The Listening Post

On The Listening Post this week: The screws are being tightened on Kenya's media, but the fourth estate also has credibility issues. Plus, president Macron tries a new tack with French media. Kenyan media: Under pressure and in crisis Kenya is in the midst of a political power struggle and the country's media outlets are at the heart of the story. Opposition leader Raila Odinga, out to challenge the legitimacy of President Uhuru Kenyatta, held a mock inauguration last week. The Kenyatta government, eager to put the election story behind it, ordered the Kenyan media to ignore the alternative inauguration. So when three privately-owned TV channels then tried to broadcast the event, the authorities pulled the plug on them. Who is getting to decide what constitutes news in Kenya - journalists or politicians? Contributors: Joe Ageyo, managing editor, KTN News Hanningtone Gaya, chair, Media Owners Association Nanjala Nyabola, writer and political analyst Patrick Gathara, cartoonist On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Tariq Nafi about: Youtube's latest measures to counter misinformation online and the intensifying web crackdown in Egypt France: Macron's new media strategy During last year's presidential election campaign, Emmanuel Macron was the darling of the French media. However, their romance has since soured. The new president's reluctance to engage with French journalists has made him appear aloof, distant and has made some contentious policies, that much harder to sell. So Macron's changing his approach, making himself more available. We look at how Emmanuel Macron's revamped media strategy is going down with France's troublesome, and opinionated, fourth estate. Contributors: Elizabeth Martichoux, political editor, RTL Daniel Schneidermann, media analyst, Arret Sur Images Francois Jost, professor of communication, La Sorbonne University Jean-Jerome Bertolus, political writer, L'Opinion Francis Letellier, TV host, France 3 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

The Kremlin is clamping down on critical voices as Russia's presidential election is due to take place in about six weeks. Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was arrested in Moscow last weekend and his Youtube-based channel was shut down in the middle of a broadcast. It's the fourth time Navalny has been arrested since calling for a boycott of a presidential election in which he has been banned from running. International coverage, along with his online following, have been central to Navalny's media strategy as the Kremlin has steadily tightened the screws on domestic news outlets. Over the past few years, ownership of mass media has shifted almost entirely into the hands of Kremlin allies. Moscow has also blocked access to VPNs, the virtual private networks that allowed citizens to circumvent online censorship. Additionally, a new law is in the works that would require some journalists and bloggers to register as "foreign agents." Navalny's arrest was "an opportunity to mobilise supporters and, perhaps, acquire new ones, according to Maxim Kornev, associate professor at Russian State University for the Humanities. "Because if he does not produce media events, he will disappear as a politician. It's also an opportunity to show one more time to the global community that the leader of a protest has been arrested and isolated and when the western media covers the arrest, it helps him build his image overseas." Russian news outlets owned or controlled by the Kremlin have effectively blackballed Navalny while many western news organisations tend to give the Navalny story the surface treatment - the one-time blogger, the anti-corruption crusader who bypassed the pro-Putin media by using social media to take on the Kremlin. Where the foreign coverage tends to fall short though is the Navalny backstory and his past flirtations with Russian nationalist movements. In 2007, he likened Muslims to insects. In 2008, it was Georgians who he called "rodents" and said they should all be deported from Russia. And in 2013 he publicly backed skinheads who attacked immigrants. "Navalny's base of support is not in Moscow, it is not in Russia but it is mostly in the West.... In the Western media, Navalny is presented as a martyr, but the reality is that the government in Russia is quite lenient when it comes to Navalny and his supporters," says political commentator Viktor Olevich, Actual Politics. "Contrary to popular Western opinion, not all media in Russia support government positions," adds Olevich. "There are opposition magazines and newspapers, there are opposition radio stations. Navalny has access to newspapers and magazines. He has access to radio, he has access to Dozhd channel for example and despite all that, we see ... that he has not been able to garner significant support." With Alexei Navalny barred from the upcoming presidential run - effectively neutralising him, that clears the way for Russian mainstream media outlets to focus on the job at hand. Which is casting Vladimir Putin, the president who stood up to the West during the showdown over Ukraine, as the saviour that Russia and Russians need. "There is a specific narrative that they are trying to push right now," explains Olga Khvostunova, a political analyst, Institute of Modern Russia. "There is this documentary about Putin restoring an ancient monastery in Valaam, in the northern part of Russia. And the message of the story is to try to combine some sort of religious narrative and Putin's ability to restore justice, to bring order, and to show him as this national saviour. So, that sort of religious sentiment that plays here is something that the Kremlin is trying to exploit." Contributors: Viktor Olevich, political commentator, Actual Politics Roman Dobrokhotov, editor-in-chief, The Insider Maxim Kornev, associate professor, Russian State University for the Humanities Olga Khvostunova, political analyst, Institute of Modern Russia - 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

With an election that's just five months away, Cambodia is at a tipping point. The government of Hun Sen, the world's longest-serving prime minister, is fearing the prospect of losing its parliamentary majority, after having been in power in various guises since 1979. A concerted campaign is under way to silence opposition figures, NGOs and media outlets refusing to toe the government's line. Three months ago, the government dissolved the opposition party, arrested its leader on charges of treason, which prompted more than half of the opposition's MPs to flee the country. Multiple media outlets, both on the airwaves and in print, have been forced to shut down over tax evasion charges that journalists say are simply designed to silence voices of dissent. "We report the truth and the truth really hurts the government," according to Vuthy Huot, Khmer service deputy director of Radio Free Asia. "We broadcast, for example, about deforestation, and those businessmen who are conducting the deforestation, are the children, nephews, nieces of the government official. And that makes the government really, really unhappy with us." In September, The Cambodia Daily, a newspaper known for its fervent criticism of the government, was forced to print its final pages. Journalists believe it's their content the authorities are taking issue with but the government is sticking to its line. "The case of the Cambodia Daily and the Radio Free Asia, they do not abide by the law of the sovereign state. They do not pay tax. And if you live in a civilised nation, tax evasion is a crime," says Huy Vannak, the under-secretary of state. Trumped-up tax charges, closures, and suspensions are just some of the tactics in Hun Sen's media playbook. The arrests of numerous reporters, usually on charges of treason or attempts to overthrow the government, has forced many journalists to flee the country and scared those who remain into silence. With the space for traditional media shrinking, Facebook has offered an alternative. A recent study by the Asia Foundation found that the network has, since 2016, become Cambodians' go-to source for news. But in October last year, Facebook chose Cambodia as one of six countries to participate in an experiment in which content from news publishers was pushed away from people's news feeds into a separate 'Explore' section, unless they were prepared to pay to promote it. The effect was tangible. "When Facebook rolled out its explorer experiment in October, people were very concerned. The fear was that you would have a very biased situation where most independent media would be pushed onto the explore field, and then other media, perhaps with the financial resources, would still be able to put their contents on the news feed," says Astrid Noren-Nilsson, associate senior lecturer at Lund University. The Facebook experiment played right into the hands of the prime minister, who seemed set on taking down all US-funded media outlets from the outset. Ever since the 2013 election, his party has accused these outlets of being part of an American conspiracy to topple the government. The irony is, the CCP has long been dependent on the US for aid, but those funds come with strings attached: preserving media freedoms for example. But it appears that Hun Sen no longer needs to comply with the commitment to democracy thanks to a new partner: China. When the Cambodia Daily was closed down, the PM kept "raising up the relationship he had with China", says political commentator Cham Bunthet. "Probably the government tried to send [a] message to the US government that 'I'm not afraid of you, you are not my boss, this is my country'." But if China's own record on press freedom is anything to go by, the new relationship between Phnom Penh and Beijing does not bode well for the Cambodian journalists silenced and the media outlets shut down. And in the run-up to a crucial election, Cambodian voters are getting less and less news and information. 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: The Kremlin calls the shots on Russian media, so how do critics get their messages out? Plus, we take a look at Cambodia's pre-election information blackout. Russia: Pre-election media manipulations With Russia's presidential election taking place about six weeks from now, the Kremlin is clamping down on critical voices. As the opposition politician at the heart of this story, Alexei Navalny, will tell you, there's nothing subtle about the government's tactics. Moscow has blocked access to VPNs and steadily tightened the screws on domestic news outlets - ensuring ownership of mass media has shifted almost entirely into the hands of Kremlin allies. So how do critics get their messages out? Contributors: Viktor Olevich, political commentator, Actual Politics Roman Dobrokhotov, editor-in-chief, The Insider Maxim Kornev, associate professor, Russian State University for the Humanities Olga Khvostunova, political analyst, Institute of Modern Russia On our radar Richard Gizbert speaks to producer Flo Phillips about yet another round of arrests in Turkey and so-called 'follower-factories': •Turkey has arrested more than 300 people, including journalists, over their criticism of the government's military campaign against Kurdish militia in Syria. •An investigation by The New York Times has exposed a world of fake social media accounts and the companies behind them. Cambodia: Media blackout by design Cambodia is another country with an election coming up. The vote is five months away and it was conceivable that the government of Hun Sen, the world's longest-serving prime minister, could have lost its parliamentary majority. But Cambodians are seeing a concerted campaign to silence opposition figures, and the media outlets carrying their messages. Contributors: Huy Vannak, Under Secretary of State Cham Bunthet, political commentator Vuthy Huot, khmer service deputy director, Radio Free Asia Astrid Noren-Nilsson, associate senior lecturer, Lund University 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

Since coming to power in 2016, President Rodrigo Duterte has made many thinly-veiled threats against journalists and hit them with accusations of fake news. Rappler, a popular online news site in the Philippines, has long been a thorn in the side of Duterte because of its critical reporting of Duterte's war on drugs and its investigations into his personal wealth. The president has repeatedly accused Rappler of being run by Americans, which would be illegal under Filipino law. The site now faces a possible shut down over that allegation, taking the conflict to another level. "Why are we targeted? Because we're journalists who ask tough questions," says Rappler CEO Maria Ressa. "We've done investigative reports on key facets of this administration, starting with the drug war of President Duterte and the online social media propaganda machine and how that forms the bedrock of disinformation in this country that really is crippling democracy." "What we're going to do is to challenge it, take every legal remedy that is possible, take it all the way up to the supreme court. And we're also taking it to the people," says Ressa. Rappler has posted videos explaining its side of the legal story, and have turned to their colleagues in mainstream news outlets, channels like ABS-CBN and GMA, to report on the story. The outlets might as well cover the story - given the kind of precedent this case could set in the Philippines. "They [authorities] are trying to test the waters. If nobody will complain or protest about what they're doing with Rappler, they would go ahead with the other news organisations," according to Marichu Lambino, lawyer and assistant professor at the University of the Philippines. The government's case against Rappler is a financial one. Like many companies in the Philippines, Rappler uses PDRs, Philippine Depositary Receipts, as a vehicle for securing foreign funding. PDRs give investors a slice of the profits if the company makes money but, unlike shares, no control of that company. What the Philippines' financial regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is asserting is that one of Rappler's PDR investors, the Omidyar Group, run by Ebay founder, Pierre Omidyar, do give him a measure of control, over things like the company's makeup or bylaws, thereby breaching Filipino law, which forbids foreign control of media companies. Harry Roque, spokesperson for President Duterte, says "Rappler is about money. It is not about freedom of the press. What Rappler did was an ingenious fundraising scheme that resulted in control by a foreign entity of a media corporation. Because the business of spreading information is vested with national interest, it should only be owned by Filipinos." But Rappler is not the only news outlet in the Philippines that uses PDRs as a source of financing. The country's biggest two biggest TV networks, ABS-CBN and GMA, do too. Nonoy Espina, journalist and NUJ board member, says "even the SEC recognizes PDRs. Not as ownership, but as investments. And it's not only Rappler. The other networks have PDRs. One very telling thing to is the fact that solicitor general, who is basically the government's lawyer, asked SEC to act on the complaint against Rappler. It's basically government telling the Securities and Exchange Commission to do something about Rappler, so that alone is a very blatant government intervention." As poisonous as the rhetoric on the blogosphere can be, the government's case against Rappler, based on those PDRs, seems downright pedantic. So does the Rappler case amount to the Duterte government issuing a formal declaration of war against the Filipino media? "President Duterte while he says he's not sending armies to close down the news organisations, he's trying to kill them slowly. Constricting their economic funding, their sources of funding. So this is not the worst. The worst is yet to come," says Lambino. Contributors: Maria Ressa, CEO, Rappler Marichu Lambino, lawyer & assistant professor, University of the Philippines Harry Roque, Filipino president's spokesperson Nonoy Espina, journalist and NUJ board member 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

Among the world's climate scientists, the number of those who doubt that global warming is caused by human activity is extraordinarily low - fewer than three in 100. But that's not the impression you might get from the news media. In certain countries, climate change sceptics enjoy plenty of exposure through which to propagate their theories: carbon dioxide doesn't cause a greenhouse effect; the planet is actually cooling; or the climate has always changed. Climate scepticism in the media is largely confined to what is known as the Anglosphere: the US, the UK, Australia, and, to a lesser extent, Canada and New Zealand. Elsewhere, including the most populous, polluting countries, China and India, such scepticism is hard to find. "We looked at a very large number of articles, more than 3,000, and more than 80 percent of the articles that had climate scepticism in them were found in the US and the UK compared with the newspapers in Brazil, China, India and France," explains James Painter, a research associate at The Reuters Institute. Right-wing media moguls keen for business to remain as usual have certainly played their part. The Anglosphere forms the core of Rupert Murdoch's media empire, and outlets like Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, the London Times, the Australian and Sky News Australia have long provided platforms for climate scepticism. But right-wing media are only one part of the story. News outlets with a reputation for impartial reporting have also come under fire, for how often they present fringe views on climate change alongside those of climate scientists, which is also known as "false balance". "The BBC has had a particular problem with false balance for a number of years," explains Leo Hickman, director of Carbon Brief. "And particularly with the Today programme, on Radio Four, its main flagship of current affairs programme, it just almost feels like Groundhog Day ... The BBC is now even in the position of actually having an OFCOM investigation into the way that it reports climate change due to this being such an acute problem." The notion that there is balance in the climate change story - that climate science holds the same weight and significance as climate scepticism - has been manipulated to great effect, particularly in the US. The fossil fuel industry there has set out to sow doubt about the science of global warming by funding like-minded think-tanks, who make spokespersons available at the media's request. "There's some members of think-tanks who simply say they are paid to spend, in one case, 40 percent of their workday reaching out to the media," says Maxwell Boykoff, associate professor at the University of Colorado-Boulder. Across the world in China, on the other hand, you won't find climate sceptics in the media because the industry tends to move in step with the Communist Party policy, where the debate around the causes of global warming has long been settled. "Over the past decade or so, Chinese media have developed closer relationships with our climate scientists," says Hepeng Jia, director, China Science Media Centre. "As a result, the quality of the reporting has improved considerably." India, too, is home to a sizeable fossil fuel sector and, like China, it has no industry-funded lobby disputing climate science. However, the reasons for that are quite different. India's extractive industries tend to get what they want from government, whoever is in power. Pushing back against concerns about climate change simply hasn't been necessary. "Climate scepticism in India is not an organised conversation, in that they're not very large business groups, political parties think-tanks where scepticism is being promoted," explains Anu Jogesh, India policy and governance lead at Acclimatise. "You have very, very vocal NGOs, vocal think-tanks that have actually been at the forefront of a lot of the climate reportage." The influence of online media is growing, but mass media remain the primary source of information for most news consumers. And in that realm, scepticism still has a place. However, as the consequences of climate change increasingly affect the Anglosphere, the pushback against sceptics is growing louder. And although the carbon industry continues to pump money into lobbying and media messaging, climate scepticism is running on borrowed time. Contributors: Leo Hickman, director, Carbon Brief Maxwell Boykoff, associate professor, University of Colorado-Boulder Anu Jogesh, India policy and governance lead, Acclimatise James Painter, research associate, The Reuters Institute Hepeng Jia, director, China Science Media Centre - 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/ More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost

On The Listening Post this week: As Rappler, a popular Filipino news site, battles with authorities, media there feel the chill. Plus, climate sceptics and the media platforms they get. Media on notice in the Philippines Rappler, a popular online news site in the Philippines has long been a thorn in the side of President Rodrigo Duterte because of its critical reporting. Duterte has repeatedly accused Rappler of being run by Americans, which is illegal under Filipino law. Now the site is facing a possible shut down over that allegation. Duterte has made many thinly veiled threats against journalists since 2016, but does this official move against Rappler amount to the Duterte government issuing a formal declaration of war against the Filipino media? Contributors: Maria Ressa, CEO, Rappler Marichu Lambino, lawyer and assistant professor, University of the Philippines Harry Roque, Filipino president's spokesperson Nonoy Espina, journalist and NUJ board member On our radar With an election coming up in March, Italy's government has a new formula for taking on the fake news problem. In Yemen, photojournalist Mohammed al-Qudsi was killed in the crossfire between Houthi rebels and Saudi coalition. According to new data, he is far from the only causality since the Houthis took over the country in 2014. The curious persistence of climate scepticism Climate scepticism is fringe and unscientific. So why is it that sceptics still manage, in certain countries, to get airtime denying the effects of global warming? Sceptics theories in the news media, such as carbon dioxide doesn't cause a greenhouse effect, are largely confined to what is known as the Anglosphere: the likes of the US, the UK, Australia. Elsewhere, including the most populous, polluting countries like China and India, such scepticism is hard to find. The Listening Post investigates the curious existence and persistence of climate scepticism in the news media. Contributors: Leo Hickman, director, Carbon Brief Maxwell Boykoff, associate professor, University of Colorado-Boulder Anu Jogesh, India policy and governance lead, Acclimatise James Painter, research associate, The Reuters Institute Hepeng Jia, director, China Science Media Centre - 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

Facebook is taking a big chunk of the news out of its news feed and, in so doing, retreating from a crucial part of its business. Having transformed the way billions of people consume and share news online, in some cases the way news organisations produce it, Facebook now wants to replace news with more content from friends and family. Venturing into the news business has brought Facebook revenues but also a boatload of trouble. The platform has been blamed for the spread of fake news, misinformation and hateful content online. News publishers even changed their business models to max out on Facebook as a way to get to audiences. But the platform's founder, Mark Zuckerberg, is batting away his critics, saying he's doing right by the people who matter most to him - his users. "Up until now, Facebook has kind of been doing a push towards more media content on their news feed. They've been pushing for video, and a lot of different publishers have been creating video that's specifically for Facebook," explains Surya Mattu, engineer and data reporter at Gizmodo. "From what it sounds like they're going to change that now by devaluing what publishers are doing and kind of promoting what family and friends are saying." However, critics speculate the CEOs announcement is simply a business decision. "Facebook is a business, it's a publicly traded company," says Sue Halpern, writer and scholar-in-residence at Middlebury College. "Every announcement that Mark Zuckerberg makes is a business decision. And another motivating factor is that they're losing the demographic battle. Younger people are much less engaged with Facebook than ever before." The changes to Facebook's news feed will have a far greater effect on news producers than consumers. Consider the lengths publishers have gone to in order to make their material work on the platform. "It's gotten a lot of publishers really freaked out," said Alan Wolk, a leading TV industry analyst. "Publishers had really gotten to a point where the vast majority of them were getting their traffic from social media...And too many of them have gone into a habit where they're creating news stories and just basing their whole business model on driving traffic from Facebook." The relationship that news organisations had with Facebook was always "complicated". Now, having been given notice of being de-emphasised in the news feed, they have a right to feel aggrieved and fearful of what the future holds. Whether Zuckerberg's recent announcement truly aims to counter misinformation or actually succeed in tackling hateful content online, it's clear the company is under attack from both sides of the Atlantic. "Facebook and a lot of the other tech companies were called to account by the United States Congress among other legislative bodies around the world...so there's you know great incentive on the part of Facebook to do something," says Halpern. "The fact is that Facebook changes their algorithm all the time, but they don't always make an announcement about it. So the fact that they made an announcement about it is probably a response to that very challenge." The coming changes to the news feed will be significant, but they won't fix Facebook's fake news problem. News stories will still be on the site. It's just that they won't originate in the news feed. Users will post stories that will then be shared. And given what we know about social media ecosystems, news bubbles and comfort zones - fake news will still find audiences. 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

Despite sharing the same peninsula, South Koreans don't know much about their northern neighbours. Most of what they do know comes from the testimonies of those who have sought asylum in the south. The 'Defector TV' formula takes a reality TV approach - putting asylum seekers on the air, exploring what their lives were like before defecting and even setting them up with romantic partners from the south. The producers involved say they're out to improve understanding, pave the way to reunification of countries divided since the end of World War II, but sceptics aren't buying that. They say the shows are heavy on misrepresentation, sensationalism and sexist stereotyping. In December 2011, South Korea's Channel A launched a new programme with defectors from North Korea. It's part talk show, part talent show and part beauty contest - and it was the beginning of a trend. "There's never been a programme about North Korea before," explains Kim A-ra, defector and broadcaster of Channel A. "North Korea was only ever seen through the news, which kept talking about nuclear issues, the North Korean army, how poor North Korea is... that was it." South Korean channels, eager to find a different lens through which to present North Korea, could finally break away from the usual portrayals of famine and human rights abuses and add an element of entertainment. "The question of whether they break down prejudices or reinforce them is difficult," says Christopher Green, co-editor of Sino-NK. "The fact of the matter is they mostly do both simultaneously. They certainly seek to convey information about North Korea... [and] they have the tendency to reinforce some prejudices as well." For instance, 70 percent of North Korean defectors are women and the ones that find themselves on TV often end up reinforcing a cultural stereotype: that beautiful North Korean women are the best partners for South Korean men. In shows like 'Love Unification', young North Korean women are paired with South Korean men who proceed to instruct them on the ways of the modern, developed country in which they now live. The messaging is less than subtle and it conforms to the South Korean nationalistic narrative that North Korea is the "weaker" nation that needs protection by the stronger South. "The concern is that such a caricatured, immature and objectified image of these women is then extended to all North Korean defectors and the North Korean population in general," explains Park Hyun-sun, sociology professor at Ewha Womans University. "So South Koreans may end up looking down on North Koreans or thinking 'we can treat them carelessly'." There's another issue that doesn't help with the perception of North Koreans - on occasion, some defectors' testimonies have been sketchy and inconsistent but it's almost impossible to fact check these stories. "There are such cases. But at the same time poverty in North Korea is real. And It is also true that North Korea ignores human rights," contends A-ra. "So we need to see these stories...it may not be his or her own story, they may have heard it from someone else and made it theirs but even when that happens, the story exists." In a situation where stories about North Korea remain scarce, politicised and controlled, defectors are a rare source of news. That the information they provide gets turned into infotainment says as much about South Koreans - their television market and viewing habits - as it does about their neighbours to the north. Contributors: Kim A-ra, defector and broadcaster, Channel A Christopher Green, co-editor, Sino-NK Park Hyun-sun, sociology professor, Ewha Womans University Kim Ji-young, defector and broadcaster, TV Chosun 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

On The Listening Post this week: Will Facebook's news feed reforms deal with hate speech, fake news and the need for moderation? Plus, a uniquely South Korean media phenomenon: "Defector TV". Less news in the news feed: Behind the Facebook reform Having transformed the way billions of people consume and share news stories online, Facebook has announced it is taking a big chunk of the news out of its news feed and, in doing so, retreating from a crucial part of its business. CEO Mark Zuckerberg says he's doing right by the people who matter most to him, his users, but many in the media are not buying it. So what will the social media giant's new policy mean for news organisations and news consumers? Contributors: Sara Fischer, media reporter, Axios Sue Halpern, writer and scholar-in-residence, Middlebury College Surya Mattu, engineer and data reporter, Gizmodo Alan Wolk, author of Over The Top. How The Internet Is (Slowly But Surely) Changing The Television Industry On our radar Two Reuters journalists are facing up to 14 years in jail in Myanmar for supposedly breaching an obscure, colonial-era law. A legal battle looms in the Philippines where the authorities want to take down an online news site, Rappler. South Korea's 'Defector TV' Despite sharing the same peninsula, the citizens of South Korea don't know as much about their northern neighbours as you might think. Most of what they do know comes from the testimonies of those who have sought asylum in the south. The Listening Post explores a uniquely South Korean phenomenon: 'Defector TV'. Contributors: Kim A-ra, defector and broadcaster, Channel A Christopher Green, co-editor, Sino-NK Park Hyun-sun, sociology professor, Ewha Womans University Kim Ji-young, defector and broadcaster, TV Chosun 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

When President Donald Trump announced last week that the US was making a seismic policy shift in the Middle East, officially recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the fallout was immediate. The bulk of the initial coverage focused on the potential for a violent reaction while barely focusing on the root causes of the anger. "What was focused on was this notion that this could be a bad idea because it was going to instigate all kinds of violence and potentially result in acts of violence against American interests in the region," explains Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights. And it fits right into a neat little stereotype, widely held outside the region, that the people of the Middle East, Palestinians in particular, have violent tendencies that are just waiting for a news peg to come out. "We're used to the narrative of angry Arab," says Jewish-American Daniel Levy, president of the US Middle East Project. "We're not used to the narrative of the non-violent displays of push back." Relatively few Palestinian voices were granted a media platform to get at the context, the conditions of life under an Israeli occupation that has lasted half a century. "The coverage perpetuates all kinds of stereotypes in terms of how one sees the violence on one side - the Palestinian side ignoring the daily violence inherent in an occupation," says Levy. In a story that is so fiercely disputed, terminology matters. In the same way pictures, images, tend to drive news stories – words, and the way they are used, frame them. "The situation with covering daily oppression of Palestinians comes from the language that the media has constantly used. Jerusalem is not called an occupied city it's just called Jerusalem," points out Palestinian writer Mariam Barghouti. "Illegal, Jewish only settlements are, are called neighbourhoods. Palestinian protests and demonstrations are called riots. Attacking protesters is called dispersing crowds by, by Israel and the media has adopted this. And you see these subtleties become in the reports and the language being adopted as the norm. It's the same language that Israel uses and unfortunately, it has dominated the narrative," says Barghouti. Another factor that can shape news coverage is the choice of what voices the news media turn to – who they put on the air or quote in print. "US media and international media, in general, has constantly and incessantly taken international voices over that of Palestinians. It strips agency of Palestinians and it helps in the denial of the existence of Palestinians," says Barghouti. "This comes from not giving us a voice. It comes from stripping our fate and putting in the hands of analysts or experts that are internationals, that do not live here that do not experience the consequences of Israeli oppression." Contributors: Mariam Barghouti, writer Daniel Levy, president, US Middle East Project Jodi Rudoren, executive director, New York Times Global Yousef Munayyer, executive director, US Campaign for Palestinian Rights

Fewer than one in four people in India have a smartphone, but in a country of more than 1.3 billion, that's about 300 million. And as of February 2017, 200 million of them are on WhatsApp - texting, voice messaging and video-calling each other - making India the messaging service's biggest market. But India's WhatsApp habit has a dark side too. Misinformation, disinformation, rumours and false messages can go viral. In at least two cases, fake messages spread on WhatsApp have led to mobs lynching innocent people. The growth of WhatsApp has coincided with a wave of political and socio-religious activism in India. Political parties, and the ruling party BJP in particular, have been adept at using the messenger as a powerful campaigning tool. Many religious and civic groups that share the BJP's Hindu nationalist agenda are also very active Whatsappers. As the party has focused its efforts on regulating cow slaughter and beef eating across the country, dedicated groups have sprung up on WhatsApp, tracking and targeting those they suspect of harming animals considered sacred by Hindus. In September 2015, in a village just outside of New Delhi, the local cow protection group got an alert of a man, Mohammed Akhlaq, who had supposedly killed a cow and stored its meat in his house. That information has yet to be verified, but it triggered a deadly domino effect. "People see this, they don't go to law enforcement agencies, they don't call the police saying there's a possibility that Akhlaq had killed a cow. They go to his village, drag him out and beat him to death. And brutally assault his son," recalls journalist Mohammad Ali at The Hindu. While tensions between different groups have always existed in India, "WhatsApp amplifies it on a scale that didn't really exist before," explains media professor Kalyani Chadha of the University of Maryland. "So WhatsApp is really in fact not just fake news, it's actually fake news with consequences." Indian authorities are on the backfoot when it comes to even beginning to deal with the challenges posed by the misuse of WhatsApp. Technologically, and even in terms of regulation, law enforcement officials are struggling to catch up. WhatsApp itself says keeping a check on the spread of misinformation is "complex". Earlier this year, one of the company's engineers, Alan Kao, said the key challenge to monitoring WhatsApp was encryption. It's one of the most valuable features of the messaging service, helping ensure privacy and security, but it makes it impossible to get to the root, the source, of some of the most dangerous messages being shared on the app. "Whatsapp has end-to-end encryption...Whatsapp has become the primary medium to spread rumours, because people know that they will have a large amount of legal immunity, even if they are pushing out news which might lead to disastrous consequences like people being killed," says Sinha. Speaking on the political polarisaion of Indians, Ali says, "the digital ghettoisation has increased much more now. We are looking at millions of people in a rural India being constantly radicalised through WhatsApp. They may not be ideologically-driven, but they have been ideologically appropriated." Contributors: Kalyani Chadha, professor of media, University of Maryland Mohammad Ali, journalist, The Hindu Vaid Nagar, national director, Gau Raksha Hindu Dal Pratik Sinha, cofounder, Alt News 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

On The Listening Post this week: The tropes, omissions and narrative flaws in the coverage of US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Also, why WhatsApp rumours can be fatal in India. Covering Trump's Jerusalem move When President Donald Trump announced last week that the US was recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the international media were quick to fall back on cliche narratives - focusing on the potential for violence while doing little to explain the root causes of Palestinians' anger. "US media and international media in general has constantly and incessantly taken international voices over that of Palestinians. It strips agency of Palestinians and it helps in the denial of the existence of Palestinians," says writer Mariam Barghouti. "This comes from not giving us a voice. It comes from stripping our fate and putting in the hands of analysts or experts that are internationals, that do not live here that do not experience the consequences of Israeli oppression." Contributors: Mariam Barghouti, writer Daniel Levy, president, US Middle East Project Jodi Rudoren, executive director, New York Times Global Yousef Munayyer, executive director, US Campaign for Palestinian Rights On our Radar It's the end of an era for Rupert Murdoch's media empire - in a $66bn deal, the media mogul is selling most of 21st Century Fox's entertainment assets to Disney. A Saudi-led coalition airstrike has hit - potentially targeted - Yemen's Houthi-controlled state television station Yemen TV, killing four civilians. Viral rumours, deadly consequences: India's WhatsApp dilemma India's most widely used messaging service Whatsapp has become the platform of choice for activists, politicians and marketers alike. However, the country's WhatsApp habit has a dark side too. Misinformation, disinformation, rumours and false messages can go viral, which in at least two cases, had deadly consequences. Contributors: Kalyani Chadha, professor of Media, University of Maryland Mohammad Ali, journalist, The Hindu Vaid Nagar, national director, Gau Raksha Hindu Dal Pratik Sinha, co-founder, Alt News 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

Last week, Yemen's former President Ali Abdullah Saleh was killed, but media coverage has not been straightforward. Tune in to the Saudi Arabian version and Saleh's killing this past week by Houthi rebels is used as justification for continuing a war in Yemen that has already claimed as many as 10,000 lives and left millions suffering, in the world's worst current humanitarian disaster. Pro-Houthi media saw Saleh's savage end as a blow to Saudi efforts to overthrow them. Foreign audiences may be forgiven their confusion of the causes of this conflict, given that much of the coverage of the war's main architect, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, has been enthusiastic, even effusive. There's little reporting of the behind-the-scenes roles Britain and the United States are playing in this conflict - underwriting the Saudis with arms, expertise and diplomatic cover. There are a lot of angles to this story - including the alleged role Iran is playing in Yemen, an angle long on allegations and short on proof. "The problem with the press, the Saudi-backed press or Saudi-funded press, like all Arab-funded press establishments, is that it is simply a propaganda tool and therefore we shouldn't take it as a reflection of any independent thinking, but as a reflection of the political views of the power elite at that moment, because that view can change the next day, just as Ali Abdullah's position changed overnight," says journalism professor Rami Khouri at the American University of Beirut. If Yemenis are confused by how their story is being told, they can always watch state-owned Yemen TV. They just have to decide which one. There's the one based in Sanaa, on the air since 1975; and the one Saudi Arabia created last year, that is beamed into Yemen from Riyadh. Two channels, with the same name offering distinctly different versions of the same story. Saudi-funded news outlets spend a lot of airtime talking about Iran. The narrative: Shia Iran seeks influence through its Houthi proxies in pursuit of a larger, regional hegemony that represents a threat to any Arab country, particularly states with sizeable Sunni populations. It was on that basis that Saudi Arabia entered the war in Yemen in 2015. That war has since turned into a stalemate, a humanitarian catastrophe, and like the military offensive it was supposed to bolster, the Saudi narrative on Iran has grown less popular and less credible with time. "The claim that the Houthis are a proxy of Iran in Yemen is, is ludicrous, and most knowledgeable observers of the Middle East don't take it very seriously," explains Khouri. "And this is a real problem, because if suddenly the Saudis and the Iranians enter into negotiations, which will happen eventually, the Arab media that is close to Saudi Arabia or funded by it, is suddenly going to turn on a dime and they're going to suddenly talk about Iran as a strategic partner and a good neighbour and we live together in respect and peace. So the credibility of the media has been terribly damaged all across the Arab world when the Saudis and others use it to push a propagandist case." The Saudis have also pushed their case in the international news media - through a public relations offensive aimed at diplomats and news organisations. That has borne fruit in the relatively positive reviews for the new crown prince who championed the same war in Yemen that has morphed into a quagmire. And the PR offensive may have led the international news media to divorce the humanitarian side of this story from the political - divorcing the effect from the cause. "The Anglo-American media has been criminally complicit in not reporting accurately about what actually is going on in Yemen in terms of the deeper context of who is responsible or who is engaged in the war in Yemen. It's presented as a great tragedy," says Khouri. While Houthi authorities can claim victim status in this Saudi-led media war, they are hardly an innocent party. Their version of state-owned Yemen TV is tightly controlled, and they have shown little tolerance for critical reporting by Yemeni journalists. - 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: http://www.aljazeera.com/

Television programming in Spain has undergone a transformation over the past decade - changes driven partly by economics and partly by politics. Ever since the banking crisis of 2008, the country has been in a semi-constant state of political upheaval. A series of corruption scandals, inconclusive general elections and, more recently, Catalonia's run at independence have kept Spaniards glued to their televisions and pundits talking 24/7. That has given rise to a wave of political talk shows that the Spanish call tertulias. These programmes meet two important criteria, they provide political flashpoints that audiences seem to like and they're cheap to produce. However, the discussion is not always balanced. Public broadcasters, in particular, have been known to engineer talk show panels to promote their government's agendas. "Political debates seem to have adopted the practice of gossip shows to get record audiences, and it looks like it's working," says Marina Gonzalez Sanz, the University of Seville. Behaviour that previously would have been unthinkable is now accepted, like biased interventions by moderators or the use of insults during prime time. "It is true that, lately, politics are as widespread on television as cooking or football shows with practically the same kind of structure," explains TV3 presenter Xavier Graset. "But that isn't negative. Debating is a good thing. And it has its roots in our literary circles and cafe culture. Also, this format has been very successful because it is much cheaper to produce." After the 2008 economic recession that saw housing prices collapse and Spain's GDP plummet, media outlets were forced to find cheaper forms of programming. By 2011, the recession had spawned an anti-austerity movement, that took to the streets and infiltrated the TV studios. Some channels saw an opportunity, producing tertulias that were political – with an element of showbiz. The industry was in crisis and found a winning formula. Since the crisis, "the hours people spend watching TV has greatly increased" says professor Joan Lopez Alegre, University Abat Oliva. "Why? People don't have enough money to go out for dinner - sales of frozen pizza have rocketed. Appetite for politics has rocketed, too. A debate guarantees you a bigger audience than a blockbuster film or a good series, and on a smaller budget." Tertulias aren't just Spain's new political battleground. They're a launching pad. In 2013, a conservative TV channel, Intereconomia, signed up a relative unknown leftist professor of politics to counter right-wing voices on its best-known tertulia "El Gato al Agua". Within a year, Pablo Iglesias became the third-most recognised commentator in the country, and the new political party he co-founded, Podemos, finished third in its debut election. Political tertulias tend to fail Spanish audiences in the area of plurality, a problem affected publicly funded channels during the debate over Catalonian independence. TVE is Spain's national public broadcaster. TV3 is its equivalent in Catalonia. The heads of both channels are appointed by politicians. TVE's tertulias were loaded with anti-independence voices, while TV3's tilted the other way, providing only token unionist voices, heavily outnumbered by the other side. "In tertulias, there are always two ideological flanks, but they are uneven," explains Sanz. "About a quarter of tertulias invite a majority of speakers of one ideology, and just one representative of the counter-ideology, the so-called 'useful idiot'. In the rest of the tertulias, the moderator clearly supports one side. So while it looks like there is plurality, in fact, there isn't." However, not everyone thinks this is a bad thing. "Political debates and political communications in Spain have changed completely because of the TV tertulias and, moreover, there's no going back to the past. That is good for democracy," says Alegre. "Spain is a country where we have always said that politicians are our main problem. But nevertheless, we have ended up with politicians having a presence in all channels at all hours. We have gone from being a country of bullfighters and flamenco singers, so to say, to be a country of footballers and politicians." Contributors: Cesar Gonzalez Anton, head of news, La Sexta Marina Gonzalez Sanz, University of Seville Joan Lopez Alegre, professor, University Abat Oliva Xavier Graset, presenter, TV3 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