Remember the likes of Alejandro Blanco and Marius Vizer — and better be on guard. Or maybe Sergey Bubka from the Ukraine? There is one thing for sure — the more rounds it takes the more dangerous the scenario gets for the favorite, Thomas Bach. But who are Mr.
The following forecast is based on interviews with IOC members, IF presidents, longtime observers of the olympic movement as well as journalistic research. He has hired Berlin-based lawyer Christian Schertz, who continues to send emails and letters with threatening content to journalists for doing their job — which means: they investigated, they asked questions. Over the next few weeks I am going to offer you some basic information, some PR stuff see below : , some exclusive stuff see below and check the blog , a lot of rumors, analysis and as much independent journalistic research as I am able to do.
I do think the legions of well paid spin doctors and olympic PR people can not really direct me since I am not cashing for their advertising campaigns on my blog — this is a huge difference to other olympic devoted online and offline media. My blog posts will be written in German as well, with some exceptions. If you are interested in really independent journalism and research, consider to support my crowdfunding project, buy my ebook and be a part of this new journalism project.
I recommend, of course, my special offer — check it out. Some polls, basic information, PR and useful links — please, take your time! Have your vote, please. Eine Summary der gestrigen Email- und Wortwechsel. Denn Fragen werden nicht wirklich beantwortet. Mark Adams beispielsweise antwortet manchmal erst nach Wochen und dann auch nur mit wenigen Worten, meist ohne auf die Fragen und Details einzugehen.
World dictators do not have the right to exploit internal laws to justify violation of human rights. Freedom of expression constitutes the most important principle of human rights and the first step toward democracy. And, of course, that means freedom for the opponents of the government because it is evident that the supporters are free to praise and eulogize the government all the time.
It is the opponents who should be free to disseminate their views in any way they wish. Otherwise, it is evident that the majority that has come to power would grant itself every right and prerogative. Therefore, the followers of divine religions in a secular government, the secular individuals in a theocracy and the advocates of capitalism in a socialist government should be able to express and promulgate their beliefs in total freedom and enjoy immunity from persecution. On the basis of human rights criteria, the only instance when restrictions could be applied to human rights concerns propaganda aimed at inciting war and discord.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has banned any declarations that could lead to war on a national or international scale.
That is why in some countries, including Germany, any discus-. Naturally, this ban is justified in the sense that it averts wars. On that basis, we must avoid issues that justify war. That is why we must be alert and take heed that news and reports are broadcast and published correctly and are not exploited by war mongers. Unfortunately, there are a few in the media that pay less attention to that issue. For example, when they publish reports on the arrest of a terrorist or criminal who is not of Christian faith, or is an immigrant in Europe, then after the name of the offender they immediately mention his faith or nationality and in so doing indirectly turn the attention of their readers to the fact that the culprit or criminal does not belong to their faith or nationality and that his civilization is different to theirs.
We must take heed not to fall into the trap of the war theorists, thus allowing the Middle East wars to be justified. It is the individual who should be held accountable for the crime he has committed, not his religion or the civilization to which he belongs. Therefore, publishing the religion or nationality of offenders in the media is wrong and conducive to war. Another issue that should be highlighted in respect of freedom of expression is censorship, which is sometimes open and blatant; meaning that the government openly makes the publication of any book or journal subject to the issuance of a permit.
And, naturally, it is very severe in respect of its opponents. This means that a writer or artist who needs to obtain the consent of the government and attain a permit but knows that he does not have total freedom to publish his work, tries to think and write in a manner that would allow his work to be published.
That is how literary potential and artistic creativity are destroyed. Such a form of censorship exists in certain countries, including Iran. In Iran publication of a book is subject to obtaining the written consent of the Culture and Islamic Guidance Ministry. No publisher is allowed to publish a book without a permit. The most significant problem concerning censorship in Iran is that it is not based on any criteria but is dependent on the viewpoint and preference of the individual commissioned to read the book to determine whether or not it merits a permit.
The existing variety and assortment of viewpoints on similar subjects have thrown writers and publishers into a state of confusion and led to a growing disruption in the sphere of book publication. Even translations of well-known literary works are not exempt from the sharp blade of censorship. They do not allow just any book to be published, or they force the translator to omit sections of the book.
More importantly, sometimes a book is granted a permit only to be rejected by the prosecutor and the Press Court afterwards, who subsequently punish the translator and publisher. In other words, even obtaining a permit cannot provide the writer or translator with a safety margin and save him from punishment.
The government in Iran has also filtered many internet sites, and sent a number of bloggers to prison on the charge of criticizing the government. Censorship in Iran often becomes so extreme that one cannot help feeling astonished. For instance, according to the Press Law, any criticism of the constitution in the press and public media is forbidden, and any infringements would lead to the closure of that publication.
The sorrowful tale of censorship in Iran has always been the same. In other words, under the previous regime we also encountered extreme censorship. It was only in the first year of the revolution that we enjoyed a better situation. In the subsequent years, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran would not allow books that opposed the official ideology of the ruling establishment to be published. Moreover, recently a decision was made not to issue permits for publication of works or production of films that promoted nihilism, secularism and feminism. It is interesting to note that the ruling system does not consider feminism as valid, because it regards.
Currently, several of our best journalists and writers are also in prison. In the past three years, a great number of publications have had their licences revoked or have been banned. The areas off-limits to the press are becoming wider by the day. There is even a ban on reporting of certain court cases.
She was subsequently sent to prison on the orders of an inspector. Sadly, after two days her dead body was delivered to her family. The prison officials alleged that she had committed suicide. But of course the allegation is neither compatible with the evidence presented in the case nor accepted by her parents, who maintain that their daughter was killed in prison. Another kind of censorship, which is not as apparent as the first kind, yet acts more vigorously, is a censorship that is rife in some Western countries, such as America.
In such instances, the government does not officially and openly impede publication of books and media, nor does it incarcerate an individual for the crime of writing. Yet, it acts in such a way that opponents are prevented from embarking on any form of activity. They only promote ideas that they agree with and are not prepared to publish other work.
In such a system, independent media and non-affiliated publications do not have the chance to compete against the big publishers and are soon crushed. Thus, the print and publication market remains in the hands of a few, destroying literary and artistic creativity. For example, if we look at the list of shareholders of major media corporations in America, we see the names of five big corporations on all the lists. These five big corporations, which are the principal owners of American media, control and manage assets that amount to five thousand billion dollars.
This concentration and accumulation of capital becomes so powerful that it eclipses the role of the individual in society. The big media merge together; they become bigger and bigger and more and more powerful. And subsequently Time Warner formed a merger with A. The new corporation holds assets amounting to over billion dollars, and it controlled over media companies in This is one instance which I wanted to draw your attention to.
And what is more interesting is that the heads of the aforementioned companies all belong to the same faction and share the same ideology. Thus, an independent-minded writer or journalist who holds a different view to theirs has very little prospect. The aforementioned concentration of power operates with such force that opponents are robbed of all initiative. According to the most recent statistics, there are even some 50 million people in the world who have never seen a telephone. In such a world, how could a writer or artist create artistic work and make it accessible to his or her fans?
This is perhaps the reason why the majority of literary and artistic prizes are awarded to artists and writers in the developed and industrial world. This is an unequal race. If a strong runner races against a crippled one, then the result is known even before the race commences. Winning in such a race is nothing to be proud of. They encounter innumerable obstacles whilst attempting to make their voices heard by the rest of the world. To that end, they need your help. I hope that following your productive discussions in this seminar you will be able to offer your colleagues effective solutions.
Since we are on the subject of covert censorship, I would like to highlight another type of censorship found in the digital world. In addition to filtering, which is prevalent in many countries and prevents writers from communicating their messages to their target audience, the digital gap that exists between the industrial developed countries and the non-industrial developing ones helps writers and artists in the developed world to reach their target audience and ensure that their voices are heard by them, while those in the developing world do not enjoy that opportunity.
What is the relation between the media and violent conflict? Do the media have a responsibility to prevent the outbreak of violence? Moreover, can they contribute to peace-building activities? And if so: how? The conference took place in Bonn from 2 to 4 June Speakers and guests included journalists from print, radio, television and online, as well as development practitioners, academics, government representatives and media activists from altogether 70 different countries.
The role of the media in conflict and peacebuilding was thus reflected upon from an international as well as explicitly inter-disciplinary perspective. The media as an agent for peace and an agent of war Participants agreed that the impact of the media on peace and conflict dynamics should not be underestimated. They also have a direct bearing and influence on the way that people think and act. In his Keynote Address State Secretary of the German Foreign Office, Georg Boomgarden, elaborated upon this observation by pointing to both the constructive and the potentially destructive effects of the media.
Journalists, in other words, may either promote peace and reconciliation or facilitate war and hatred. As it became very clear in the remainder of. Changes in the global media landscape Overall, it can be stated that the media sector has witnessed a rapid growth and expansion over the past couple of years, particularly in developing regions. An increase in available channels of communication has resulted in a more diverse array of broadcasters reaching ever larger audiences.
Certainly, the global expansion and diversification of media channels, which is especially apparent in the advent of new information and communication technologies, holds some great potential for encouraging non-violence and peace. However, as many contributions to the conference aptly illustrated, easier access to media platforms is not always and necessarily a good thing. On the contrary, it has coincided with an increase of voices promoting hostility and violence. The media has a responsibility Given the often detrimental effect of media messages, there was an overall consensus in the conference that journalists have a responsibility for actively challenging or at least consciously avoiding the types of broadcasts that fuel violent conflict.
Hence, one of the central questions, which implicitly ran through all the session was: What can and should be done — concretely — to minimize the involvement of media outlets in war mongering whilst at the same time maximizing or enlarging the spaces available to them for promoting peacebuilding efforts? To be sure, the media, on its own, will hardly be the long-awaited panacea for ending all wars and bringing about global peace. Notwithstanding this caveat, however, the conference succeeded in identifying a number of conditions, ideas and recommendations for strengthening the potential contribution of the media to fostering peaceful co-existence.
Freedom of the press is essential First, and perhaps most importantly, in order to play any constructive role at all, panelists frequently pointed out that the media needs to be independent and free. Indeed, as Georg Boomgarden had it, freedom of the press is an essential factor for ensuring a democratic culture of non-violence and peace. However, the conference heard of frequent obstacles to press freedom. Often, reporting is seriously hampered by the restriction of movement in conflict zones.
Journalists are denied access to certain places. Muamar Orabi, Director General of the Palestinian television channel Watan-TV, explained how it was almost impossible for Palestinian journalists to get past checkpoints and thus into Jerusalem, Nablus, or Gaza. Similarly, the Chief Editor of an Israeli television channel, David Witzthum, spoke of the difficulties for Israeli journalists to report from places such as the West Bank or Gaza Strip. As it were, political leaders who encroach upon media channels for the purpose of furthering a populist agenda seriously compromise democratic freedom.
More often than not, governmental monopolization is accompanied by disciplinary sanctions in order to silence critical voices. Although new information and communication technologies are making it increasingly difficult for governments to control the flow of information, freedom of the press remains as yet a very rarely realized value across the world.
Censorship laws as well as the intimidation and harassment of journalists are the norm rather than the exception in many places. This holds true for the Asian region — as vividly illustrated by Vincent Brossel from Reporters without Borders — as it does for the African continent. Indeed, the number of journalists being murdered as a consequence of publishing critical information is on the rise worldwide.
In the end, the conference fostered general acknowledgement of the fact that journalists work most effectively if there is — in the words of Voice of America Director Danforth W. Freedom of the press may be an important precondition for reporting on violent conflicts effectively and responsibly. In and by itself, however, a supportive political and legal environment will hardly suffice to make the media appear as an agent of peacebuilding.
Here, the main part of the conference went one step further and also asked what journalists themselves could do to promote peace. The former uses only few sources and confines itself to simply reporting the facts on what is going on at a very particular moment in time. By contrast, the latter would seek to broaden its coverage so as to take the wider context of a conflict into account.
This would include not least a detailed consideration of the root causes of violence. Arguably, however, this is a lot easier for the press than for TV journalists, who usually do not have the time to engage in any deeper analysis. Objectivity and impartiality Obviously, peace journalism requires an objective and impartial approach. Yet, especially when reporting from conflict zones, it is not always so easy to maintain a professional distance. Salameh B. Nematt, former bureauchief of Al Hayat, was particularly outspoken against the bias prevalent in both local and international coverage of the war in Iraq.
Also, journalists speaking at the. Although there was agreement that bias should be kept to a minimum, other speakers cautioned that an entirely objective and neutral coverage of conflicts may not be really possible. Every issue can be approached from many different angles and perspectives. We therefore may have to accept a diversity of viewpoints and concentrate our efforts rather on promoting professional and responsible attitudes among journalists. Journalists, that is, need to take care not to cater to widespread feelings of distrust and hatred in their respective audiences, thereby unwittingly facilitating the possible escalation of a conflict into violence.
The media as an agent for peacebuilding. The conference not only considered how the media should passively cover violent conflicts it also sought to identify concrete ways in which the media could become more directly involved in — and, indeed, actively contribute to — different peacebuilding efforts. The media can expose wrongdoings In any setting, but particularly in conflict and postconflict situations, the media has the central task of uncovering war crimes, human rights violations, corruption and similar wrongdoings.
Awareness raising is usually the first step toward instigating a concerted political process. The media can contribute to early warning The discussion also addressed the endurance of particularly the international media when covering conflict issues. Once the open exchange of violence is over, many journalists lose interest and move on to the next global hotspot.
Post-conflict developments, which are often highly precarious, remain very much neglected in the international news. The media might provide a much-needed forum for dialogue between conflicting parties, thus serving as a bridge across cultural and religious divides. As was also stressed by Claude Anthony, local journalists may use this method to ease tensions between conflicting groups and contribute to peacebuilding. The media can transport messages of peace and unity Apart from providing a platform for inter-cultural exchange, the media may also directly communicate content promoting certain values, which are conducive to peacebuilding.
Indeed, as John Marks, the President, and Susan Collin Marks, the Senior Vice President of Search for Common Ground, remarked in their presentation, conflict does not only, if at all, have a rational side to it, but also involves people emotionally. Precisely this emotional aspect can be addressed by certain media formats, be it for the better or worse.
They showed clips from TV dramas carrying messages which promote tolerance between diverse ethnic groups. Media messages can also be used for the purpose of facilitating national unity, for example by covering certain sports events. To this end, a number of recommendations were made by various speakers. Taking advantage of the interactive features of Web 2.
Parallel to this, the audience ought to be better equipped to discern objective and correct information from lies and propaganda. This could serve as a useful early warning instrument and help coordinate concerted counter-measures. Moreover, Susanne Frueh, the Chief of External Relations at the Peacebuilding Support Office of the United Nations, introduced the idea of establishing a fund for quickly allocating resources to the production of emergency information against any type of hate media.
Finally, the conference identified some overarching measures, which ought to be taken in order to improve the capacities of international as well as local media to either directly or indirectly support peacebuilding efforts. In particular, there is a clear need for setting up more capacity building and training programs for journalists on the various ways in which the media can contribute to non-violence and peace.
This is especially important in developing countries, for these are the most vulnerable to violent conflict. Not only this but, as Stephen King, the Director of the BBC World Service Trust remarked, the rapid growth of media outlets over the past couple of years has led to a large number of untrained information providers. Closer cooperation between international media broadcasters Finally, in order to agree upon common journalistic standards and values, coordinate assistance to media sources in developing countries, and set-up international training programs for media workers from all over the world, there is a space for closer cooperation between international media broadcasters.
Dilemmas eines Herausgebers
Whether based in Asia, America, Europe or the Middle East, large broadcasting organizations should coordinate their efforts and work closely together toward the promotion of peace. The session addressed the role of the media in conflicts and war-torn societies. David Astley pointed out that from the presently about 40 countries in the world involved in violent conflict, half are located in the region covered by the Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union ABU.
In addition, many states, which have just recovered from war, remain highly unstable and may revert back to violence at any time. Reflecting on the role of the media in a bit more detail, Astley especially stressed the need for more objective, detailed and elaborate broadcasting. By contrast, the former would broaden its coverage of a conflict to include a consideration of the root causes of violence; that is: it would encourage a deeper understanding of its historical, socio-political and economic background, avoiding any representation of winners and losers. Responsibility and journalism are indisputably linked to one another, especially when it comes to reporting on violent conflicts.
Indeed, in many places skepticism toward the idea of peace journalism prevails. There is, therefore, a clear need to actively promote greater awareness amongst journalists on the role of the media in violent conflicts. Whereas it may make sense. As Astley pointed out, approximately seven to eight hundred thousand people work in the electronic media alone. While this number appears large at first sight, we need to keep in mind that it represents less than one percent of all the professionals working in this field.
Are we reaching the right people? Moreover, Astley observed that most of the journalistic professionals attending conferences and seminars on the role of the media in peace and conflict issues were from management level. For, at the end of the day, it is these who translate the values of peace journalism into concrete practice.
Are we reaching them in the right way? Finally, we may want to also ask ourselves whether we are reaching journalists in the right way. Although some very good publications on media reporting in war and conflict zones exist, they are usually writing from an overtly academic perspective, with a propensity of being highly theoretical. In fact, many scholars tend to forget that the average journalist is not one of them. Many practitioners feel that academic writings contain very little information or advice, which might be directly relevant to them in their daily work.
Especially smaller broadcasters needed in-house training programs and standardized editorial guidelines. Georg Boomgarden stressed that a free and diverse media landscape is a precondition for democratic structures to function and that a democratically vested press always feels obliged to promote a culture of non-violence. It is thus that the media are a central factor for ensuring peace.
This is especially important in postconflict situations, where the media help to re-establish the trust of the population in government and accompany reconstruction processes. He then went on to discuss three related observations, pertaining 1 to the media itself, 2 to the consumers of information and 3 to the political environment in which the media operate. The role of local radio stations in promoting the Rwandan genocide is a drastic and gruesome example of media-incited hatred and violence. Hence, the media have a responsibility. They need to be constantly aware of the potentially dangerous, even devastating consequences of their messages, something which particularly applies to correspondents broadcasting from conflict and war-torn countries.
However, the influence of the media may also be used for good purposes. The media should not simply inform but also educate the people toward the promotion of peace. However, the majority of media are still not independent and free. At the most extreme end, it may be pointed out that the number of journalists killed doing their work remains high. Media freedom is endangered when broadcasters fear for and risk their lives.
However, Boomgarden also pointed out that new technologies, particularly the Internet, have made it easier for people to circumvent such restrictions. Natalie Majcenovic. Consumers of media messages need to be critical A central element in educating people, in this sense, is to enable them to critically appraise the messages they consume.
DE, Germany. The number of radio and TV broadcasters with global reach is growing constantly. Ever increasing numbers of people around the world use the Internet. These are outstanding conditions for dialogue with foreign cultures and exchanging information about the most varied religious, political and societal concepts. The international media and the Internet can foster understanding and strengthen tolerance. But by the same token the global information exchange gives populists, fanatics and terrorists a platform.
Their threats and attacks win them global attention. How could they contribute to the dialogue of values? What should their strategy consist of in the short and long term? How can effective evaluation procedures be implemented? Uta Thofern opened the session by remarking that while global information exchange is positive for many parts of the world, the same technologies also give voice to extremists and terrorists.
This underlines both the chances and risks that globalized media present. Moreover, the audience is much larger during crises. Hence, the media has a very high responsibility to be as genuine and objective as possible. Danforth W. Austin explained that Voice of America VoA is currently re-evaluating how to do business. The days of shortwave radio are over. With the right software, technology makes it possible for anyone to become a broadcaster.
More resources need to be established for international media training. Most journalists want to do a better job but lack of professional traditions and resources stand in the way. There is a great need for improving the media regulatory climate. It is not enough to train journalists; they need a legal environment that supports them. Better access to information should be provided. Along the same lines, there is a need for more freedom of information and increased transparency. Austin emphasized that these values need to be spread to journalists in developing countries.
In the end, access, accountability and transparency must be demanded. We must divide the line between governmentfunded reporting and government-funded propaganda. Honest, fair and objective reporting should be the ultimate goal. The task of the media is, quite simply, to tell people what happens. Notwithstanding this observation, however, Hijjawi went on to argue that the Al Jazeera news network may yet have had a positive contribution to conflict prevention.
For example, during the Danish cartoon affair it tried to put issues into perspective, thereby dampening religious violence. Stephen King pointed out that the ability of governments to control information is being considerably challenged by new technologies. However, this does not necessarily mean that the media are being used more responsibly. For example, the rapid increase of local radio stations in developing countries coincides with a surge of untrained information providers.
This can encourage ethnic violence. On the other hand, the media is. Erlends Calabuig criticized media coverage for facilitating the popular preconception according to which the world is experiencing an increase in conflicts. As it were, a recent report from the United States Institute for Peace shows a marked decline in wars both at the interstate and extra-state level. However, what we can do is try to mitigate the consequences. However, he also pointed to a BBC World Service study which found that the representation of conflicts by the media is often oversimplified, often preparing the grounds or instigating hate.
The primary steps to create such a mechanism would be: 1. To develop an alert system and make information available. To act as a clearing house on who does what. To design tools to analyze local media in those areas. To look at ourselves and examine the phrases we use. Discussion The discussion highlighted a lot of ways in which the international media could contribute to peacebuilding efforts and conflict prevention. Some things should not be. However, the difficulty of where to draw the line — and by whom it should be drawn — was also alluded to.
Whereas hate media are powerful in Web 1. Sixth, despite ongoing suspicion, in particular between the Western and Arab media networks, panelists also recognized the need for closer cooperation between international broadcasters, especially when it comes to agreeing on shared journalistic standards and values as well as in training media broadcasters.
Documentation of the Deutsche Welle Global Media Forum by Deutsche Welle - Issuu
Philip Rush. Nearly everywhere in Asia the factories are operating at full capacity and qualified workers are becoming a scarce resource.
Ten years of non-stop economic growth also show some stress syndromes: how to secure enough qualified staff, how to cope with the resulting enormous structural, social and demographic changes? What can be done about the big income gaps in many societies, the haves and have-nots? What is the connection between economic disparities among populations and social peace?
Frank Appel opened the session by highlighting that war and conflict have a direct impact on supply issues. Moreover, they go hand in hand with human tragedy, which in turn presents a logistical challenge, since it requires the rapid and effective delivery of aid.
Business in the Asia-Pacific region has expanded considerably over the past couple of years.
In collaboration with
Indeed, there seems to be a correlation between economic growth, on the one hand, and corruption, poverty and violence, on the other. The assumption is that by global trade will have doubled. According to Appel, education is the key to success in this business environment. In recognition of this, Deutsche Post World Net have started a training center for its personnel and have trained 7, people so far.
The expert logistical capacities that DHL are able to bring to bear mean that they can supply goods to wherever they are needed. Mr Appel then addressed environmental issues, which arise around the logistics and transport industry. He stated that 40 percent of all carbon emissions come from cargo, however DHL is committed to a reduction of 10 percent on every container, truck, etc. In his closing remarks he stated that companies can utilize their considerable resources to help in disaster reduction and economic growth. Indrajit Banerjee began the panel discussion by stating that the title of the discussion is very apt.
The Asian media landscape is a jungle, which is transforming rapidly; advances in consumer needs are becoming more and more important. He claimed that the Asian media landscape is constantly evolving. Recently, China surpassed the United States as the country with the highest number of Internet users. In India, the film industry is the largest in the world and nine million new mobile phones are sold each month. In Asia there is a phenomenal growth in print media. Banerjee went on to point out four important developments in the Asian media landscape: 1.
First, there is a growing commercialization of the media, resulting in a more intense competition between media producers and thereby affecting the content of the messages. Second, commercialization is accompanied by a conglomeration of media systems. Third, there is an increase in media connectivity, particularly due to the growing importance of the Internet in the Asian region.
Not least as a result of this, we can. Banerjee then listed the current tensions running through the media systems in Southeast Asia. The first is with regard to the commercial viability of media stations. All media systems regard it as fundamentally important to maintain public interest; however this can produce a unipolar view.
Banerjee said that citizen journalism allows a differing viewpoint to that of certain media organizations as citizen journalism is less constrained by public interest issues. A second set of tensions he outlined was with regard to the developing nature of media systems. Local capacity is still growing in many countries and as such there has been a tendency in the past to rely excessively upon foreign expertise.
This naturally may have had an influence on the media output. Therefore a balance has to be struck between excessive reliance on foreign expertise and gaining the necessary skills. Further tensions outlined by Banerjee related to the friction between mainstream and alternative media, between the protection of the freedom of expression and the responsibility of reporting as well as, finally, between governmental regulatory frameworks and emerging new media technologies.
Sucharita Eashwar began by making a comparative analysis of India and China with regard to economic factors. Both India and China have huge human resources and natural capital. Also India has evolved into a services-led economy, with 50 percent of its total population being young. Last year 3.
Eashwar then made the point that India is a stable democracy and because of this change is slow. Wir legten unseren Publikationstermin auf den 8. So mussten wir wieder einmal erfahren, was jedem droht, der das Machtmonopol der Partei in Frage stellt. Henry Kissinger schrieb dazu am Und auch das stellt die Herausgeber vor ein Dilemma. Das ist nun wirklich ein Problem, das uns alle betrifft. Dennoch ist es so, dass aus den Millionen von Blogs eine begrenzte Anzahl hervorgegangen ist, um deren Kommentare, Analysen, Meinungen kein Herausgeber einer amerikanischen Zeitung herumkommt.
Aber mich interessiert hier nicht nur die Frage, woher ernsthafte journalistische Arbeit kommen soll. Dieser Essay beruht auf einem Vortrag, den der Autor am Harper's Magazine , October , S.
Related Peking 2008 - Bringen die Olympischen Spiele die Demokratie nach China? (German Edition)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved