Latest news with #mediaEthics
The Independent
03-07-2025
- Business
- The Independent
CBS News anchor swipes at parent company for settling Trump lawsuit ‘it said is without basis in law and fact'
John Dickerson ended Wednesday's broadcast of CBS Evening News by subtly swiping at the network's corporate boss Paramount for shelling out $16 million to settle Donald Trump's lawsuit over a 60 Minutes interview, noting that the company itself said the president's case 'is without basis in law and fact.' The veteran anchor's commentary was even more pointed on the show he hosts for the network's streaming platform, as he noted that the settlement 'poses a new obstacle' for the network's journalists. 'Can you hold power to account after paying it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you've traded away that trust?' Dickerson pondered. Journalists and free speech advocates have absolutely pilloried Paramount for capitulating to the media-bashing president in a case that legal experts described as frivolous and the network's own lawyers said was completely without merit, warning that it sets an increasingly dangerous precedent. 'Behavior that gets rewarded gets repeated,' the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression stated. 'This settlement will only embolden the president to continue his flurry of baseless lawsuits against the press — and against the American people's ability to hear the news free from government intrusion.' Beyond that, the company is facing the threat of civil litigation and congressional probes over allegations that it violated anti-bribery statutes, as Paramount needs the Trump administration to approve its massive $8.4 billion merger with Skydance Media. Paramount, for its part, has insisted that the lawsuit is 'completely separate from, and unrelated to' the transaction and the FCC approval process. At the end of Wednesday's telecast of CBS Evening News, Dickerson delivered a fairly straightforward recap of the settlement and what led up to it, which was the editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then-Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris just ahead of the 2024 election. 'Under the terms of the settlement worked out with a mediator, Paramount will pay $16 million to cover Mr. Trump's legal costs. Whatever's left will go to his presidential library. No money will be paid directly to the president,' Dickerson noted. 'The settlement does not require an apology or expression of regret for the editing of the interview, which was done in accordance with long-held CBS News standards and widely accepted journalistic practices.' The news host also pointed out that despite Trump's allegations that CBS ran a different portion of Harris' answer to a question during a Face the Nation promotional clip to make her look better, the network has repeatedly denied this. Additionally, Dickerson explained that the 60 Minutes transcript revealed that the president falsely claimed the network had pulled a response from another question asked of Harris and 'deceptively edited' it in. After telling viewers that a senior Paramount executive told shareholders this week that the corporation only settled to avoid what he called the 'high and somewhat unpredictable costs of legal defense, Dickerson brought up that this took place as the company is looking to close the Skydance merger. 'That deal needs Trump administration approval,' he concluded. 'The corporation said the settlement of the Trump lawsuit is completely separate from and unrelated to the merger. In the end, Paramount decided to settle a suit it said is without basis in law and fact and an affront to the First Amendment.' Over on CBS Evening News Plus, which airs on Paramount's streamers, Dickerson was even less sparing in his criticism of the network's corporate overlords. 'We pride ourselves on our BS detector, so it ought to work on ourselves, too. When it doesn't, the stakes are real, a loss of public trust, the spread of misinformation,' he said in a monologue focused on Paramount's payoff to the president. 'A visitor to our newsrooms might wonder why we debate a single word for so long, why it takes hours to answer the simple question, what is this story about, why there's a cry of frustration when a detail is off by an inch,' Dickerson continued. 'That is what it looks like when it is deeply felt, when the audience's concerns become ours, passed by bucket brigade from the subjects of our stories to correspondents, to producers, to editors, fact-checkers, and writers.' Noting that the 'obstacles to getting it right are many,' he then declared that the settlement 'poses a new obstacle' before asking: 'Can you hold power to account after paying it millions? Can an audience trust you when it thinks you've traded away that trust?' In the end, he pointed out, 'the audience will decide that' and that job of CBS News' journalists is 'to show up' and 'honor what we witness on behalf of the people we witness it for.' The conglomerate, which is hoping to complete its merger later this month, could soon be staring down lawsuits and investigations over claims that it 'bribed' the president in order to push the Skydance deal through. 'Today is a dark day for press freedom. Paramount's spineless decision to settle Trump's baseless and patently unconstitutional lawsuit is an insult to the journalists of '60 Minutes' and an invitation to Trump to continue targeting other news outlets,' Freedom of the Press Foundation said in a statement. The advocacy group is also gearing up to pursue legal action on behalf of shareholders to 'stop this affront' and hold the company's board accountable. Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who had warned Paramount in May that a settlement could potentially violate laws against bribery, promised to challenge the settlement in both Congress and the courts. 'This looks like bribery in plain sight,' Warren said on Wednesday. 'Paramount folded at the same time it needs Trump's approval for a billion-dollar merger. I'm calling for an investigation into whether any anti-bribery laws were broken, and I'm working on a new bill to rein in this kind of corruption.' Meanwhile, CBS News staffers past and present are expressing despair and fear over what the settlement means for the once-revered network and its newsmagazine, which has already lost two respected newsroom leaders due to tensions surrounding the company's handling of the lawsuit. 'No one is a fan of Shari right now,' one network staffer told The Independent, referencing Paramount chair Shari Redstone, who was the driving force behind the decision to settle. 'People are still angry and frustrated and morale is very low.' Former CBS News correspondent Armen Keteyian called the settlement 'the nadir for the network' and 'a breach of the public trust Murrow, Cronkite, Hewitt and thousands of us worked decades to build.'
Forbes
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
You Are Not A Journalist: The Diddy Trial And Credible Media
Members of the media report before Court Opens outside the Southern District of New York Federal ... More Court, as jury selection begins in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex crimes trial in New York on May 5, 2025. Jury selection begins Monday in New York in the blockbuster federal sex trafficking trial of music mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs, who stands accused of years of harrowing abuse. (Photo by kena betancur / AFP) (Photo by KENA BETANCUR/AFP via Getty Images) As the Diddy trial continues to make headlines, the rise of cosplay journalism driven by influencers and content creators sharing unsubstantiated claims is eroding the foundation of trustworthy news. The result: audiences are increasingly unable to tell credible journalism apart from mere imitation. It is getting out of hand. The transformation of media consumption cannot be used to compromise the tenets of journalism—or the identity of the journalist. From the recent red carpet antics to the courtroom chaos surrounding the Diddy trial, one thing is painfully clear: we are witnessing an epidemic of cosplay journalism. According to the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics, the core mission of journalism is to 'seek truth and report it,' to 'minimize harm,' and to 'be accountable and transparent.' Yet in today's media landscape, these principles are often overlooked in favor of virality, speed, and personal branding. The SPJ further emphasizes, 'Ethical journalism treats sources, subjects, colleagues and members of the public as human beings deserving of respect,' and warns against pandering to lurid curiosity. This is exactly where cosplay journalism fails—where the spectacle outweighs truth, and rumor outweighs fact. According to Muck Rack's 2025 State of Journalism Report, 36% of journalists say misinformation and disinformation are the most serious threats to the future of journalism—more concerning than even declining public trust or funding. This is exactly why cosplay journalism is more than just a branding issue; it's a credibility crisis. Journalists who are tenured in this game are exhausted. I often scroll through my LinkedIn timeline and witness the expression of a plethora of practicing journalists—some struggling to find new positions, others whose quality work never sees the light of day. Some with decades in the game are simply disillusioned, openly sharing their disappointment with the current state of the media. That story deserves its own deep dive. For now, I want to focus on how this has played out in coverage of the Diddy trial. Media and television crews are set up outside federal court before the Sean "Diddy" Combs' sex ... More trafficking trial in New York City on May 15, 2025. Sean "Diddy" Combs used violence and threats of reputational ruin to control women he abused for years, New York jurors heard May 12 during opening statements of the federal sex trafficking trial that was followed by the case's initial graphic testimonies. The panel of 12 jurors and six alternates responsible for determining Combs's fate heard of the famed artist's explosive outbursts and an attempt to preserve his own reputation and power of celebrity through bribery. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP) (Photo by ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images) Yes, it is true. There is no official requirement to become a journalist. There is no licensing board or formal certification. However, that is not what I am referring to because that is not the problem here. I am referring to the actual practice of proper ethical journalism. A 2024 report from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism found that only 40% of Americans say they trust most news most of the time. The collapse of trust is understandable when anyone with a camera and a YouTube channel can claim the title of 'journalist.' Since its official commencement last May, the Diddy trial has served as the ultimate opportunity for the media to feed the algorithmic needs. From social media influencers, bloggers, YouTubers, to actual journalists and legal analysts flocking to the Southern District of New York Court in downtown Manhattan. For all of them, this was an opportunity to capture a moment in hip-hop and American music history. However, those who are indeed social media influencers, bloggers, and YouTubers with no journalistic intent or background are only flocking to lower Manhattan to obtain content. Some of these social media figures have traveled across the country, some even asking their audience for CashApp donations to survive their stay in New York City to 'cover' this trial. Some of them operate rather as new age paparazzi. Without a doubt, this is one of the biggest trials of the decade and calls for such attention. And it is from this experience and manner that their subscribers are retrieving their content, finding their takes raw, unfiltered, and valuable, they are under the impression that the success of such content has now qualified themselves to take on the label of journalist. Now this, is certainly an erroneous thought and act. The aforementioned order of behaviors does not make such social media influencers, bloggers, or YouTubers sudden journalists. Absolutely, never. They are undeniably social media figures. But a journalist? No. NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MAY 12: Media are set up outside during the continuation of the jury selection ... More phase of the Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial at the Southern District Manhattan Federal court on May 12, 2025 in New York City. Combs has been charged with sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy, and transporting to engage in prostitution. He has been in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York since his arrest last September, and has pleaded not guilty on all charges. (Photo by) Many can't tell the difference—and cosplay journalists straight up exploit that confusion. According to Pew Research, approximately 40% of U.S. adults who get news on social media say inaccuracy is the aspect they dislike most—for example, unverified facts, "fake news," or unreliable sources. Yet even with that awareness, their subscribers, drawn in by raw and unfiltered coverage, begin to believe that going viral qualifies someone to be called a journalist. That is an erroneous and dangerous belief. Oxford defines a journalist as someone 'who earns his or her living by editing or writing for newspapers, magazines, etc.' This is the traditional comprehension of the identity of a journalist. And it still stands, as the most credible journalists are associated with media outlets. In my opinion, Florida's shield law offers the clearest and most comprehensive definition of a journalist, and should be adopted as a universal standard. According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Florida Statute 90.5015(1)(a) defines a journalist as: 'A person regularly engaged in collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting, or publishing news, for gain or livelihood, who obtained the information sought while working as a salaried employee of, or independent contractor for, a newspaper, news journal, news agency, press association, wire service, radio or television station, network, or news magazine.' This is pretty much a universal understanding of what makes one a journalist. However, it is fair to say in contemporary times, journalists with built credibility have been operating through their own modes of media—be it radio and podcasting like Pulitzer winner Karen Hunter or launching a YouTube media network like the renowned Don Lemon. As a matter of fact, 34% of journalists now self-publish outside of traditional newsrooms, and 61% of those report earning income from doing so, per Muck Rack. This shows that independence is not limited to informality, it still demands training, ethics, and trust-building. However, it was not Hunter's sole ability to write and Lemon's diction that catapulted them to high credibility status—it was their compassionate wandering curiosity, personable deliverance, and investigative rigor that earned them the trust of their audiences. NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MAY 27: Ex-assistant Capricorn Clark leaves after testifying in the Sean ... More "Diddy" Combs sex trafficking trial at Manhattan Federal Court on May 27, 2025 in New York City. Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty on all counts, which include a racketeering charge alleging the hip-hop pioneer was the leader of a sex crime ring that included drug-fueled sex parties through the use of force, threats, and violence. (Photo by) Now, let's just look at some of the credible music online publications and their journalists that are covering the Diddy trial, like seasoned hip-hop journalist Shawn Setaro at Complex alongside fellow Complex journalists including Jaelani Turner-Williams, Trey Alston, and Trace William Cowen where the platform is giving near daily updates. Then there is Bill Donahue who is giving consistent coverage on the Diddy trial over at Billboard. Rolling Stone has dedicated coverage by Nancy Dillon, Cheyenne Roundtree, and Jon Blistein—which is expected because of the historic exposé they published last year regarding the Diddy allegations which was published before the infamous Cassie lawsuit last November. It was the perfect example of hard credible journalism as they abided by pure journalistic ethics: from securing accuracy and verification with their six-month investigation, acquiring multiple sources between Diddy's friends, former employees, witnesses; they were transparent as they provided legal context and communicated the allegations as being allegations; they distinguished what was fact and what was rumor—something that YouTubers who cosplay as journalists will not ethically do as their platforms thrive off of unverified rumors; and Rolling Stone's investigation was apparent to hold no conflict of interest and operated independently. In the exposé, Rolling Stone balanced public interest versus potential harm by considering the sensitive details surrounding what was then unverified accusations. This speaks directly to another SPJ standard: 'Balance the public's need for information against potential harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance or undue intrusiveness.' Rolling Stone took months to investigate and was cautious in how they presented allegations—something cosplay journalists sidestep in favor of instant engagement. NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MAY 13: Janice Combs, mother of Sean "Diddy" Combs, departs for a lunch break ... More during Combs trial at Manhattan Federal Court on May 13, 2025 in New York City. Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty on all counts, which include a racketeering charge alleging the hip-hop pioneer was the leader of a sex crime ring that included drug-fueled sex parties by use of force, threats and violence. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) What needs to be understood by the public, those who do not hold the responsibility of journalists, is that it does not matter how believable a rumor may be. In the practice of journalism, if the journalist can't with their own lens verify such a rumor and confirm such to be a fact through evaluation of multiple credible sources—which may take at times months to years—they must disclose that it is indeed alleged. YouTubers use this alleged term all the time in their rants, in lieu of avoiding defamation claims. However, they misuse the term in a manner where even amid their broadcasts that they wish to label journalism, they still overwhelmingly insinuate truth. And of course, there are traditional mainstream news outlets who are also ethically covering the Diddy trial. Over at the New York Times, journalists in the likes of Julia Jacobs, Ben Sisario, and Anusha Bayya have taken on the platform's consistent coverage of the trial, while mainstream publications including The Washington Post, The New York Post, E! News, ABC News, and CNN are disseminating near hourly updates while also being mindful of the sensitive nature of such contextual exposure to domestic violence. Most of these outlets are referring readers to the National Domestic Violence Hotline through editor's notes—a necessary act particularly amid the week Cassie Ventura took the stand. Mainstream outlets at large are privy to proper press credentials to the trial, and hence have some of their most trusted reporters on the scene. Among the most visible are ABC News Chief Investigative Correspondent Aaron Katersky, CNN Legal Analyst Laura Coates, CBS News' Jericka Duncan, and News Nation's Laura Ingle who have all taken on the unbiased, classic inverted pyramid style of strictly fact-based broadcast reporting combined with investigative and analytical chops. NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MAY 05: Brian Steel, attorney for Sean "Diddy" Combs, arrives for the start of ... More trial at Manhattan Federal Court on May 05, 2025 in New York City. Jury selection begins in Combs' trial, who has been charged with sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy, and transporting to engage in prostitution. Combs has been in custody since his arrest last September and has pleaded not guilty on all charges. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images) Chasing around celebrities with a microphone for an unarranged so-called interview is not journalism. Using your voice to disseminate the talk of a rumor in the name of transparency is not journalism. It is amateurish and potential grounds for defamation. Journalists do not speak on unverified facts. As the SPJ states, 'Never deliberately distort facts or context, including visual information. Clearly label advocacy and commentary.' The problem with many content creators cosplaying as 'journalists' is that they distort under the guise of transparency, while disguising entertainment as fact. And if such is mentioned in a report, at most, the fact that it is an unverified variable of the article will be disclosed. The truth is many that cosplay the identity of a journalist are realistically aspiring media personalities. Many of these people are fixated on being in front of the camera. There are those who don't declare themselves as journalists but take on media roles in delivering commentary and asking figures basic questions (not necessarily an interview)—like DJs, actors, athletes—something that runs rampant in the form of podcasts, red carpets, and radio. They don't call themselves journalists, but they think they are in the same line of business. These people are wholeheartedly business tycoons. They see opportunity in the lane of media and they capitalize off of their appeal and reach—something that most ethical journalists have as actual practitioners within their unique networks and the dedicated journalism world—which is not at large. Most practicing journalists do not have grand social media followings because let's face the truth: reading is boring to most Internet users and social media paraders. According to Muck Rack's 2025 State of Journalism Report, 61% of journalists have fewer than 5,000 followers, and only 19% reach the 'micro-influencer' level of 10,000–100,000 followers. In journalism, visibility and virality are not the standard—credibility is. Then there are those raw tenured journalists that we love. They have been in the game for years and decades. Some of them, the above average broadcaster who once held a slot on a traditional media platform like a Joy Reid or Briahna Joy Gray. They are prime examples of those who have managed to pivot their journalism into modern modes of viral media. An act that journalists are starting to realize they must pivot to, but in the most integral and ethical manner. That is the power of real journalism. Not cosplay. Not content. Actual journalism. As the Diddy trial attracts the cosplayers of journalism, it's time we protect that distinction.
The Guardian
30-05-2025
- General
- The Guardian
'Trauma porn': media urged to reflect on role as victims' families speak at Bondi Junction stabbing inquest
Families of some of the victims of the Bondi Junction stabbings have told the inquest that intrusive media tactics compounded their grief and that inaccurate reporting was rife. The inquest was extended to examine media reporting in the immediate aftermath of the event and the impact on the families of the deceased, giving the public a rare insight into what it's like to be at the centre of the media spotlight. Ashley Wildey, whose partner, Dawn Singleton, was one of six victims of Joel Cauchi on Saturday 13 April 2024, said reporters gathered outside a family member's home the morning after the murders 'trying to get vision of me or my family there'. He said he was bombarded by 'highly inappropriate' messages from journalists 'lacking any genuine compassion' sent to his private social media accounts. He ignored them all. 'I feel that the media involvement to date has lacked empathy and truthfulness which has only served to exacerbate my pain and that of those who actually knew Dawn,' he told the New South Wales coroner's court. Wildey said reports that Singleton had been shopping for wedding makeup were not true. 'I am not aware of any basis for this claim,' he said. 'It is false. As far as I am aware, Dawn did not go into the Chanel store in Westfield Bondi Junction on the day.' Jade Young's mother, Elizabeth Young, said TV reporters appeared outside Jade's home the morning after the tragedy. Young, 74, said she was shocked by the graphic images of the aftermath broadcast on television. 'Images of Jade's lifeless body being worked on were cast throughout the world … including on a national channel's evening news,' she said. 'I learned a new phrase in the days after April 13: trauma porn.' Dawn's mother, Julie Singleton, said she received notes, emails, text messages and phone calls from reporters for months and she felt her privacy had been violated. And while she was forbidden by police from seeing her daughter's body inside Westfield, the media were permitted to film her daughter's body being taken out of the centre on a gurney. But Singletons's family reserved their strongest criticism for former 2GB broadcaster Ray Hadley who said her name on air while speaking to 3AW presenters Ross Stevenson and Russel Howcroft on the Monday morning before they had formally identified her body. 'I find it highly offensive that [he] appears to have capitalised on the unfathomable murder of my fiancee by immediately publicly broadcasting it on radio without even consulting her immediate family or myself,' Wildey said. Singleton: 'I felt that we as a family had a right to privacy. All this coverage distressed me and my family greatly.' Counsel assisting the coroner, Peggy Dwyer SC, said at the start of the five-week inquest 'the media will have to reflect deeply' on graphic footage shown in reports. Families are hoping the coroner will make recommendations which may protect families in the future. Young's brother, Peter Young, told the court: 'I trust you will also consider these factors when making recommendations from this inquest: Media guidelines on reporting mass casualty events. The moral injury caused by the media's monetisation of tragic events.' Hadley has been approached for comment. The 40-year extension of the North West Shelf gas project granted by the federal environment minister, Murray Watt, this week was welcomed in some media quarters, namely those owned by Western Australian billionaire Kerry Stokes. 'COOKING WITH GAS North West Shelf a goer', declared a strap on the front page on The Nightly, the West Australian's digital newspaper. Below that it featured an arresting image of the Victorian premier, Jacinta Allan, portrayed as a North Korean dictator with the headline ROGUE STATE. It was a reference to the Santos boss, Kevin Gallagher's comments comparing Victoria's investment climate to North Korea. Gallagher said Queensland, Western Australia, the Northern Territory and South Australia were 'very supportive jurisdictions' for onshore investment', while 'Victoria, North Korea, they're in a different category altogether'. The publication also published a banner ad from Woodside Energy along the bottom of the page: 'Produce reliable energy for today. Invest in new energy for tomorrow. Challenge accepted.' Meanwhile the West Australian's front page said 'Shelf Life', and a double page spread inside featured a large photo of a smiling Woodside chief executive, Meg O'Neill. According to the Herald Sun, Allan told a Victorian Chamber of Commerce of Industry event that Victoria had created more jobs than other states, which was 'not bad for a place apparently run like North Korea'. The premier told the Herald Sun [the comments from Santos] were driven by fear of competition. 'Victoria is growing, open for business, and investing in energy – including gas.' The Australian meanwhile chimed in with fart jokes. 'Is Victoria about to pass gas project despite discomfort with LNG?, the august organ asked on the eve of the decision. Sign up to Weekly Beast Amanda Meade's weekly diary on the latest in Australian media, free every Friday after newsletter promotion 'When it comes to gas Victoria is more likely to pass wind projects …' Comedian Kitty Flanagan told a Women in Media gala dinner on Wednesday night how delighted she was to be invited to give the second annual oration at the black tie event. The star of ABC TV hit Fisk said she thought the gig was a good fit given who had delivered the first oration in 2024. That was until she realised it was not fellow comic Kate McLennan of Katering Show fame but Kate McClymont, a 'serious investigative journalist' from the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age. Flanagan brought the house down, and McClymont, who was a 'prize' in the silent auction, did not appear offended by the name mix-up. The comedian inspired the audience by tracing her career trajectory from a failing standup performer to a regular spot on Ten's The Project which raised her profile and allowed her to tour her act successfully. 'My advice to young women, stick around,' she said. 'Work harder than you think you have to, and try not to get angry or disappointed when things fall over. And things fall over in this industry a lot.' Two of Australia's most prominent newspapers came under fire during a single session at the Sydney Writers festival last week, when Michael Gawenda, former editor-in-chief of the Age, and Philippe Sands, a British barrister and author spoke on a panel about antisemitism and xenophobia. Gawenda took aim at his former paper, saying he had not been published in the Age, the paper he had worked at for four decades, since the 7 October attacks. The comments came as Gawenda was recounting stories of Jewish Australians working in the arts who had been refused gigs because of their political stance on Israel. 'In terms of not getting gigs, I worked for The Age for 40 years, I ended up editor-in-chief of The Age. Since October the seventh, I have not been published in the Age,' he said. 'I don't know why not, I can't tell you exactly why not. But it seems to me that it has something to do with whatever I wrote in my book about my position on Israel.' Gawenda later told Weekly Beast that while he had discussions with the paper's editor since 7 October about writing for the Age, these discussions were not followed up. He said that at this point in his career he doesn't pitch individual articles, but writes when approached by editors and 'The Age has never asked, despite our conversations about it, and they've made it clear they don't want me.' He said he has never been told specifically that his views on Israel were precluding him from writing for the paper, but said: 'What other reason could there be, my work isn't good enough? I can't think of another reason.' The Age declined to comment. It was Murdoch's The Australian newspaper which came under attack from Gawenda's fellow panellist, Sands, who said an article in the broadsheet in February was 'totally ridiculous'. Sands, who is Jewish, has written extensively about the origins of the legal definition of genocide and crimes against humanity, most famously in his family memoir East West Street. 'When an article appears in the Australian and some of you would have seen it, which is how outrageous it is that the Sydney writers' festival has invited Sands to speak because he acted for the Palestinian Authority … It was just totally ridiculous. It was offensive. It was stupid.' Headlined 'Sydney Writers festival invite for barrister Philippe Sands who took on Israel' the Australian framed Sands as 'a barrister who represented Palestine in a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice and argued for the immediate withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories'. Many of the commenters expressed their fury about Sands' invitation underneath the story. He said he was part of a team that had been retained to argue for the right to self determination before the International Court of Justice and all of a sudden it was said 'he's anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, it's a nonsense'. A spokesperson for The Australian strongly rejected that the story was in any way an attempt to criticise Sands and pointed out that the author, Caroline Overington, wrote columns in which she encouraged readers to see him and said he is a brilliant mind. Additional reporting by Kate Lyons
LBCI
11-05-2025
- Politics
- LBCI
Presidency urges Lebanese media to act responsibly amid municipal elections
According to a statement released by the presidential media office, the Lebanese Presidency called on local media outlets to uphold national, legal, and ethical responsibility during the current sensitive period. It warned against unfounded accusations, fabrications, or false narratives targeting any foreign party friendly to Lebanon, particularly Arab nations, especially in matters that could verge on undermining national interests. While reaffirming its full commitment to the sanctity of freedom of expression, the Presidency reminded stakeholders that this right carries inherent obligations—truthfulness and respect for public order in a democratic society, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The statement concluded by stressing that any violation of these principles would not fall under protected speech but would instead be considered a clear and punishable offense.
