Tuesday 20 November 2007

100 Journalists arrested in Pakistan

Journalists arrested in Pakistan
Protesting Karachi journalist
A journalist recovers after the confrontation with police
More than 100 journalists protesting against media restrictions and emergency rule have been arrested in Pakistan, eyewitnesses say.

Most were held in Karachi and several detained in Hyderabad.

Police baton-charged the Karachi journalists after they tried to stage a protest march. Some of them were hurt.

When President Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule on 3 November, radio and TV news was banned, as was criticism of the government.

Country-wide

Heavy contingents of police were deployed on roads to the Karachi Press Club to stop the rally there.

Police and journalists clash
Police stopped the marchers going to a TV station

It was part of a country-wide protest organised by the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) against the media curbs.

The journalists were planning to hold a demonstration outside the Karachi offices of the ARY TV channel, one of half a dozen news channels that cable operators stopped airing after the emergency was imposed.

The BBC's M Ilyas Khan in Karachi says police beat up a number of journalists in front of the press club entrance.

The arrests came shortly after the government said it released some 3,400 people jailed under emergency rule.

The release of political opponents has been a key demand of opposition parties who are threatening to boycott parliamentary elections in January.

A number of leading political figures are still being held.

Monday 19 November 2007

US Plans Case Against AP Photographer

The U.S. military plans to seek a criminal
case in an Iraqi court against an award-winning Associated Press
photographer but is refusing to disclose what evidence or accusations
would be presented.

The journalist, Bilal Hussein, has already been imprisoned without charges for more than 19 months and there have been many calls and petitions on Lightstalkers for his release and calls for his freedom have been backed by groups such as the Committee to Protect Journalists.

An AP attorney on Monday strongly protested the decision, calling the U.S. military plans a "sham of due process."

The military has not yet defined the
specific charges against Hussein. Previously, the military has pointed
to a range of suspicions that attempt to link him to insurgent
activity.

The AP rejects all the allegations and contends it
has been blocked by the military from mounting a wide-ranging defense
for Hussein and claims that Hussein was interrogated at Camp Cropper this year without legal counsel.

Hussein was part of the AP's Pulitzer Prize-winning photo team
in 2005

More information on AP Website



Powered by ScribeFire.

Be your own personal privacy czar

Be your own personal privacy czar
Facebook name reflected in human eye, Getty
Some campaigners worry about using social sites such as Facebook

Regular columnist Bill Thompson wonders if it is time to create web services that can be trusted.

Like most journalists I know I'm very sloppy about keeping my online communications secure.

I rarely encrypt e-mail messages, leaving them to be read by anyone in the electronic chain between me and the intended recipient.

And I use public chat services like MSN Messenger and iChat, even though they send messages as plain text across the network.

Partly this is because the tools needed to make communications secure can be cumbersome and complicated, even for someone with a technical background.

But partly it is because I have not often been involved in researching stories that are going to bring me to the attention of those with the capabilities needed to tap even insecure online communications.

But you never know.

Each year I tell my students on the online journalism course at City University that they should take care to protect their files and e-mail.

And I point out that once someone e-mails them from a work address then that person can never be guaranteed anonymity in future, simply because it is so easy for employers or the police to get access to e-mail traffic records.

They may not know what was said, as reading the contents of e-mail requires permission under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, but they can find out that messages were exchanged.

Bill Thompson
But using commercial services for campaigning or organising raises the same sorts of issues as we see with Hushmail, because the interests of the owners are not the same as those of the users.
Bill Thompson
In the past I've suggested that they get an account with Hushmail, the Canadian company that offers secure encrypted e-mail for its customers.

But after revelations that Hushmail has passed on details of supposedly secure e-mails to the Canadian police I think I'll stop.

I like Hushmail because it works in your web browser. When you sign in it downloads an application written in the Java programming language, and this encrypts and decrypts your message using your secret keys.

Hushmail never sees your e-mail, and so it can't hand it over to the authorities even if they come with a warrant.

But the company also offers an easier to use service which does the hard work on its server rather than your computer. And when it does that it has to have access to your original message, at least briefly.

So when the Canadian police asked it for copies of e-mail sent and received by someone suspected of the illegal manufacture and distribution of anabolic steroids it could not deny that it could read them.

The company has been open about what happened, although it does not seem to have got around to mentioning it on its website yet.

But being open isn't good enough, as the issue has highlighted a fundamental flaw in its security model, one that it will be all but impossible to get around.

Even its more secure service could be undermined if the company agreed to add a 'backdoor' to its code at the authorities' request.

The problem is that Hushmail, like other companies that store and process personal information, is bound by the laws of the country in which it is based and sometimes those laws will require it to betray the confidence of its customers.

A newspaper editor in the UK has to decide whether to go to court or hand over leaked documents; a manager at an net service firm has to decide whether to allow the police to access e-mail logs; and someone running a secure e-mail company has to decide whether the privacy of a suspected drug dealer is worth a jail sentence.

Usually they do what is asked, and often they are not even allowed to tell users what they have done because of gagging orders.

Computer keyboard, Eyewire
It can be hard to keep your messages secret, warns Bill
The issue goes much wider than trying to decide who to trust with confidential or possibly incriminating data. It also has an impact on the tools we use to contact our friends or organise activities.

The National Union of Journalists is currently having an occasionally fractious internal discussion about the impact of new media on the profession, and the use of social network sites has been raised several times.

Some of the participants are simply opposed to these new-fangled technologies, a position that I have little sympathy with.

I remember meeting Tony Benn, former MP and lifelong campaigner for socialism, and being pleasantly surprised at his enthusiasm for YouTube and the ways it could be used to amplify a political message.

But using commercial services for campaigning or organising raises the same sorts of issues as we see with Hushmail, because the interests of the owners are not the same as those of the users.

Trade union activist and online campaigner Eric Lee put it succinctly in a recent blog post when he noted that 'Facebook is a poor replacement for a real online campaigning strategy for unions. And it makes us vulnerable to the whims of those who own the company'.

Hushmail seems to offer a good service, but its 'simple' service offers little real security when it matters. Far better to install your own encryption software, like the freely available GnuPG, and take responsibility for your own security.

And Facebook may make it easy to set up a group, but it will never be as good as having your own server, your own code and your own security mechanisms in place. Organise a group on Facebook and it belongs to them; organise it on your own server and it belongs to you.

Of course doing this takes time, costs money and requires expertise that many campaigners simply do not possess. Perhaps the time is right for a co-operative social network site, one owned by its members and run in their interests.

It might never be worth $15 billion, but it could make the world a better place.
Source :: BBC

Tuesday 13 November 2007

Yahoo settles its China lawsuit

Source ::BBC
Yahoo's Michael Callahan and Jerry Yang at the House committee hearing
Yahoo senior officers were criticised in a congressional hearing
Yahoo has agreed to settle a lawsuit brought against it on behalf of several Chinese dissidents, according to papers filed in a California court.

No details have been given of the settlement but Yahoo will be covering legal costs.

The case alleged that Yahoo had provided information to the Chinese government that had then been used to prosecute the dissidents.

Yahoo said it had to comply with Chinese laws to operate in the country.

A statement released by the World Organization for Human Rights USA, which brought the case, said Yahoo had decided to settle the case following criticism at a US Congressional hearing on 6 November.

'Inexcusably negligent'

A Congressional panel criticised Yahoo for not giving full details to its probe into the jailing of a reporter by Chinese authorities.

Yahoo had been "at best inexcusably negligent" and at worst "deceptive" in evidence given to the House Foreign Affairs Committee last year, the panel said.

One journalist cited in the case, Shi Tao, was tracked down and jailed for 10 years for subversion after Yahoo passed on his e-mail and IP address to officials.

He was convicted in 2004 of divulging state secrets after posting online a Chinese government order forbidding media organisations from marking the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Yahoo's original response to the lawsuit acknowledged releasing information to the Chinese government.

But it argued that there was little connection between the information the firm gave and the ensuing arrests and imprisonment of its users.

Michael Callahan, Yahoo's executive vice-president and general counsel, then told a congressional panel in February 2006 that he did not know why the Chinese authorities wanted to trace Shi Tao.

Last week, Mr Callahan wrote to the committee admitting that other Yahoo employees had a document saying it was to do with the "suspected illegal provision of state secrets".

Mr Callahan said the information only came to his attention months after he testified.



Powered by ScribeFire.

Friday 9 November 2007

News media feels force of Musharraf crackdown







Last Tuesday the owner of Geo, Pakistan's largest television station, sent an email to his senior editors.

"I
have received [a] threatening telephone call last night from ISI,"
wrote Mir Shakil ur Rahman, referring to the powerful Inter Services
Intelligence agency. "They have taken me to a house in Islamabad."

Mr
Rahman did not describe what happened at the spy safe house, but the
following sentence suggested it was not pleasant. "I would like to
advise you to please follow the laws specially [sic] the newly
promulgated law."









He also attached an email from "Sabir".

"Pakistan
Army is the backbone of Pakistan, don't try to damage it, if u do, u
and your family who have looted billions would be hunted down like
rats," it read. "It will just take a few hundred people to smash ur
studios, offices, vans."

As General Musharraf's emergency rule
slides towards a second week, Pakistan's media barons are coming under
intense pressure from his heavy-handed security forces - officially and
unofficially.

Private TV channels have been pulled off air,
stringent new laws prohibit stories that "ridicule" the president, and
many journalists are wondering if the country's television revolution
is over.

"News has become a contraband item," said Imran Aslam,
president of Geo, whose four sister stations are off air. "Now it's
like the old days when we used to tune into the BBC radio to find out
what's happen in our own backyard."

Journalists and proprietors
complain of threatening calls and emails, some by people claiming to be
the Taliban. They are continuing to broadcast, sending stories by
satellite and high-speed internet to a minority of wealthy viewers.

But
with satellite dish prices soaring, most Pakistanis are in the dark,
blind to the great dramas of the past week - clashes between police and
lawyers, human rights activists behind bars, or the sight of their
deposed chief justice, Muhammad Iftikhar Chaudhry, under house arrest
in Islamabad.

"The government's goal is to consolidate their
position in the courts and not to allow protests grow," said veteran
journalist Zaffar Abbas. "At the moment they seem pretty satisfied."

Film,
cartoon and sports channels are allowed, as is Pakistan Television, the
state news station, which presents an alternate reality.

The channel airs Musharraf speeches, anti-Indian propaganda and chat shows hosted by regime loyalists.

"Gen
Musharraf is finally doing what President Putin did for Russia - stop
democracy from turning into total chaos," wrote PTV presenter Ahmed
Quraishi, who on his website this week blames the CIA for Gen
Musharraf's woes.

Television has become hugely popular and
politically influential in Pakistan. Newspapers have a small
circulation, selling just 3m copies in a country of 165 million people,
but the plethora of new TV stations offering 24-hour news and lively
debate reaches tens of millions.

They came of age last March,
when live coverage of anti-Musharraf rallies led by Justice Chaudhry
stoked public outrage and brought floods of protesters onto the streets.

"It was a huge force in the restoration of the chief justice. It really motivated the public," said lawyer Kashif Ali Malik.

Now
the government is leaning on owners like Mr Ur Rahman, demanding they
adhere to a new "code of ethics" that effectively bars any criticism of
Gen Musharraf, who used to boast of his love for the free press.

Journalists
at the stations worry that they will be next to be arrested. In recent
days, security forces have jailed thousands of lawyers, human rights
activists and opposition figures.

"They have a hit list of six or seven senior journalists they want to arrest," said Hamid Mir, a popular presenter with Geo.

Newspapers
are still being published, many carrying detailed reports of state
brutality and angry comment, despite a new law prohibiting anything
that defames or brings into disrepute Gen Musharraf or his government.

The
editor of Dawn, a respected newspaper established by Pakistan's
founding father Muhammad Ali Jinnah, said he would not be cowed.

"We
are not in the business of ridicule, we are in the business of
reporting the facts," said Abbas Nasir. "And if the facts make someone
look ridiculous, so be it."

Source :: Guardian

Declan Walsh in Islamabad
Thursday November 8, 2007
Guardian Unlimited



Powered by ScribeFire.

Wednesday 7 November 2007

Dutch government admits spying on journalists

5 November 2007



The Dutch government today admitted officials hacked into a media agency's
computers to find out what stories were being written about them.


The GPD news agency only discovered what was going on when one ministry press
officer rang up to complain about a story that had not even been published.


Marcel van Lingen, editor-in-chief of the agency which serves more than a
dozen newspapers in the Netherlands and Belgium, accused the government of
"spying."




The Social Affairs Ministry "used stolen information to influence (our)
reporting," he said.


The ministry confirmed in a statement some of its employees had accessed
GPD's internal site and apologised.


"It is not our policy and we reject it. The department will investigate the
matter and take steps to prevent it happening again in the future," said a
spokesman.


It invited public prosecutors to investigate whether any criminal acts were
committed. Other news outlets criticised the ministry's action, and The
Netherlands' Union of Journalists' chief Thomas Bruning called it a "kick in the
shins for the independent role that journalism plays."
source :: Press Gazette



Powered by ScribeFire.