The Listening Post

Ever since last year's palace coup in Saudi Arabia left Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, commonly known as MBS, in control of every important arm of the state, his promise of reforms has had many in the international media putting a new face on the kingdom. As the global media were busily churning out "good news" stories of Saudi women preparing to take the wheel, it begs the question why the government choose to arrest 10 activists, seven women and three men, accusing them of being traitors and colluding with unspecified foreign powers to "destabilise the kingdom". "Unfortunately, this is not the first instance where human rights activists, and any political dissent is linked to a national security threat," points out Kareem Chehayeb, Saudi Arabia researcher at Amnesty International. "We have seen cases where people are arrested simply for tweeting criticisms of Saudi Arabia policy, and, of course, this plays a huge role in stifling any form of human rights activism dissent and any form of expression association assembly in the country," says Chehayeb. Those activists have been under the gun ever since last September when the crown prince's father, King Salman, announced the driving ban was coming to an end. Not surprised by the recent arrests, journalist Hana al-Khamri of Yemeni Salon, says that during last year's announcement, "[On] the same day, ironically, they called women's rights activists and they asked them to remain silent, resulting of many women's rights activists being condemned into silence, de-activating their Twitter account or stopping tweeting." The narrative now emerging around this story seems at odds with the one Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had managed to create since becoming the presumptive heir to the Saudi throne last year. "Even the PR machine of the kingdom is having a difficult time defending such a decision," says Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi. The Saudi government pays millions of dollars to US public relations firms to burnish its image through the news media, to global policymakers and the public. They've painted MBS as a moderate reformer who is tackling corruption and "extremism" in his country. "Every country wants to have a good image," explains Khashoggi. "But to depend only on PR companies and promises, this is short lived. The arrest of those women activists is proof of that. The moment the news came out, all that image is gone. And now, everybody is talking about, again arrests, lack of political freedom in Saudi Arabia. So, basically, what will fix the image of Saudi Arabia is action on the ground." Contributors Hana al-Khamri, writer, Yemeni Salon Josh Wood, journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Saudi writer Kareem Chehayeb, Saudi Arabia researcher, Amnesty International More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

Journalists in Mexico face many dangers, especially when they're covering the country's ongoing drug war. But journalism is not just under threat from cartels. There are structural problems deeply embedded in the political framework of the country, which have a daily effect on the production of Mexico's journalism. Since he came to power in 2012, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on government ads - airtime and print space dedicated to government self-promotion. He has spent more money on media advertising during his time in power than any other president in Mexico's history. Broadcasting giants like Televisa and Azteca both get around 10 percent of their ad revenue from the federal government. The country's newspapers of record like Milenio, El Universal, Excelsior, rely on the government for millions of dollars to keep them going. And when a media outlet relies so heavily on the government to keep it alive, investigative reporting, critical journalism, scoops and exposes are either diluted, deferred or censored - if journalists haven't censored themselves already. "It's a fairly straightforward paradox. If your main client is the government, you cannot criticise the government. Because if that government pulls the plug, your business cannot survive," says Daniel Moreno, director of independent news site Animal Politico. The symbiotic relationship between the Mexican state and the press goes way back. In the 1970s, President Lopez Portillo said of the media, 'I don't pay for them to beat me,' and stopped government advertising in Proceso, the only major independent weekly. Portillo was the leader of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, the PRI, who ruled uninterrupted for 70 years, during which they were rarely held to account. When they were voted out in 2000, successive governments promised a freer press. However, the complicity between the media and the state persisted. Media watchdogs and civil society groups finally took the government to court over the issue and in 2017, the Supreme Court sided with them, demanding laws to curb ad spending and all money to be distributed in an unbiased way. It sounds like progress, but those pushing for change say the bill is toothless. "We got a big surprise last year when the Supreme Court recognised that the opacity and the lack of regulation in the governmental advertising has a direct impact in the freedom of speech in Mexico," explains Justine Dupuy, Fundar Centre for Analysis & Research. "Unfortunately, what we saw is that lawmakers pretended to meet the requirement, they passed a law, but they didn't take this historic opportunity to change this perverse relationship and to create free media in the country," Dupuy adds. If the polls for the upcoming presidential election are to be believed, Mexicans, disenchanted both with the media establishment and the political one, will be voting the current government out of power. According to media scholar, Grisel Salazar, "this inertia is something that has been at work for decades, it is very difficult to get out of it. The incentives for the media to carry on with this mode of self-preservation are just too strong, too powerful. That's why it's so difficult to put a stop to it." Whether the next Mexican leader changes a habit of a lifetime and cures media outlets of their addiction to government advertising remains to seen. Contributors: Daniel Moreno, director, Animal Politico Sebastian Barragan, reporter, Aristegui Noticias Grisel Salazar, media scholar, CIDE Justine Dupuy, Fundar Centre for Analysis & Research More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: The jailing of women's rights activists in Saudi Arabia makes the story of reform in the kingdom harder to tell. Plus, the politics of government ad money in Mexico. Image vs reality: Spinning the Saudi reform story Ever since last year's palace coup in Saudi Arabia left Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (also referred to as MBS) in control of every important arm of the state, his promise of reforms, an anti-graft campaign, the opening of cinemas, and the decision to finally lift a ban on women drivers, has had many in the international media putting a new face on the kingdom. But the recent jailing of women's rights activists and their labelling as traitors with links to foreign powers feels like the same old Saudi Arabia. So what's behind the crackdown on female activists and what does it mean for Saudi Arabia's image? We look at the role of the PR firms, mostly in the US, to whom the Saudi government pays millions of dollars to burnish its image through the news media to global policymakers and the public. Contributors: Hana al-Khamri, writer, Yemeni Salon Josh Wood, journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Saudi writer Kareem Chehayeb, Saudi Arabia researcher, Amnesty International On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Johanna Hoes about the intensifying pressure on journalists in Egypt and the US media's approach to mass shootings. Journalism and the politics of government advertising in Mexico Since coming to power in 2012, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto's administration has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on government advertising. He's thrown more pesos the media's way than any other president in the country's history. That has helped keep some media outlets afloat, but the ad revenues can also cost news media their editorial independence. The Listening Post's Marcela Pizarro reports on the politics of government advertising, the news outlets that have grown addicted to it, and the effect that has had on the fourth estate in Mexico. Contributors: Daniel Moreno, director, Animal Político Sebastián Barragan, reporter, Aristegui Noticias Grisel Salazar, media scholar, CIDE Justine Dupuy, Fundar - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

The images beaming out of Israel and Palestine this week could not have been more different. On one side of the split screen, dignitaries mingling in West Jerusalem, toasting the opening of the new US embassy there. On the other, carnage at the Gaza-Israel border, at least 60 Palestinians killed, most of them picked off from a distance by Israeli snipers. Elsewhere in the region, media coverage reflected significant geopolitical changes occurring in certain states. Saudi Arabian media, that have often provided a pan-Arab platform for anger at the Israeli occupation, relegated the bloodbath at the border to the back half of their newscasts, until the images and voices online became too compelling to downplay. "When you look at Al-Arabiya and you recognise that this is a Saudi channel, and you see that the Saudi regime has been opening normalisation economically, politically, militarily with the Zionist state and has been adopting the Zionist discourse, then of course that will be exemplified in the Al-Arabiya news," says Rania Masri, associate director for Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship, AUB. Political agendas were also at play among the other major media players in the region - Turkey, Iran and Qatar, home to the Al Jazeera Media Network. The Palestine-Israel conflict, like the war in Syria, is one of those stories that serve as a prism reflecting various regional interests and ideologies. And the coverage can reveal as much about the news outlet's country of origin, where it's coming from, as it does about the story itself. "Over the last probably 12 months, with the increased rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iran tries to show that it cares so much about Jerusalem and out-do Saudi Arabia, especially under Mohammed bin Salman. So this competition using the Palestinian issue between two regional powers, Saudi Arabia on one hand and Iran on the other hand, in order to outscore the other which is actually not very helpful to the Palestinians," says Professor Madawi al-Rasheed of the Middle East Centre at LSE. Meanwhile, when it comes to Turkey, "its news media is more critical to Israel than it used to be in the past," points out Asaf Ronel, head of foreign news at Haaretz. Yet despite having some influential news outlets in its corner, despite the careful choreographing of an embassy opening to show the world, Israel, through its uncompromising military response and the news footage that produced, has managed to lose the battle for public opinion on this story. "Sometimes, I agree that the Palestinians are not given enough attention. But this week, I think that they've been given all the attention," says Jerusalem Post reporter Lahav Harkov Levine. Contributors Rania Masri, associate director, Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship, AUB Asaf Ronel, head of foreign news, Haaretz Mawadi al-Rasheed, visiting professor, LSE Lahav Harkov Levine, journalist, Jerusalem Post - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

In 2003, false intelligence and a news media willing to publicise it helped justify the invasion of Iraq. The politicians responsible for launching the invasion have largely escaped repercussions for their role in misleading governments and the public. Much less have US media outlets learned lessons from the way that military institutions were allowed to drive narratives that promoted the conflict. In 2008, the New York Times revealed a secret Pentagon programme which trained and briefed former military generals to push pro-Pentagon talking points to a compliant news media. Today, former military personnel are still regular contributors on every major cable news network despite some of them being the very same figures who pushed for the Iraq war. "Being one of these former military official TV pundits means never having to say you're sorry," says Jeff Cohen, founding director of the Park Center for Independent Media and associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College. "These people have gotten it wrong repeatedly and they're on the air forever." Former CIA director John Brennan and former director of both the NSA and the CIA, Michael Hayden are now employed as national security analysts for NBC. No mention is ever made of Brennan's work as an adviser for cybersecurity SecureAuth Core Security or Hayden's role at the Chertoff Group, which provides strategic consultancy to the arms industry. "This is a revolving door between folks who were officials in the national security apparatus who then have moved out of that role and are now leveraging their experience to get these lucrative positions in the defence industry, like contractors, strategic firms and media gigs," says Gin Armstrong, deputy director of the Public Accountability Initiative. "Media have a responsibility to viewers to make sure that they know where this commentary is coming from and so far have just done a very poor job." Almost without exception, these former officials turned media pundits are opposed to the current administration. The combination of their official record and their anti-Trump credentials helps the networks present themselves as part of the responsible 'resistance' to the White House. However, when it comes to policies such as US President Donald Trump's choice of Gina Haspel as incoming director of the CIA, their resistance ends and their ideology begins. "You saw a parade on cable news of former CIA officials talking about how great at her job she was. Remember, she oversaw torture and is part of the exact same military intelligence complex that has been doing rendition, torturing people," explains Nima Shirazi, co-host of the Citations Needed podcast. "When it comes to strikes on Syria, we see the same thing; former military officials talking about how efficient and how effective the military is. These are people talking about a sector that they respect and they will always respect." Polls consistently find that the US military retains the trust of the American public while confidence in other institutions such as Congress and the TV news have plummeted. The constant presence of former military and intelligence figures in the news media may well contribute to the deep entrenchment of militarist values in US society. "When you allow these military brass to come on night after night and never have to debate, it normalises what we call the military-industrial complex," said Jeff Cohen. "I would call it, a military-industrial media complex." Contributors Nima Shirazi, editor, Muftah Co-host, Citations Needed Podcast Gin Armstrong, deputy director, Public Accountability Initiative Melvin Goodman, author, Whistleblower at the CIA: An Insider's Account of the Politics of Intelligence Jeff Cohen, associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: A ceremony in Jerusalem, a massacre in Gaza. We analyse media coverage of events in Israel and Palestine. Plus, spies on air in the US. Split screens and dissonant narratives The images beaming out of Israel and Palestine this week could not have been more different: On one side, dignitaries mingling in West Jerusalem, toasting the opening of the new United States embassy there. On the other, carnage at the Gaza-Israel border: at least 60 Palestinians killed, most of them picked off from a distance, by Israeli snipers. The bulk of the Israeli media echoed the official state narrative of self-defence and sovereignty. Elsewhere in the region, from Turkey and Iran to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, media coverage reflected the significant geopolitical changes underway. Contributors Rania Masri, associate director, Asfari Institute for Civil Society and Citizenship, AUB Asaf Ronel, head of foreign news, Haaretz Mawadi al-Rasheed, visiting professor, LSE Lahav Harkov Levine, journalist, Jerusalem Post On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Flo Phillips about a change at the top of the Bangkok Post and the reason Spanish journalists at the state broadcaster have taken to wearing black every Friday. Pro-war pundits on US airwaves During the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003, false intelligence reports and a compliant US news media helped sell the invasion to Americans. Five years later, the New York Times revealed that part of that media sales pitch had been scripted by the Pentagon itself, in the person of retired generals it had trained to deliver talking points through the news media. Have the US media learned from the Iraq experience? It doesn't look that way. Cable news coverage of US involvement in Syria features a phalanx of former military and intelligence officials: among them, some of the same faces that helped pave the warpath to Iraq, and others who have proven to have a casual relationship with facts. Not that that seems to bother the news producers who keep calling them up and providing them with on air platforms. Contributors Nima Shirazi, editor, Muftah Co-host, Citations Needed Podcast Gin Armstrong, deputy director, Public Accountability Initiative Melvin Goodman, author of Whistleblower at the CIA: An Insider's Account of the Politics of Intelligence Jeff Cohen, associate professor of journalism at Ithaca College More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

More than 80,000 people in the United States are held in solitary confinement on any given day, with underreporting being one of the main issues for the lack of information about conditions and effects. Not only does the media rarely get access, but popular culture also works against people in solitary confinement, demonising them and portraying them as "bogey men", psychopaths and killers that need to be put away. But is this pop culture over-simplification of a real issue in the American justice system damaging journalists' chances to uncover a blanketed story? And what is being hidden under the pretence of the "Natural Born Killer"? According to the ACLU's David Fathi of the national prison project, "Solitary confinement units in the United States are stuffed to the rafters with the mentally ill, with the developmentally disabled. People are put in solitary confinement for having too many postage stamps. For having too many pencils." James Ridgeway has been documenting that system on Solitary Watch, a website he established back in 2009. He now has correspondence with more than 5,000 subscribed prisoners. The site has reported on every angle, every detail of conditions in isolation from prisoners diminished human rights through to their mental health. "When we started our project, there was literally hardly anything about solitary confinement in the press, TV, or newscast, or papers," says Ridgeway. "The only way I could connect with people was through letters, through just plain letters. No phones, no emails, no real visits, no press contacts. I sort of thought to myself: these guys are reporters - what they've got to say is the way in." Last month, Solitary Watch published the most recent essay by Jack Powers, an inmate in Colorado. He's been in isolation for almost 30 years and has contributed several compelling accounts of psychiatric trauma. Ridgeway is no longer alone in his campaign to get stories on solitary from the inside. Media attention and outlets like Netflix are also showcasing prisoner conditions to shed light on solitary confinement. It's not just media attention. Before he left office, President Barack Obama introduced a series of directives and guidelines, including an outright ban on juveniles in solitary. It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump's administration will roll back on those promises or commit to continued reform, but regardless, audiences are finally hearing from some of the solitary voices. Contributors: James Ridgeway, Solitary Watch Johnny Perez, adviser, US Commission on Civil Rights Ricky Jones, radio host, 'Unlocked' David Fathi, national prison Project, ACLU More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: Ten Afghan journalists killed in a single day. Plus, the human rights issue in the US that most Americans have never heard of, solitary confinement. The deadliest day for Afghanistan's media The Afghan journalists rushing to the site of an explosion two weeks ago in Kabul were trying to cover the news. They didn't realise it was set up. In the aftermath, a second suicide bomber, disguised as a news cameraman, detonated his device. The attacks, claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, known as ISIS), left 29 people dead, including 9 journalists. Another Afghan reporter was shot dead that same day and the carnage was a brutal reminder of the perils of being in the news business in Afghanistan. Contributors: Najib Sharifi, director, Afghan Journalists Safety Committee Parwiz Shamal, head of news, TOLO News Parwiz Kawa, editor-in-chief, Hasht e Subh Daily newspaper Malali Bashir, journalist, Radio Azadi On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Johanna Hoes about the buyout of a newspaper in Cambodia - the Phnom Penh Post, that has lead to mass resignations. They also hear from Erin Handley, a former reporter for that paper. Solitary confinement in the US The numbers are hard to nail down, but somewhere in the region of 85 thousand prisoners in American jails are currently being held solitary confinement. The limited coverage of this issue in the US news media - comes down, mostly, to access. The prisons rarely let reporters in to do those stories. The Listening Post's Marcela Pizarro looks at the coverage of Americans in isolation - and one journalist who has bypassed prison authorities - by using the post office and turning prisoners into reporters. Contributors: James Ridgeway, Solitary Watch Johnny Perez, advisor, US Commission on Civil Rights Ricky Jones, radio host, ‘Unlocked’ David Fathi, national prison Project, ACLU - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

When news broke on April 2 that South Africa's iconic anti-apartheid leader Winnie Madikizela-Mandela had died at the age of 81, the media went to work characterising her life. But in the days after her death, many took exception to the way her obituaries read. Much of that coverage either reduced Madikizela-Mandela to the "former wife of Nelson Mandela" or made her a caricature of an angry, vengeful woman who had lost her way - rather than considering her decades-long struggle to end white-minority rule in South Africa. "The obits were flat. They just didn't have the kind of work that should've been done for this individual," says Gugulethu Mhlungu, a host with Radio 702, "if you were relying on, I think, media coverage, it wasn't substantive." In the 1960s, the African National Congress (ANC) was banned with many of its leaders in jail or in exile. The apartheid government had forbidden the media from covering the ANC in any way that was deemed to advance its agenda. With no visible leadership, in person, or in the media, the liberation struggle hung in the balance. It was Madikizela-Mandela, a young mother at the time whose husband was serving a life sentence on Robben Island, who picked up the mantle. For all those years that Nelson Mandela was imprisoned, Mama Winnie, as she was known, moved to the front line in the fight against white-minority rule, earning her the respect of her people and the ire of the apartheid-era government. "She kept that voice alive at a time when it really went dead inside the country," says Anton Harber, a media professor at Wits University. According to him, Madikizela-Mandela seemed to live without fear at this time, speaking out for her jailed husband and for the banned ANC. Over the next two decades, the apartheid-era government went to great lengths to silence Madikizela-Mandela. She was kept under constant surveillance, harassed, frequently jailed and spent months in solitary confinement where she was reportedly tortured and demeaned. In the end, the government blamed the 1976 Soweto uprising - which claimed the lives of hundreds of black youths - on Madikizela-Mandela, and in 1977 she was banished to a small farming town called Brandford. Eight years later, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela defied the government and returned to the media spotlight. This time, the world saw a different side to her - with ratcheted up rhetoric, a new militancy. By the mid-1980s, political unrest and violent uprisings were widespread, the armed struggle against apartheid was intensifying - but so was the propaganda war. The apartheid government created a covert unit called Stratcom tasked with waging psychological warfare on black South Africans by - in part - discrediting their leaders in the media. There were as many as 40 journalists working directly or indirectly for Stratcom who would deliberately disseminate misinformation and propaganda about Madikizela-Mandela. "The government pretended it was conducting this war by parliamentary rules. When in fact, it was conducting a dirty war," says Sean Jacobs, an associate professor at The New School. Three days before Madikizela-Mandela's funeral, a documentary called "Winnie" aired in South Africa. Using interviews with former Stratcom agents, it showed how the unit had orchestrated the media campaign against Madikizela-Mandela. For many viewers, it illustrated how insidious the apartheid government could be and quite how damaging the coverage was because, even after Madikizela-Mandela's death, it still reverberated. For author Sisonke Msimang, the documentary provided an opportunity for South Africans and their media to have a more nuanced discussion about the life and legacy of the anti-apartheid stalwart. "This is not about whitewashing history and pretending that Winnie Mandela was a perfect warrior, it's not about pretending as though there weren't missteps that she made, but it is about broadening the view of what her contribution was to the history of this country beyond the years between 1986 and 1989." Contributors: Gugulethu Mhlungu, radio host and writer Ra'eesa Pather, journalist, Mail & Guardian Sisonke Msimang, author, Always Another Country Anton Harber, media professor, Wits University Sean Jacobs, associate professor, The New School - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

The Afghan journalists rushing to the site of an explosion this past week in Kabul were trying to cover the news. They didn't realise it was a set up. In the aftermath of the attack, a suicide bomber disguised as a news cameraman detonated his device. The attacks, claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group (ISIL, also known as ISIS), left 29 people dead, including 10 journalists. They were a brutal reminder of the perils of being in the news business in Afghanistan. "It was one of the deadliest incidents for Afghanistan media and Afghanistan journalists because this one was directly targeting reporters," says Parwiz Kawa, editor of Hasht-e-Subh Daily newspaper. Although responsibility for the twin explosions was claimed by the Islamic State, the Taliban represent a much wider threat to Afghan journalists. "Militant groups don't want their atrocities to be covered and reported, and it's basically the media who highlights, who reveals atrocities that they commit," explains Najib Shafiri, director of Afghan Journalists Safety Committee. While attacking journalists isn't new, the Taliban are also targeting "the telecommunication towers and other structures that are related to media and communication," points out Radio Azadi's Malali Bashir. "They are trying to destroy the very fabric of the media and communication as so people don't have first-hand and correct information." While the Taliban choose their targets carefully, the Islamic State targets everyone. Like one of Tolo News's cameramen, Yar Mohammad Tokhi, who perished in the second explosion, having been lured there by the first. His equipment bears the stains and his colleagues bear the scars of the mother of all attacks against journalism in Afghanistan. Contributors: Najib Shafiri, director, Afghan Journalists Safety Committee Parwiz Shamal, head of news, 'Tolo News' Parwiz Kawa, editor-in-chief, 'Hasht-e-Subh' Daily newspaper Malali Bashir, journalist, 'Radio Azadi' More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: Afghanistan suffers its deadliest day for journalists since the 2001 US invasion. Plus, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela: Life and death in the media. Afghanistan: 10 journalists killed in a single day The Afghan journalists rushing to the site of an explosion this past week in Kabul were trying to cover the news. They didn't realise it was set up. Amid the media scrum, a second suicide bomber, disguised as a news cameraman, detonated his device. The attacks, claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, known as ISIS), left 29 people dead, including 10 journalists. They were a brutal reminder of the perils of being in the news business in Afghanistan. Contributors Najib Shafiri, director, Afghan Journalists Safety Committee Parwiz Shamal, head of news, TOLO News Parwiz Kawa, editor-in-chief, Hasht e Subh Daily newspaper Malali Bashir, journalist, Radio Azadi On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Meenakshi Ravi about Malaysia's anti-fake news law after a court there issued the first sentences. Also, a couple of weeks ago, the Listening Post spoke about the banning of the messaging app Telegram in Russia - now the same thing has happened in Iran. Winnie Madikizela-Mandela: Life and death in the media Last month, South Africa laid to rest one of its iconic anti-apartheid leaders, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela. In the days after her death, many took exception to the way her obituaries read; how she was reduced to the former wife of a president, and how she was demonised. Just days before her funeral, a documentary aired showing how the apartheid government, with the help of the white-owned news media, had smeared Madikizela-Mandela with the lies that made it into those obits. That documentary changed things. Contributors Gugulethu Mhlungu, radio host and writer Ra'eesa Pather, journalist, Mail & Guardian Sisonke Msimang, author, Always Another Country Anton Harber, media professor, Wits University Sean Jacobs, associate professor, The New School More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

The US Democratic Party has recently filed a lawsuit against the Russian government, Donald Trump's presidential campaign and WikiLeaks, charging that they carried out a wide-ranging conspiracy to influence the 2016 US presidential election. Suing WikiLeaks - a news organisation - for publishing leaked material, when it is hardly the only news outlet to do so, could set a troubling precedent for press freedom. The US media have remained strangely silent on the implications. Busily obsessing over Russian meddling in the election, the FBI's Robert Mueller investigation and Trump's rhetorical war with the media, reporters are taking a pass on the DNC lawsuit story and the legal assault on the fourth estate coming from the other side of the aisle. "The DNC's suing WikiLeaks because they're the central player," says Eric Boehlert, a senior writer for Shareblue Media. "If it weren't for WikiLeaks essentially conspiring with Russian operatives, this wouldn't have been a story ... they marketed these emails. They were reaching out to the reporters." The core issue in this story is not what was in those hacked emails - the DNC's sabotaging of Bernie Sanders' campaign, its unseemly, cap-in-hand approach to financial donors - but rather how those emails found their way into the media food chain in the first place. Cybersecurity specialists say the hackers who infiltrated the DNC's servers were Russian. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have stuck to their policy of neither confirming nor denying who their sources are, saying only that the "source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party". WikiLeaks acquired the files and started publishing the emails four months before the 2016 election. No major US media outlet ignored the story. It was, for better or worse, considered newsworthy. "These were stolen conversations, and I don't think that journalists took proper care to vet them," says Eric Alterman, a media columnist for The Nation and professor of journalism at City University of New York. "It's not that they weren't true, but the motive in releasing them in order to demonise the Democrats when there was no such comparable effort on the part of Republicans - that was not handled well." "Journalists just rushed into print without considering the source, without considering what was behind them, without explaining it to their readers. And this had the effect of perverting the political discourse," Alterman says. The DNC, which has an ongoing relationship with news networks and papers like the New York Times, has not taken legal issue with any of those organisations over their coverage of the story. The lawsuit targets the alleged source of the emails, the Russian government, and the middleman WikiLeaks, but spares the news outlets that took what WikiLeaks provided and fed it to American voters. According to Jane Kirtley, a professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota, "a broad interpretation of the first amendment would cover WikiLeaks". She disagrees with those who "would say that this kind of lawsuit against them is perfectly acceptable and has no first amendment ramifications ... I would hope that news organisations would focus not on WikiLeaks, but rather on the principles that are at stake." "If this is a successful campaign against WikiLeaks it would have ramifications for other news organisations. News organisations should be concerned about that aspect of the case," says Kirtley. Contributors: Ben Norton, reporter, The Real News & Fair Media Watch Eric Boehlert, senior writer, Shareblue Media Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics & law, University of Minnesota Eric Alterman, media columnist, The Nation & professor of journalism, City University of New York More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

It has been more than 8 months since the start of the military crackdown in Myanmar's Rakhine State - which has forced almost three quarters of a million Rohingya Muslims across the border into Bangladesh. The United Nations has called the crisis a 'textbook example of ethnic cleansing' but the Myanmar government maintain this is a targeted operation to weed the state of Rohingya militants - a narrative they have gone to great lengths to uphold. As Mark Farmaner, Director of Burma Campaign UK explains, "We've seen the government of Burma very strictly controlling the access and news coming out of Rakhine State and trying to dominate how it is reported and trying to intimidate domestic and international media organisations, who are trying to investigate and find out what really has gone on." Rohingya refugees who have escaped the violence have stories of rape, torture, and massacres at the hands of the Myanmar security forces - stories that most media outlets in Myanmar shy away from - but one broadcaster has made it its mission to tell those stories, Rohingya Vision TV. Rohingya Vision TV, or RVision, is run by exiled Rohingya, broadcasting from headquarters in Malaysia. The channel relies on a significant network of undercover citizen journalists in Rakhine who work at great risk to offer a rare glimpse behind the authorities' veil of secrecy. Its founder, Muhammad Noor, told the Listening Post he started the network to tell the Rohingya side of this story and to shed light on a community that has been under-reported and persecuted for decades: "we started to get news, actual facts and figures from the ground and started to broadcast. International media are not allowed in Rakhine, so they cannot do their job. So now we have to take over the job. We are the news breaker of Rakhine because we convert citizens into citizen journalists, existing people into journalists, training them and getting the information out whatever possible equipment they have". And it's not just the government's version of events RVision is up against. When it comes to stories of the Rohingya, most media outlets in Myanmar simply agree with the authorities' official line. Francis Wade, author of 'Myanmar's Enemy Within' explained that "the vast majority of journalists, Burmese journalists, inside the country, appear to share the government and the military's antagonism towards the Rohingya; there's a real lack of will in reporting critically on the military and a real lack of robust, vigorous, media that cast scrutiny on the military's actions against civilians - regardless of whether there is or there isn't space for independent journalism." When Myanmar started its transition from military to civilian rule in 2011, there was real hope that a space would open up for independent journalism but any hope has since been shattered. "I think we've seen since Aung San Suu Kyi came to power a gradual slide in press freedom and increasing restrictions on freedom of expression and that accelerated since the military offensive in August last year. The hopes that there would be an increase in media freedom under Aung San Suu Kyi, that the repressive laws of the junta era would finally be repealed, those hopes are gone, they're dashed", Mark Famaner said. Which makes outlets like Rohingya Vision TV all the more important when trying to understand all sides of the story. Contributors: Muhammad Noor, co-founder and managing director, Rohingya Vision TV Francis Wade, author, 'Myanmar's Enemy Within: the Making of a Muslim Other' Mark Farmaner, director, Burma Campaign UK Aye Aye Win, former Myanmar Bureau Chief, AP - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: The saga of the US elections continues as the Democrats file suit against Russia, Trump and WikiLeaks. Plus, the news network telling the Rohingya story. Democrats versus Wikileaks and the implications for US media It's been almost a year and a half since the election of Donald Trump and yet the opposition Democrats still haven't moved on. Last week, the party filed a lawsuit over the hacking and publishing of emails from the Democratic National Committee - the DNC - in 2016. The defendants in the suit are the Russian government, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks. Suing WikiLeaks - a news organisation - for publishing leaked material, when it is hardly the only news outlet to do so, could set a troubling precedent for press freedom. Contributors: Ben Norton, reporter, The Real News & Fair Media Watch Eric Boehlert, senior writer, Share Blue Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics & law, University of Minnesota Eric Alterman, media columnist, The Nation & Professor of Journalism, City University of New York On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Flo Phillips about the Egyptian government's reaction to an imprisoned photographer winning a UN Press Freedom prize; and how the historic Korean summit was covered, live. Reporting Myanmar's Rohingya story Since the military campaign against Myanmar's Rohingya minority began 8 months ago almost three quarters of a million Rohingya, Muslims, have taken flight across the border into Bangladesh. Myanmar's government has tried to control the narrative - denying journalists access to the story - so international media and NGOs have struggled to get the facts. But there is one broadcaster that is still reporting from the inside - Rohingya Vision TV. Run by exiled Rohingya, the network relies on undercover reporters to get information out. The stories they tell contest the Myanmar government's version of events, as well as the national media outlets that have closed ranks with the authorities. Contributors: Muhammad Noor, co-founder and managing director, Rohingya Vision TV Francis Wade, author, 'Myanmar's Enemy Within: the Making of a Muslim Other' Mark Farmaner, director, Burma Campaign UK Aye Aye Win, former Myanmar Bureau Chief, AP More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/

When footage of an alleged chemical weapons attack was beamed out of Douma, Syria, it set off an outcry and lit the fuse for counterstrikes. The narrative in much of the western mainstream media echoed their own governments': a red line had been crossed, it was a transgression that could not go unpunished. Those demanding evidence that Bashar al-Assad's government was behind the chemical attacks, the sceptics questioning the rush to launch, were given short shrift. The question of waiting for evidence "seems to be missing from much media discussion," points out Tara McCormack, an academic at the University of Leicester. "What we have seen in Syria is footage taken by people on their mobile phones. But there does seem to be a total abandonment of any kind of critical scrutiny. An idea almost that it would be immoral to question these images. I think that's quite a serious failure on the part of a lot of western media." A big part of this geo-political showdown is being fought out over the airwaves, and when it comes to state propaganda, Russia is contributing its share. If only their media could bring the same scrutiny to bear on the Kremlin that they do on the White House. "The main point made in the Russian media was that there was no chemical attack, that there was no need for it and that Russia was being blamed for something it had no role in," explains Marianna Belenkaya, a Russian journalist at Kommersant newspaper. "When the Western media talked about the chemical attack as a fait accompli, the Russian media, not just the state ones, but more liberal, balanced outlets were trying to understand what the reasons for such an attack would be. Our western colleagues don't even want to hear this kind of questioning," she adds. Syria's civil war has claimed half a million lives and displaced millions more, but the United States and its allies have chosen to intervene, publicly, only when the fighting is alleged to have gone chemical. Chemical weapons are politically beyond the pale. Almost 200 countries have signed the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 which outlawed their production and use. The way allegations of chemical warfare are reported - the way it looks on screen - triggers a response. The footage is horrific, the suffering evident. And once these images turn up in Washington and other western capitals, the politics and the accepted rules of war do the rest. According to Omar al-Ghazzi, professor of media and communications at LSE, "it is not about images specifically, it is about the politicisation of images in relation to political agendas. The attention that chemical warfare gets in relation to Syria has actually less to do with Syria than western European history and European publics. Because suffering by bombings and by barrel bombs arguably can be more damaging and kills more people." Contributors: Omar al-Ghazzi, professor of media and communications, LSE Tara McCormack, academic, University of Leicester Adam Johnson, contributing analyst, FAIR.org Marianna Belenkaya, journalist, Kommersant newspaper More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: https://www.aljazeera.com/