Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/791658
24 maltatoday, SUNDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2017 Opinion Y ou know what? I'm starting to enjoy this 'fake news' era we are now very clearly living in. For let's be honest about something. 'Real news' was always a little overrated. About the last time I read a story in a local newspaper in which every allegation was thoroughly substantiated, and there wasn't any room at all to speculate that the whole thing might have been fabricated from scratch... it was actually about some random guy caught shitting behind a skip in a Birkirkara side-street. 'Man seen defecating in public has been identified', the headline ran. And thank goodness for that, I remember thinking. Otherwise, that poor little shit would never have got to know the identity of its true biological father... But then again, there can be little doubt that this particular event (unlike nearly everything else reported in the news these days) really did take place. The 'Phantom Shitter of Birkirkara' was filmed taking his outdoor crap on CCTV camera; and a still from the footage showed him in the act of wiping his arse... with the newly deposited turd still steaming on the asphalt. Now, I ask you: if that's the sort of 'real news' that is seriously considered worthy of publication in a mainstream Maltese newspaper... who can blame us for choosing to go with all the invented bullshit instead? No wonder everyone is currently lapping up stories which are either completely fabricated... or else random samples of idle village gossip, just thrown out there without the tiniest shred of evidence or even substantiation. These stories are much more fun. It's like watching your favourite series on TV: who cares that the dragons in Game of Thrones don't exist anywhere but the imagination of George R.R. Martin? That is entirely the point of fiction... it's meant to entertain, not convince. 'News', of course, is supposed to be the clean opposite of that. When it comes to journalism, the litmus test is – or should I say, WAS - 'credibility'. Not just of the story itself; but also of the journalist who reports it, and the news source where it appears. There was, however, always another consideration when dealing with 'real news': it was also meant to be 'relevant'. Apply that to the Birkirkara shitter story, and see where it takes us. Was it credible? Heck, yeah. Was it relevant? Erm... perhaps. If the phantom shitter turned out to be a member of parliament who had only just voted to increase penalties for crimes against public decency, for instance... then yes, we'd all see the relevance in that. The truth, however, was that it was a random nobody who very clearly suffered from mental health issues. Exactly why his personal problems should have been so voyeuristically exposed is anyone's guess. Still, however, that story did at least pass half the litmus test... which is more than can be said for 90% of what is being reported in the media right now. This morning, for instance, I read a story about how David Thake – Radio 101 host and PN candidate – chose to air street gossip about a presumed 'affair' between Health Minister Chris Fearne and the Foundation for Medical Services CEO Carmen Ciantar. As with the 'Chris Cardona-brothel' allegations, Thake supplied not a jot of S eeing placards with middle fingers against the government during protest marches gives me a pleasant feeling. Those of us who have in the recent years been lobbying for anti-censorship reforms are pleased with such developments. We remember very well how, in demonstrations held during previous Nationalist administrations, a "MEPA bla bajd!" or "Lawrence Gonzi ħanżir" placard would be taken away by the police. It is also to our satisfaction that in its new press reform bill, the government is basically doing away with criminal and obscene libel. The Times of Malta and MaltaToday have consistently demanded reform of current press libel laws and they should be credited for pushing this matter in the government's agenda. Labour can be credited by keeping its word in addressing legal reforms to improve censorship laws in the art and literature fields and now it's making a new and much-awaited step to reform stifling press laws. Of course we are not happy that civil libel damages will be increased and neither do we agree with the register for the online news portals. This is a simple regulatory mechanism which already exists in print and broadcasting, but the government should have done away with such useless regulatory instruments and not keep extending them. The government didn't invest much time consulting with experts and lobbyists on this bill before it was published, and in fact the bill has some technical mistakes which could easily have been avoided. The bill also makes the mistake of granting the right of protection of sources exclusively to journalists – this is unconstitutional and a mistake of principle because the law should not have the power to discriminate between journalists and citizens. The question whether something is journalistic or not does not need to be mixed with the legal adjudication process upon what is truthful or not. Despite some of the positive aspects of the bill, we expected something better, so it's also good that the government is now making a step backward and discussing with the right stakeholders such as the Institute of Journalists to change this bill even further. I am optimistic that the government will listen to the right advice and amend its mistakes, and we have to keep engaging government and arguing our case with scientific and legitimate arguments. If the lobby for freedom of speech grows more cohesively and gets more organsied, we could even lobby for the removal and reform of even more laws which are used by politicians to suppress criticism, such as article 252 of the criminal code and article 48 of the electronic communications act. Definitely this press bill will not be the end of our cause. It is crucial that we never let go of the momentum to keep changing the law since we have come far to convince politicians to legislate against laws which are intended first and foremost to protect them. Admittedly, we have now been sidetracked with the recent entry of new factors into the equation, mainly those of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the Nationalist Party. The Nationalist Party has suddenly gone into the business of fighting for freedom of speech after one of its activists and spin-doctors, Daphne Caruana Galizia has gone on trial and was mandated with a garnishee order Not much happening that is worth reporting? Who cares? Just make some stuff up on the spot and run with it on the pretext that you are 'seeking clarification' No news? Never mind, just fake some of your own Don't derail press law debate with spin Raphael Vassallo I will not be apologetic for being irreverent to the hypocritical and opportunistic dinosaurs using the press reforms for their own partisan fantasies Mark Camilleri