facing violence, imprisonment, and harassment have gone into exile worldwide since 2001, when CPJ launched its journalist assistance program and began keeping detailed exile records. The large majority, about 91 percent, have not been able to return home.

Five countries—Ethiopia, Iran, Somalia, Iraq and Zimbabwe—account for nearly half the total number of journalists driven out of their countries over the past decade.

CPJ's survey is based solely on cases it has documented, from which it derives global trends. Other groups using different criteria cite higher numbers of journalists in exile.

For hundreds of journalists, legal hurdles, language differences, and the challenges of finding work in a new country can be professionally devastating, says the CPJ. It's long-term research shows that only about 22 percent of journalists who have remained in exile are engaged in media-related work today; a total of 461 journalists have had to look for work outside their profession.

• CPJ is releasing its annual survey of journalists in exile to mark World Refugee Day.

'Gay Girl in Damascus hoax should not cloud real cases of jailed bloggers and online journalists'

The furore over the A Gay Girl in Damascus blog hoax should not distract attention from the plight of real bloggers and online journalists in the Middle East, according to the Committe to Protect Journalists' Danny O’Brien.

O’Brien, the CPJ's internet advocacy coordinator, says he was in Beirut talking to real Syrians about the detentions of online journalists, some of whom had befriended Amina (the supposed writer of A Gay Girl) online, and they were profoundly disturbed that she was a fraud.

He writes on the CPJ site: "Beyond the time-sink of watching the Net collectively pursue a story, the undermining of important ties that can help protect vulnerable writers in times of danger, and the sympathetic anger and hurt of many at being betrayed, the Amina hoax continues to be a distraction. It has drawn attention away from genuine cases of imprisoned bloggers and online journalists in the region.

"Amina's story--her original blog and her subsequent revelations--shouldn't cloud the real cases of bloggers and journalists in Syria and the wider region who face genuine danger.

"For instance, Tal al-Mallohi was sentenced in February to five years in prison for violating Syria's state security laws. The court proceedings remain secret but she was prosecuted, her supporters say, because of postings on her blog. To make matters worse, she was only 19 when she was first arrested, making her the youngest human rights case in the region. The campaign to free al-Mallohi has a website and Facebook group. The U.S. State Department has also protested the prosecution.

"Elsewhere, in the United Arab Emirates, five bloggers and commentators accused of undermining public order went on trial. As we reported at the time of their arrest, the UAE bloggers include the administrators of a banned forum. That forum, CPJ research shows, is one focused on politics, pluralism and democracy. While the UAE plans to hold the trial in secret in order to, in the words of the official state media, "ensure no pressure is exercised on the court," diplomatic pressure from the UAE's allies--encouraged by individuals raising the issue with their representatives--could make a difference.

O'Brien concludes: "Legitimate writers in the region risk their freedom and safety every day to simply comment on what they see around them. This is difficult and dangerous enough without them having to contend with the pathologies of liars inserting themselves into that discussion."