english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow IFJ v.President Azhgikhina to EF: Business model Media against Journalism, specialy in Terror Crisis

IFJ v.President Azhgikhina to EF: Business model Media against Journalism, specialy in Terror Crisis

Written by ACM
Thursday, 19 November 2015

*Strasbourg/CoE/Angelo Marcopolo/- The Experienced International Federation of Journalists' vice-President and Russian Union of Journalists' Executive Secretary, Nadezda Azhgikhina, a Key-note Speaker in CoE's 2015 World Forum of Democracy's Plenary Session on "Media Responsiblity in "the Age of Terror"", earlier Today, stressed in Reply to "EuroFora"s Questions that Busines-model based Media are Opposed to real Journalism, and these two Different realities become even More Incompatible between them, after Terrorist Attacks as those recently in Paris+.



    "EuroFora" observed that Azhgikhina had just evoked the idea that real "Journalism's Deontology is sometimes Contradictory to the Business-model Media", and invited her to further Clarify that point :

    - "Of course !", reacted spontaneously IFJ's experienced vice-President on that "Contradiction", Topical issue.

    - Indeed, "the Main Idea is that Media are Media, but Journalism is competely an Other matter.

    - I.e. "Media are Business, and News for them is just a Platform", Azhgiknia Criticaly but Realisticaly observed.

    -  While, on the Contrary, "Journalism is a Differend kind of Activities : Journalism has a <<Public Good>> value", she underlined, (obviously pointing at the Socio-Political meaning of that term, and not just to its Economic synonumous).

    - "Because it (real Journalism) provides Infos and Ideas to the Society, It provides Information Important for People !", she rightfuly stressed, on a Key-point very Close also to ECHR's well established Case-Law about Freedom of Expression, (Art. 10 of ECoHR), which is the only Legal Protection that EuroJudges offer to Real Journalists, in situations of Tension and Pressure against Liberty.

    - In other words, it (real Journalism) is about "Significant Social Information", including f.ex. Original/Critical News on "Human Rights", etc, while, on the contrary, "Media are simply about Disseminating Information, which is something Differend", she Distinguished anew.

    + Moreover, "Journalism follows also well Established ...Ethical Standards", "that's why it's Important to Develop (real) Journalists' Community, and those Ethical Standards, as a Basis for Social Relations" in this field, President Azhgikhina added, close to an Idea that "EuroFora"s co-Founder had supported at the "Assises of Journalism" in Strasbourg as early as already since 2009-2010, etc, and discussed with World Famous long-time former IFJ's Secretary General, and currently Director of Ethical News Network, Aidan White, who has recently focused on Developing a landmark work about almost Identifying real Journalism with the Respect of Press Deontology.

    Indeed, Azhgikhina, who is also responsible for all International relations and activities of the Russian Union of Journalists, not only at the IFJ, but also in UNESCO, OSCE, UN Women, UNFPA, and other Global Organizations , etc,  told "EuroFora" that she personaly "knows(s) very well Aidan White", who has recently Published at CoE's latest Book on "Journalism at Risk", (ed. October 2015), a landmark and quite comprehensive Study with a very Interesting and Pioneer Work on such Topical Issues and concrete suggestions, (See, f.ex., "EuroFora"s analysis of that Important White's Article at: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/iachrcoebookandefjsgonjournalismdefinition.html )

     - In fact, Real Journalism mus be Clearly Distinguished and Never Confused with So called "Professional Media", she further Explained, reacting to a relevant "EuroFora"s Question on whether Journalists should be obliged to be submited to Business Media, or not :

    - "No, No, No !", she Vigorously Denied on that Controversial -but Key in real practice- point : - "It's Differend". F.ex., "Some (Business-like) Media would like to promote either Propaganda, or Sensational News, etc., because they are "No 1" generators of Profit (Money), and, recently, even some Media who wanted (in the Past) to present themselves as "Quality Media", i.e. following those High Standards (Comp. Supra), they have now Shifted to much More <<Lucrative>> staff", she Regretted

    - "That's the (main) Problem". And, particularly when People are facing "Terrorism", as now even inside Europe, "this (Business-model based Media's Profit aim) is Dangerous !", President Azhgikhina Warned, in line with CoE's main Debate (Comp. Supra)

    Therefore, Contrary to some old-fashioned, narrow minded Petty Bureaucrats, (often with a Hidden Political Discrimination Agenda and/or Ignorance), who scandalously persist, even Today, to Subordinate the very Definition of "Journalism" with .. a Quantity of Money Paid by a so-called "Business"-model based Media, are not only Violating Freedom of Expression, according to ECHR's Case-Law, (and IACHR's, which Declared illegal f.ex. an attempt to subordinate Journalist Status to an Obligation for a Majority of Revenues from such "Media Business", that was Unanimously Condemned as Contrary to the Convention on Human Rights. See the 2nd Conclusion of IACHR's Historic Decision cited at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/iachrcoebookandefjsgonjournalismdefinition.html ),

but even Worse, particualrly Nowadays, Playing with Fire and EnDangering Modern Society when it faces Big Challenges against Democracy and/or by Terrorist Attacks and Threats.

    - "It's Important to Focus on the Substance of the Issue", IFJ's vice-President stressed in Reply to an "EuroFora"s relevant Question.

    - " Because", indeed, nowadays, "Many People work Not for Traditional Media, but for New Media, and some of them are Serious and Correct", as she noted.

    - "However", on the Contrary, "Most Social Media and Bloggers are Far Away from Them".

    - So that, in general, Today, "this is a Big Issue", Nadezda Azhgikhina underlined in Conclusion, apparently adopting a Similar, in Principle Open but Careful stance to the Question raised by "EuroFora", as also CoE's Director on Democratic Governance, Claudia Luciani, recently did wih us at CoE's Press Conference on this 2015 CoE's "World Forum on Democracy", (See : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/coeofficialonrenewalofjournalismprotectionandwdf.html).


    - In this regard, during CoE's 2015 World Democracy Forum's Plenary Debate (Comp. Supra), she had acknowledged the Fact that the Business-based Old Model of Traditional Media was recently provoking growing Problems to the Detriment of Real Journalism, and even Dangerous during Crisis' times, Launching a Call to Search to Find any Other, New, Adequate and Better ways of making Materialy possible real Journalists' work, including, f.ex. Public "Funding", (at least Partly, but on the Basis of Objective Criteria), and/or any other appropriate Economic Solution might Fit.

    + Because, in fact,  what Counts most, as a critical Young Lady from Latin America, participant at CoE's 2015 "World Democracy Forum", put it in a subsequent Debate with CoE Parliamentary Assembly President Anne Brasseur, and former Prime Ministers of Belgium and Romania, Yves Leterme (currently Secretary General of "International Idea" Foundation), and Petre Roman, respectively : - "People Wish to Avoid having such kind of (traditional Establishment's) Media which All Publish only what they have been told to do from "Above" (PTB)...



    + Meanwhile, at another Interesting (even if partly Symbolic) parallel Development, Nadezda, who is also Russian Coordinator of the Dialogue between Russian and Ukranian professional Journalists Organizations on 2014-2015, as "EuroFora" witnessed on the spot, was surrounded by a Group of participants to CoE's 2015 "WFD" from Ukraine and Russia, including another well known to Strasbourg PanEuropean personality as former CLRAE Regions' Chamber President, Nataliya Romanova, apparently in Deep Topical Discussions with several Young Russian representatives including on "Donetsk/Luhansk" Autonomist areas, currently under Minsk Agreement's Peace Process, and other "Hot" Issues, (Comp. f.ex. for earlier Romanova statements to "EuroFora" at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/clraepresidentonmayorsfreedomofconscience.html ).




("DraftNews", as already send to "EuroFora"'s Subscribers/Donors,, earlier. A more accurate, Full Final Version might be Published asap).

Enterprises' Competitiveness for 2014-2020


Visitors: 26758820


Login Form

Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account


RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3

Other Menu


Former "Green-Red" German government's Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer's job at the controversial Turkish pipeline "Nabucco" was denounced as "not proper", "very bad", and "incompatible with Democracy", by the new President of EU Parliament's EuroLeft Group, German Lothar Bisky, replying to an "EuroFora" question.

For once, criticism of Joschka Fischer's doings with Turkey affecting Europe, didn't come only from the Center-Right of the political spectrum, but even from his Left side : The experienced Bisky, who has been chairing all over 1993-2009 the PDS - Die Linke party :  

- "Former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer got involved in dealings with oil-gaz business in a foreign country, Turkey, and its controversial Nabucco pipeline. This raises questions about Democracy, also because of the well known problems of Human Rights violations in that country. Do you thing that this might be abused in order to cover up and close EU's eyes on Human Rights violations ?", "EuroFora" asked Bisky.


- "Nabucco pipeline is (only) at the planning stage". And "there are some difficulties",  he observed from the start. But "'I don't want to get into the details of Nabucco pipeline, because I don't think that there is any point for it at the moment".
At any case,  "we  (EU Parliament's EuroLeft Group) strongly believe that Politicians should not get involved in the Energy Business, and all these commercial transactions", President Bisky declared on the Joschka Fiischer's affair.

- "We feel that it's something that shouldn't be done. It's not proper !"           

- "We don't think that it's compatible with Democracy either, and it gets politics into a very Bad track", Bisky went on to denounce.
- "EuroLeft  and "Die Linke" always spoke against that, saying that politicians should not get directly into the arms of private enterprises"

- "It is pretty bad if a former Minister takes a job f.ex. in a major Energy producer. So, it's an issue if a Minister who may have seen excellent opportunities, subsequently gets personally grasp of them, in very serious parts of the economy, once he has given up his (Government) job."

- "It doesn't really make politics in general look any better'", Bisky concluded.


Earlier, this week in Strasbourg, other Journalists had also raised critical questions on former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer's involvement in the conroversial Turkish Nabucco pipeline to the President of his own EuroParty : Kohn-Bendit of the "Greens", who, contrary to Bisky, tried to find excuses for Fischer, while criticizing his long-time partner, Schroeder for having done a similar move :

- "Shroeder was chancellor", and he "negociated" with "Russians", who gave him a job only "3 Months" after he resigned from the Government. While "Joschka Fischer", on the contrary, got a job with the controversial Turkish Nabucco pipeline only "4 Years after" he left the Government. "He didn't negociate Nabucco", so I have "no objection", Kohn Bendit claimed.

But, many Facts indicate the contrary :

Joschka Fischer was Foreign Minister in Germany from 1999 up to 2005 : I.e. from the year that EU took the controversial decision to give Turkey a "Candidate" status, until he year it started controversial "accession negotiations, (later declared "open-ended" after Sarkozy-Merkel's arrival from 2005-2007).

During that period was prepared the controversial so-called "Annan" Plan (in fact, drafted by others and attributed afterwards to the former UN SG) on Cyprus, which failed after a Popular Referendum said "No" on 2004 with a large Majoriy of 3/4 : 75%. Mainly because it was criticized for making too much concessions to the Turkish side :  Particularly by restricting Greek Cypriot Refugees' Human Right to return to their ancestral Land and/or get restitution of their Familiy Homes and private properties, usurpated by Ankara's Army since the 1974 militay invasion and continuing occupation of the northern part of Cyprus. And by weakening the Central Government, leaving to 2 "constituent States" so much powers and separate interests that more conflicts appeared inevitable, provoking the danger of a break-down in the foreseable future, with more crisis, troubles, perhaps bloodshed, etc., instead of creating an harmoniously integrated, really one federal State.

The controversial Plan was finalized on March-April 2004 at Burgenstock (Switzerland), curiously in the presence of an Envoy by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany, then governed by Joschka Fischer, but in the absence of a French and not even an European Union's Envoy, contrary to what was usually practiced on similar occasions in Switzerland (fex. in 1997 at Montreux, in 2000 at Geneva, etc).

Turkey notoriously exploited the failure of the "Annan" Plan in order to convince the EU to decide to start accession Negotiations on December 2004. This provoked an unprecedented series of Institutional Crisis inside the EU, shortly afterwards, when French and Dutch People rejected, 2 popular EuroReferenda by a majority "'No" vote to the EU Constitutional Treaty on 2005, aggraveted in 2004 a Majority Abstention to EU Elections, etc., followed by the recent Irish "No", etc.

"Nabucco" Gas pipeline was notoriously planned since ..2002. It follows an even earlier idea, for an Oil pipeline Baku-Ceyhun, which started to be prepared on 1999-2001 and was meanwhile recently completed.  

So, facts indicate that what is now at stake is based on decisions made during Joschka Fischer's term as former Foreign Minister, closely interested in Turkey's controversial EU-bid.

To the point that he now practically ...switched jobs with a poliician from Turkey, (the State which pays today openly Joschka Fischer), Mr. Ozdemir, who came earlier in Germany, got fast the nationality, and became EiuroMP in a few years, continuing now as head of the "Greens" in Germany, i.e. in Joschka's former job !...

Such astonishing facts risk, unfotunately, to give to German politician Lothar Bisky's criticism of  representative Democracy a topical meaning :

 - "We (EuroLeft Group) think that what is really at stake is Democracy. It's not only about Gas Pipelines or Energy sources", President Lothar Bisky went on to add in his reply to "EuroFora"'s question on Joscka Fischer's personal interests in the controversial Turkish "Nabuco" pipeline.

Such facts, "make People get more distance from Politics. ...People had had enough, and they are fed up !".

- "That's why we (EuroParliament's "EuroLeft" Group) want to strengthen Direct Democracy in Europe. Citizens should be involved in the (EU) Decision-making. In the end of the day, it's not going to help anyone if Politicians are always taking decisions, without involving Citizens. We want to give a voice to the People of Europe. They've got to have their say in the decisions that are taken. That's one of our absolutely fixed and steadfast views. We want more Direct Democracy in Europe. That's how it can become more effective and stronger", he concluded.




2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?


SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.