A Call for Equity, Responsibility Amid
The following is veteran journalist Nemani Delaibatiki’s speech during the Oceanian Perspectives on Human Dignity Conference at BYU–Hawaii alongside the International Center for Law and Religion Studies (ICLRS) from April 23-25. Mr Delaibatiki was a guest speaker at the conference which also included Pacific Conference of Churches.
It has been made clear in this conference that human dignity is based on a set of core universal values and principles that transcends culture, ethnicity, nationalities, religions, socio-economic status and politics.
The values that underpin human dignity include respect, equal rights, the freedom to choose, access to essential services and goods that ensure a reasonable standard of living, security and peace.
It is sad and even a tragedy that instead of embracing the richness of our diversity and using it as a powerful tool for development and progress, unity, peace and prosperity, our differences sometimes give rise to intolerance, prejudices, contention, hatred, tension, civil unrest and violent conflicts in several parts of the world. Human dignity and many other noble ideals are trampled and become the casualties.
ROLE OF MEDIA
The media, referred to as the fourth estate, is an essential pillar of democracy. It upholds the universal narrative that all human beings are children of God, and therefore equal before divine law and the law of the land and as such must be treated equally.
The important role of the media in our society cannot be treated lightly. It informs, educates, entertains and helps shape people’s opinions. Its importance was highlighted by Thomas Jefferson, the third American president, author and founding father of the Declaration of Independence and a champion for the media. He said that he would prefer a newspaper without a government than a government without a newspaper.
The mainstream media operates on three criteria before it broadcasts or publishes a news item.
THE NEWS IS:
1) Accurate or must be factual; 2) Fair and balanced and;
3) In the public interest.
Being fair and balanced means all the parties quoted in the story are given the opportunity to comment particularly on sensitive and controversial stories.
If people feel their reputation and character have been maligned by a news item they have the right to seek legal redress in a court of law.
SOCIAL MEDIA
The advent of internet and digital media has transformed the media landscape. While the mainstream media operates on a set of criteria that protects it from litigation cases, social media knows no bounds and operates with impunity. The term human dignity is non-existent, and truth is often deliberately distorted to satisfy an insidious or clandestine agenda.
This is a global problem and a major challenge to many governments to rein in unscrupulous keyboard warriors who post reckless and factually unfounded information that deliberately malign and traumatise victims.
The human toll is difficult to measure or quantify. But suffice to say that we cannot turn a blind eye to its negative impact, and we need to do something to address it.
I am not condemning social media but in fact believe that when it is used positively and appropriately it can bring about positive societal change. However, in my experience the mainstream media, on many occasions, have had to step in and clean up the mess and inaccuracies on social media, by verifying information from authoritative sources.
MEDIA IN FIJI
The news media in Fiji is fortunate because it now enjoys media freedom, a far cry from the political turmoil generated by the country’s four coups during which the media had to endure censorship, threats and intimidation.
There have been attempts to deter and discourage people from criticising the judiciary and commenting openly about a case before the court in social media. It requires political will to enforce the law to
effectively make people think twice before they post something that is illegal on social media.
The mainstream media is aware that commenting publicly on a case before the court is sub-judice and is contempt of court. Every time we talk about limiting public commentary, the libertarians jump up and down and question what they describe as an assault on the right to freedom of speech and expression. Freedom, as we know it in the media, comes with responsibility there is no such a thing as absolute freedom.
PERSONAL EXPERIENCES
Even on a personal level we have a freedom of choice. Our agency is a gift from God. But we are accountable for our choices. We have to face the consequences of our choicesgood or bad. I made two professional life defining choices as a journalist in the 1980s.
The first choice was when I decided to publish the content of a topsecret Government document that was voluntarily handed to me by a high-ranking official. It highlighted the background of the strained relations between the army and its line ministry.
The leak was designed to put it out in the public space so that something could be done about it. I was arrested and charged with breaking the Official Secrets Act, an archaic British law.
Top criminal lawyers at the time told me I would lose the case because of the “overwhelming” prosecution evidence. But I was later acquitted on technical grounds and the prosecution did not appeal the magistrate’s ruling. The then Fiji Sun editorial board supported the decision to publish the article because it was a matter of public interest.
The lives of soldiers and the welfare of their families were at stake
here. Prior to that episode I had spent some time in the Middle East embedded with the Fijian soldiers in the United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
Some of the soldiers had shared their grievances with me. The two top issues for them were the pay disparity between them and their counterparts from other contributing nations in the UN Force and faulty ageing rifles. They were matters of public interest because at the time a number of Fijian soldiers had lost their lives in the line of duty.
At stake were the safety of the soldiers, their pay anomaly and the anxiety of their families and relatives in Fiji. Not long after, the issues were raised in Parliament and the grievances were addressed. They were the reasons for the deliberate leak of the top-secret document.
The second big choice I had to make was standing up against the first military coup in 1987 in defence of democracy. My house was raided while my wife and children huddled in a corner. I was interrogated at the military camp and the newspaper I was editor of was forcibly closed by the military.
So when we talk about human dignity we are looking at a wide spectrum. The two cases of my personal experience are towards the extreme end of that spectrum. I do not wish it on anyone.
MEDIA IN FIJI
During my more than 50 years of journalism and media experience I found that those in power, in