As we come towards the end of the posting period on Fair Comment, I’ve thought about where the future lies for the global press freedom, within a new media template. In my presentation, i touched on the way that Western Technology was creating a New Media Colonialism, where the privileged few have access to the technologies required to post messages, tweet or interact globally. However, the opposite may also be true, with developing countries shifting away from regulation to a more participatory means of global communication, as telephones, computers and internet access becomes more available, and crucially more affordable.
However. I still feel that the old addege is ultimately true. Knowledge is Power and I am aware of a growing divide between those who have access to forms of knowledge and those who do not. Increasing media freedom, as this blog has shown, is possible, but not without barriers of government regulation and international and cultural conflict. I doubt there will ever be an overarching set of rules for the Internet and what can and can’t be said, as the space itself is uncontainable and unpoliceable, but in having such a free space, those who have access to it have a voice that can shape future cultural understanding and provide a vehicle for democracy.
Violence in Israel and Gaza has spread from the battleground to the blogosphere this week with civilians, governments and journalists using the web to communicate with a global audience. With Israel still refusing to allow international journalists into Gaza, the burden has fallen to ‘citizen journalists’ using web-based technology to act as the eyes and ears of the media.
Muhammad Abushaban reports from Gaza City as one of the BBC's 'voices of Gaza
The BBC, who have been previously criticised for being both ‘pro Gaza’ and ‘pro Israel’ are illustrating their online coverage of the situation with case-studiesderived from the experiences of Palestinians living within different areas of the Gaza strip. Muhammad Abushaban describes his experiences of war from a place that both physically, and emotionally, the British press have no access to:
As I talk to you I can hear the F-16s flying overhead. Planes and helicopters fly early in the day. At night, the Israelis shoot from ships off the Gaza coast. I hope the Israelis won’t invade on the ground, but I suspect they might. We have no way of protecting ourselves if they do invade – we depend only on God to save us!
By citizen-journalist standards, this approach might seem tame. Technology such as Twitter has removed the need to use a media outlet as a means to inform or persuade the world and has allowed thousands of people from all over the world to voice their own opinions and experiences from the conflict, at a rate of around one new response every five seconds.
A snapshot of opinions on the Israel/Gaza conflict from Twitter
Whilst Twitter, (an innovation which notably took only three days to develop) has provided a window into the heart of the conflict, there are obviously issues of trust and bias, truth and uncertainty that would normally be ironed out by a so-called ‘responsible media outlet’.
One of Twitter’s key assets is that it is free for anyone to use, in order to communicate any message they choose. This afternoon, the Israel Consulate held a press conference on Twitter, in order to answer questions from the public and no doubt, ‘set the record straight’ on Gaza, following a series of calls for a cease-fire. During the press conference, the consulate repeatedly stated:
Israel does not target civilians like Hamas does
The consulate apologised for every civilian that was hit in the air strikes, describing them as ‘human shields of Hamas’.
And as if they needed to illustrate their point of view further, the Israel Defence Force (IDF) have set up a channel on You Tube with footage of bombs being dropped on Hamas targets during Airstrikes. The channel already has over 10000 followers.
So what does this mean for press and broadcasting freedom? Whilst the dizzying number of new digital communications tools give those who may be on the periphery greater agency and ability to make comment, it also enhances the voice of those who already have power and influence within the global arena, allowing them to take a greater stand for what they are doing.
We must not forget, however, is that despite all the tweeting, blogging, and posting to the virtual world, the conflict is still out there, those debating it online stand merely as observers and recorders rather than agents of change.
Fair Comment 