U-Censorship

Reporters Without Borders, 18 January 2002

Reporters sans frontières (Reporters without Borders - RSF) expresses its dismay and indignation following the death of a journalism student on January 12, 2002. The organization has asked the Ugandan authorities to carry out an in-depth and impartial investigation so that those responsible can be identified and reprimanded. RSF is delighted to hear of the rapid arrest of three police officers, but hopes that the investigation will not stop there, and that full responsibility will be established within the management ranks of the Ugandan police force. Those who authorized the officers to employ real bullets during a demonstration should also be arrested.

On January 12, 2002, Jimmy Higenyi, a journalism student at the United Media Consultants and Trainers (UMCAT), died after being shot in the back by a bullet fired by police in Kampala. The journalist was covering a demonstration organized by the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC, the opposition) in the streets of the capital. His report was for a student project. The government had banned the march under article 269 of the Constitution, which outlaws all political activity in the country. The police, overwhelmed by the crowd, began firing real bullets to break up the demonstration. It was Jimmy Higenyi’s first project as a correspondent on the ground. He is the first journalist to be killed in the course of his duty in 2002.

The same day, at least three journalists - James Akena from the daily New Vision, Archie Luyimbazi and Andrew Mujema from the television station WBS - and several leaders of the UPC were detained for a few hours by the security forces.

A few days later, the chief inspector of the police, Major-General Katumba Wamala, announced that an officer and two constables had been arrested in connection with the murder of Jimmy Higenyi. "The police takes full responsibility" in this affair, the Ugandan police chief stated during a press conference.

Honi Soit, Sydney University newspaper
http://www.src.usyd.edu.au/Honisoit/html/editions_feature705.html

The Press Gang
Amelia Walkley explores the state of student media in Australia, and how our precious independent publications are threatened by VSU
Experimental and irreverent, idealistic and politicised, brazen and raw - student media is perhaps best characterised by its perpetual state of immaturity, with a well-deserved reputation for being intensely amateur, even at the best of times. This glorious pastiche of seditious satire, cheeky commentary, heavily opinionated rants and thoughtful musings holds a fundamental place within the university and student community - it is free from the clutches of any multi-million dollar media enterprise peddling mainstream values, and most vitally it is a medium through which students may say whatever the hell they want, and get away with it - most of the time, at any rate!

The Impact of VSU
The rich tradition of alternative commentary in Australian universities is being threatened significantly on a number of different levels, as measures taken to cope with the recently introduced Voluntary Student Unionism legislation have brought to light issues of censorship and autonomy. Around the country the impact of VSU, which prevents universities from collecting compulsory levies not directly related to students' courses, is hitting student associations hard. Funding cuts and budget re-workings are unavoidable, as student unions make great sacrifices and compromises so as to keep their organisation running and to continue providing essential services to students. Arguments and rants lamenting the flaws of VSU have been plentiful in the past, and often anti-VSU activists can begin to sound like broken records stuck singing to the same old tune, but it is pertinent to bring the subject up again, because VSU is an outright attack upon the autonomy, independence and integrity of our student publications.

In some cases, it has marked the end of individual publications entirely, such as Southern Cross University's Pulp; in other cases it has forced publications to go online, like the University of Queensland's Semper Floreat. At the very least, all Australian student publications have been required to completely reassess their financial situation - often with committed editors now working for free or for a pittance just to ensure that students are provided with a metaphorical microphone for their views.

The negative effects of VSU upon the industry of student media are overwhelming and widespread, and are occurring as we speak. Dara Conduit, one of the editors for this year's Lot's Wife, produced by the Monash University Students Association, said that 'under VSU we have had our budget cut severely.' Lot's Wife had previously ten editions a year, now only eight are published; and where last year they had three full-time editors and an advertising manager, they now have only two full-time editors. Likewise at Australian National University, where Woroni is published monthly during semester, editor Peter Davis noted that "VSU has cut our funding down to a quarter of what it used to be three years ago." Woroni was lucky enough, however, to receive some financial assistance from the Australian National University, though Davis said that their economic contribution is dwindling slightly.

The situation is even worse at Adelaide University - their student association's publication On Dit was one of only two weekly student newspapers left in the country (the other being our very own Honi Soit) until last year, when they were forced to change to being published on a fortnightly basis due to budget constraints. Editors Ben Heschke and Claire Wald lament that 'VSU has made On Dit's funding non-existent. This is the first year the editors are unpaid. We rely on making $3000 an edition in advertising to cover printing costs, which we have only managed for one of our three editions. The Union has budgeted to cover costs not covered by advertising, but for a Union already running at a large loss, this arrangement may not last long.' Similarly at Wollongong University the impact has been crippling - Tertangala has had its budget reduced from $120,000 to just $20,000 in the space of one year. This means that they are unable to pay the students who contribute, and consequentially their ability to secure content is diminished. The editorial team are all unpaid volunteers, frequently having to dip into their own pockets to fund their commitment to the publication. Small things like buying late night dinners and batteries for a tape recorder may not seem like much, but it all adds up.

A regrettable reality is thus revealed - in order to maintain their existence, students have had to compromise the precious and vital independence of their publications as they search for financial assistance from alternative sources.

Censorship and Controversy
Student media has a strong tradition of providing against-the-grain opinions, especially in the good old days of the 1960s and 1970s, when the country was buzzing with politically active students opposing the war and conscription, and fighting for women's liberation and freedom of speech. Writing for the student paper was (and still is) a viable form of activism, earning you a good dose of cred at the same time. But nowadays the autonomy and freedom of student newspapers are further sacrificed as editors are obliged to attempt to be more conservative and less offensive and radical so as not to displease the advertisers and universities who fund the publication.

Yet, by nature, student media is necessarily controversial, and censorship has always been a touchy issue in the industry. One of the more notorious cases involved the editors of La Trobe University's Rabelais publishing a 'Guide to Shoplifting' in 1995, poking fun at the dire state of student poverty. It was so contentious that the article was banned by the Office of Film and Literature Classification board on the grounds that it was material that 'promotes, incites and instructs in matters of crime'. This is an example of light-hearted satire gone terribly, terribly wrong, and the editors in question were threatened with hefty fines and even gaol sentences.

Interestingly, censorship can come just as forcefully from within the student government as well as from outside sources. Woroni editor Peter Davis commented that 'our censorship comes from the most extreme corners of both the queer and feminist corners and generally is just personal opinion of what constitutes offensive material. Most frustratingly, it seems most of our censorship occurs because the individuals involved feel that they need to be seen to be doing something, even if that something is counter-productive to the publication of a well-balanced student magazine.'

Past editor of Sydney University's Honi Soit and The Bull Sarah-Jane Collins said that 'when we ran for Honi we had a light-hearted slogan: " Honi only gets sued once a year, it's a good year" - but we outdid ourselves by being threatened by solicitors on two separate occasions.' The worst example of censorship she experienced was when editing The Bull last year - 'Some deals had been done on the Union Board, and we decided to write an article about it but when it was time to go to print the Union Board refused to allow the article to be published and even threatened legal action. Ultimately we had to publish in Honi Soit.'

A similar tale is related by On Dit editors Ben Henschke and Claire Wald - 'Last year an entire edition went missing the day after it was delivered, before the editors could distribute it. It featured a (probably defamatory) article on the student elections that were being held that week, a full-scale attack on factionalism and the inadequacies of student politics.' The article would have reflected badly on certain candidates running in elections, which perhaps explains why bundles of copies were allegedly found outside the then-Union president's house. Henschke and Wald said that nothing could be proven and the incident was not pursued.

Even more disturbing are the instances of censorship at the Catholic Notre Dame University, where most sexual references, profane language and criticism of the university are forbidden in the student publication Quasimodo. Further, at the University of New England in 2005, funding was cut suddenly to the student magazine Neucleus by the Liberal-controlled Students Association because of the amount of anti-VSU sentiment circulated within the paper. It is frightening that the genuine debate and commentary provided in what is supposed to be an independent and alternative source of media has the potential to be hijacked because of a powerful group's subscription to a particular religious or political outlook.

The Future for Australian Student Publications
Felix Eldridge, president of the National Union of Students in 2005, pointed out that student newspapers 'are not set up to represent the views of student organisations, but to represent the views of students'. Lot's Wife editor Dara Conduit said that 'we've published stuff that the student association hasn't wanted us to publish and yet we can because, well, we do what we want. If our advertisers told us not to publish something, we'd cut them, rather than the articles - in the real world, that just wouldn't happen.' Conduit's comments illustrate the essence of student media in practice - it is alternative, unorthodox, unconventional - and unafraid of publishing even the most radical of views. Editors tend to be immovable and idealistic - Sarah-Jane Collins points out that if an article is ever cut for political reasons, 'most editors will spend all night making photocopies, because when you're a student and you're running a paper, its integrity is the key and its ability to communicate honestly what's going on around campus is vital.' Student press has been the breeding ground for a whole host of notable (and notorious) Australians - the likes of Germaine Greer, Robert Menzies, H.V. Evatt and Keith Windschuttle were student editors in their university years, many developing their politics and values as a result. Will the next generation be cheated of their equivalent outspoken feminists or political leaders as a result of the death of many of our Australian student publications? When asked of their opinion of the importance of student media, editors around the nation shared similar sentiments. They celebrated the fact that student media is the main point of contact between students and their representative bodies, and that there is no other aspect of University life that can so accurately encapsulate what university is about. They cherished the opportunities yielded by having a student magazine or newspaper on campus - the vital media skills learnt by students through their involvement in such activities are invaluable. But most of all they noted the importance of independent criticism - Adam Knobel, editor of Tertangala this year, stated that 'to not question your government, your country, the media - or even your own beliefs - is to resign yourself to a life of suppression and subordination.'

Students are arguably an oppressed group in society - graduating with an enormous debt and putting up with difficult living and working conditions just to make ends meet. Without student publications, the issues faced by Australian students are in danger of being ignored completely by mainstream media sources. With the loss of this vital outlet, a significant chunk of youth popular culture in Australia would go down the drain, along with the political criticisms, literary genius and unique ideas generated by students

31 March 2004

Reporters Without Borders has called on Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz to open an investigation into the death of student journalist Mohammad Abu Halimeh, who was killed on 22 March 2004 while covering clashes at Balata refugee camp in Nablus.

The international press freedom organisation also called for the conclusions of the Israeli Army investigation into the death of British documentary film-maker James Miller to be given to his family and made public as quickly as possible.

It is almost a year since Miller was killed by Israeli shooting on 3 May 2003 when he was working on a documentary in Rafah, in the south of the Gaza Strip. Eyewitneses and the conclusions of the investigation backed by his family have called his death "deliberate killing".

James Miller

"In the same town of Nablus, the Israeli Army already killed a cameraman for US news agency APTN Nazeh Darwazi on 19 April 2003. Shamefully, no investigation was announced and no action taken against the perpetrators even though eye witnesses and footage of the incident showed there was a serious breach of regulations," said Reporters Without Borders in its letter to the minister.

"Today we are calling for an honest and serious investigation to be held into the circumstances of the death of Mohammad Abu Halimeh to bring an end to the impunity enjoyed by Israeli soldiers," the organisation added.

Palestinian hospital and security sources said that an Israeli bullet had apparently fatally wounded Halimeh in the stomach. Eye witnesses told Reporters Without Borders that the journalist student was about 50 metres from the soldier who opened fire on him.

He was standing in front of one of the main entrances of the Balata camp and had a camera around his neck. No exchanges of fire had been heard at the time. Agence France-Presse said Israeli soldiers opened fire against stone-throwing Palestinians.

Halimeh, aged 22, had been working for several months as a volunteer for An-Najah University radio in Nablus, where he was completing his journalism studies. He had been reporting live by telephone on the clashes at the Balata camp about ten minutes before his death.