ICE blogs

March 20, 2008

SBS’s ’skewed’ reporting of government intervention in Aboriginal communities

Filed under: Uncategorized — news_editor @ 3:01 am

Press release from Aboriginal Rights Coalition:

Media release 19/3/08 – for immediate release

SBS ‘Insight’ programme silences Aboriginal dissent

Last night, March 18, the SBS Insight programme entitled ‘Are They
Safer’, about the Northern Territory intervention, went to air. Several
Aboriginal representatives from affected communities in the NT have
expressed dissatisfaction with selection process for the show and the
way that dialogue was framed by the programme.

Initially, Insight planned to film in Alice Springs. Following
arrangements being made by people from numerous ‘prescribed’ areas to
attend the show, the producers moved filming to Sydney.

After doing extensive interviews with Barbara and Walter Shaw from Mt
Nancy town camp, Insight refused to guarantee them a spot on the
program. Only after consistent lobbying by supporters was Barbara
allowed to attend, but Walter was told there was no space.

In contrast, four representatives were selected from Hermannsberg
community near Alice Springs. Hermannsberg is unique in that, unlike
many of the ‘prescribed’ communities, it supports the intervention. It
is also one of the few NT communities to support the Country Liberal
Party, whereas the overwhelming majority of Aboriginal people in the
NT voted Labor in the last election.

“I think it was unfair that there wasn’t a lot of people from the
communities and they just had hand-picked people,” said Barbara Shaw ,
who appeared on the programme. “I just didn’t agree with the show or
the way they went about it.”

Barbara Shaw also disputed the representativeness of the selected
Aboriginal speakers, saying that there is an issue amongst Aboriginal
people of urban Aboriginal people speaking for those from remote
communities. “I get permission from the remote communities to talk on
their behalf,” she said.

In contrast to the views of a “former resident of Yuendumu” who spoke
in favour of the intervention, the Yuendumu community have been united
in vehement opposition. The president of the Community Council Harry
Nelson led a delegation from Yuendumu to protest in Canberra on
February 12, calling for repeal of the Emergency Response legislation.

“Whilst we welcome Insight looking at the issue, the basis on which
they pursued the issue was skewed in favour of the intervention,” said
Greg Eatock of the National Aboriginal Alliance and the Aboriginal
Rights Coalition, who also appeared on the programme.

“There were no questions from the presenter about many of the punitive
aspects of the intervention which affected people have described as
racist, such as compulsory acquisition of Aboriginal land and the
installation of ‘business managers’ with extraordinary powers”.

Five other Aboriginal members of the Aboriginal Rights Coalition were
told they would be allowed to appear in the audience of the programme,
but had the invitations withdrawn the night before filming.

The Aboriginal Rights Coalition is continuing to call for the repeal
of the legislation. The new paternalism seen through intervention
measures can’t replace the desperate need for funding of Aboriginal
services on the ground. ARC is working with affected communities to
organise a national day of action on June 21.

For more info contact:

Barbara Shaw 0401291166
Greg Eatock 0432050240


For supporters:

We would like to encourage you to share your views with SBS. You can
ring toll Free 1800 500 727 (Nationwide) or send your comments to:

Director Content (Television and Online)
SBS, Locked Bag 028
Crows Nest, NSW 1585

or fax (02) 9430 3047

The ‘Insight’ website has a comments page at:

Many thanks,
Aboriginal Rights Coalition

March 19, 2008

Euro seminars

Filed under: Uncategorized, seminars — icetemp @ 10:02 am

3 Specialised European Seminars

The cycle of seminars allows all the actors concerned in the partner countries of EUROMEDUC, and more generally throughout Europe, to participate in an exchange, comparison and evaluation work. At the methodological level, each seminar will be prepared and animated by a group of representative experts at the European level in close partnership with the existing structural networks in the sector (Euromedialiteracy and Mentor). Each group of experts will represent the different fields concerned: lifelong learning, initial training for teachers, research and media production.

Each seminar will start with a synthesis of the European studies and programmes related to the issue and will lead to the publication of a public report. They will each bring together a maximum of 40 participants selected for their expertise and their involvement in the issue concerned. A system of grant allows a small number of representatives of small structures or practitioners from other countries to participate in this work.

All information at:

European Congress in Bellaria, Italy (13-16 May 2009)

The results of the three seminars will be reinforced at a European conference on media education. This three-day conference is important for real exchanges and the elaboration of transversal projects.

All information at:

Media seminar

Filed under: seminars — icetemp @ 10:01 am

>Centre for Research in the Arts, Social Sciences
>and Humanities (CRASSH), University of Cambridge.
>April 4-5 2008
>This conference seeks to contribute to the
>academic and public debate about media ethics,
>that is, about the frameworks within which we
>can ask precise questions about the ethics of
>what media institutions do and reach some
>consensus about appropriate answers. It will be
>one of the first events ever to bring together
>in debate philosophers and media researchers who share an interest an ethics.
>Confirmed Keynote Speakers:
>• Baroness Onora O’Neill (Cambridge and the British Academy)
>• John Durham Peters (University of Iowa,
>author of Speaking into the Air)
>Confirmed speakers:
>• Nafsika Athanasoulis (Keele)
>• Georgina Born (Cambridge)
>• Roy Brand (Sarah Lawrence College, USA)
>• Lilie Chouliaraki (LSE)
>• Nick Couldry (Goldsmiths, University of London)
>• David Edmonds (BBC)
>• Daniel Dayan (Ecoles des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris)
>• Sabina Lovibond (Oxford)
>• Peter Lunt (Brunel University)
>• Mirca Madianou (Cambridge)
>• Phil Parvin (Cambridge)
>• Amit Pinchevski (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
>• Don Slater (LSE)
>• Barbie Zelizer (Annenberg School of
>Communication, University of Pennsylvania)
>• Joanna Zylinska (Goldsmiths, University of London)
>Full details of the programme and how to
>register can be found at
>Advanced registration is strongly advised as places are limited.
>Conference Organizers: Prof. Nick Couldry and Dr. Mirca Madianou
>The event is funded by CRASSH and Goldsmiths,
>University of London, with support from the
>Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social and
>Political Sciences, University of Cambridge.
>If you have any administrative queries about the
>event, please contact

March 12, 2008

Promoting new forms of ethical reflection

Communication Ethics Now, which draws together articles from Volume 2 (2005) of Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics, is to be published on 15 July 2008. In a foreword, Cees Hamelink, Professor Emeritus of International Communication at the University of Amsterdam, comments: ‘Ethical inquiry needs to be more creative and deconstruct situations that look like dilemmas into configurations of a wide variety of moral options and challenges. We are very fortunate to have such important platforms as Communication Ethics Now for this exercise in new forms of reflection!’

He adds: ‘This book convincingly demonstrates how lively and relevant today’s ethical reflections on communication can be. The chapters of the book cover such an exciting and broad range of topics.’

Edited by Richard Keeble, joint editor of Ethical Space, the 25 chapters are divided into five sections. In the first, which focuses journalism ethics, John Tulloch examines the British press’s coverage of the CIA torture flights (better known as ‘extraordinary rendition’) while Julie-ann Davies reports on the media’s increasing use of anonymous sources. Jane Taylor takes a particularly unusual look at the media’s obsession with celebrity focusing on the coverage of Carole Chaplin, Cherie Blair’s ’style guru’ and broadcaster, novelist and columnist Libby Purves expresses outrage at the media’s daily diet of ‘unkind intrusions and falsifications’.

In an international section, leading Nigerian academic Kate Azuka Omenugha explores the representation of Africanness in the British press, Susanne Fengler and Stephan Russ-Mohl express concern over the slump in media standards in Germany while Angelika W. Wyka focuses on journalistic standards and democratization of the mass media in Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.

In a section that takes a historical perspective on journalism ethics, Jane Chapman’s chapter looks at ‘Republican Citizenship, Ethics and the French Revolutionary Press 1789-92′ while Martin Conboy’s focuses on Wooler’s Black Dwarf, a radical journal of the early 19th century.

Another section on communication ethics and pedagogy draws on papers at the 2005 annual conference of the Institute of Communication Ethics with contributions from Raphael Cohen-Almagor, John Strain, Brian Hoey, Brian Morris, Simon Goldsworthy and Anne Gregory. The philosophical dimensions of communication ethics are explored by Karen Sanders, Hallvard Johannes Fossheim (in an interview with Kristine Lowe) Robert Beckett, Moira Carroll-Mayer and Bernd Carsten Stahl. In the final section on business and communication ethics, Kristine Lowe interviews Paul Jackson, of Manchester Business School.

Editor Richard Keeble, in an introduction, says: ‘The Institute of Communication Ethics (ICE) stresses in its mission statement: “Communication ethics is the founding philosophy for human interaction that defines issues according to their impact on human well-being and relationships.” And it is this caring for people - the desperately poor, the inarticulate, the oppressed - along with a sense that honesty, integrity, clarity, respect for difference and diversity are some of the core principles underlying human interaction and, ultimately, communication ethics that drive the many writings in this volume.’

  • Communication Ethics Now is published by Troubador, Leicester, for £12.99. It follows the success of Communication Ethics Today, also published by Troubador, which drew on articles in the first volume of Ethical Space.

March 10, 2008

Conference on moving Australia towards a cosmopolitan society

Filed under: Uncategorized, News, Headlines, media policy, politics, conferences, human rights — news_editor @ 2:36 am

The 4Rs conference, to be held in Sydney on Sept 30 - Oct 2, frames Australia’s future as a cosmopolitan civil society. Focused on the themes of rights. responsibilities, reconciliation and respect, it explores the internal debates and the relationships between crucial social, political and cultural questions, with their relevance to public policy, community development and societal cohesion.
The conference is organised by the Centre for Cosmopolitan Civil Societies, University of Technology Sydney , SAVE Australia Inc, the Sydney Mechanics’ School of Arts and the Institute for Cultural Diversity at a critical time for Australia, when the opportunities and desire for change abound, yet older fears still persist.
The conference is designed around the four themes and their interaction- human rights, Indigenous advancement, inter-communal relations, and active citizenship.


Australia remains the only Western democracy without a national human rights framework, yet it is a society in which the struggle for rights has been a central part of history - for Indigenous people, women, ethnic and religious minorities, people with disabilities and those involved in same-sex relationships. The Rights stream (R1) invites contributions that discuss global, national and local concerns across the full range of human rights issues, from the initial engagement with political rights, through social and cultural rights, to the most recent questions raised by action on disability and indigenous rights. It encourages philosophical as well as political and legal approaches. It explores the practical politics of achieving a national human rights framework within the international community.


Wherever colonial powers have settled their populations on the lands of indigenous peoples there have been ongoing crises and conflicts. Reconciliation (R2) seeks to understand the truth of those histories and devise ways through which people from both indigenous and immigrant origins can work and live together in a shared society. Australia has faced a particularly difficult period as it has struggled with both symbolic and practical forms through which reconciliation should be advanced.

The reconciliation stream invites contributions that explore the challenges, success and failures in reconciliation across the world, and the specific dimensions of reconciliation in Australia. It welcomes community presentations, and joint presentations between scholars, policy groups and Indigenous activists. It particularly looks towards younger people and their perspectives on future directions for reconciliation.


In the often-heated conversations about relations between ethno-religious communities in pluralist societies, in the past framed by ideas about multiculturalism and tolerance, a key concept is that of respect. Respect (R3) requires recognition of the validity of different approaches to everyday life, and a desire to understand those differences. Respect is multi-directional; it calls on all members of a society to recognise the value of all other communities. In democratic societies it also points to the critical role of respect for individual human rights even though at times this may strain inter-group relations. Australia has experienced serious challenges to the place of respect in societal discussions about diversity, as have many other western societies.

The respect stream invites contributions that explore the tensions around the idea of respect, its representation, and its presence or absence in the discourse of difference globally and in Australia. It welcomes collaborative presentations that explore either comparative cases or innovations in community, arts and other practices in which respect is mobilised as a positive value.


Societies are made up of reciprocal relationships of responsibilities, in which various benefits are received and various obligations incurred. Citizenship, both political and cultural, provides the context in which debates about responsibilities most often occur. This Responsibilities theme (R4) addresses the debates about citizenship and how these have been affected by the transformations in world society in the current generation. Citizenship has been considered as a purely political question, relating to the legal status of individuals in their relations to nation states. It has also reflected broader concerns with social citizenship, active citizenship and cultural citizenship, where the broad range of human rights are considered to be part of the dynamics of citizenship. It explores the responsibilities citizens have for each other, for the well-being and protection of the state, and the responsibilities the state has for the well-being and freedoms of its citizens.

The responsibilities theme invites contributions that explore these multiple meanings of citizenship, and that can expose connections to the other themes of the conference. In particular it invites debates regarding the imposition of various tests for citizenship and what they reveal about the status of the citizen in the contemporary world.

Cross Theme proposals

This track supports innovative approaches to issues that bridge more than one theme, and involve participants from differing backgrounds and perspectives. It can also provide a location for arts-based presentations, performances and workshops.

Andrew Jakubowicz
Conference Convenor
Maqsood Alshams
Conference Secretary


March 1, 2008

Acclaimed photo was fake

Filed under: News, Headlines, journalism, professional ethics, photojournalism — news_editor @ 1:47 am

Nature reports that an award-winning photograph of a herd of endangered Tibetan antelopes apparently undisturbed by a passing train on the controversial Qinghai–Tibet railway has been exposed as a fake. The image was widely hailed in China as a symbol of harmonious co-existence between man and nature and strong testimony against any adverse effect of the new railway on the animals. Photographer Liu Wei-qiang admitted the fabrication last week after comments on the Chinese online photography forum Without Fear questioned the picture’s authenticity. Liu was promptly dismissed from the Daqing Evening News, based in Harbin, Heilongjiang province, where he was the deputy director of its photography department. The newspaper has also issued a public statement apologizing for the incident and announcing the resignation of its chief editor. ‘The train was real, and so were the antelopes,’ said Liu in a posting on the photography forum. ‘But the magic moment just didn’t happen even after I had waited for two weeks.’ Therefore, he decided to merge together one picture of a passing train with another of the migrating animals ‘to raise the public awareness of antelope protection’. The merged picture was published by more than 200 media outlets around the world and won Liu a bronze medal in the 2006 Most Influential News Photos of the Year competition, sponsored by CCTV, China’s state television. ‘The truth is probably the opposite of what the picture was trying to claim,’ says Su Jian-ping, a zoologist at the Northwest Institute of Plateau Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Xining, Qinghai province. (Nature)

New blog on Asian media ethics

Filed under: News, Headlines, journalism — news_editor @ 1:44 am

The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) and the Asia Media Forum (AMF) have launched a blog on ethical issues confronting journalism in Asia.

Initial postings on the site, Eye on the Asian Media: Asia Media Forum, included critiques of pressure on journalists in the Philippines, reflections on peace journalism in East Timor and commercial pressure on Asian journalists. The site also contains various journalism codes of ethics from across the continent and links to other media ethics resources. It is edited by Luis V. Teodoro, CMFR deputy director and journalism professor at the University of the Philippines.

Powered by WordPress