Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/832512
14 THAT journalism is a highly stressful and poorly paid profes- sion has long been known; but the sheer extent of the pressures faced by working journalists – even in Western European democracies which supposedly value journal- ism as the fourth estate – may still come as a shock. A recent study undertaken by the Council of Europe has shed some light on this little-known dimension to the profession. The research suggests that a staggering 69% of journalists in CoE countries have reported experiencing in- timidation, harassment and other instances of psychological violence in the course of their careers. A smaller percentage – but equally disconcerting – of 31% have also sustained various forms of physi- cal violence. Prof Marilyn Clark, of the Uni- versity of Malta's Department of Psychology – also the lead author of this report ¬– acknowledges that these findings are alarming, though not necessarily surprising. But what prompted this study to begin with? "At the centre of the supreme value of human rights and democ- racy, is the right to receive and impart information. Freedom of expression is in fact a prerequisite for the development of any society, and for the development of the in- dividual. But unfortunately, in the last decade or so, the world – and Europe – has seen threats to free- dom of expression. The Council of Europe gives freedom of expres- sion number one priority. The goal was therefore to examine the situ- ation in a bit more detail..." Journalism, she adds, plays a very important role in the freedom to receive and impart information. "Journalists are a very important critical voice that helps to main- tain our democratic institutions. They act as watchdogs, they ena- ble public debate, they hold people in positions of power to account. But generally, over the last dec- ade, a number of forces have been brought into play that threaten these critical voices. The impetus of the study was derived mainly from the 2016 Council of Europe secretary general report, which highlighted that almost half the CoE states had failed to secure the safety of journalists; and also that freedom of expression was being threatened in a number of coun- tries. We needed to have a clearer picture, in order to put into place a number of preventative measures and strategies to combat these threats. It is only, I think, through having trustworthy statistics that strategies can be brought into play to create an ideal environment for freedom of expression to flourish; for journalists to be able to do their job effectively; and consequently, to uphold democratic institu- tions..." What emerged from this closer look was enough to sound alarm bells in various countries. In fact, the CoE report has been widely covered in the European press. The most widely reported statis- tic was the aforementioned 69% who experienced psychological violence. What does that mean, exactly, and how does one account for the sheer pervasiveness of the problem? "There were three main research questions we started off with: one, to explore the prevalence of 'unwarranted interference' – we define that as any behaviour that interferes with physical and moral integrity of the journalist in the course of his or her work. That in- cludes physical violence: assaults on journalists, intimidation, har- assment, etc. But it also includes psychological violence... and even economic violence. journalists may be stopped from engaging in their work because a number of economic pressures are brought into play that make it difficult for them to exercise their profession. "Also, very important, there is judicial violence: we see a number of journalists being prosecuted, threatened with prosecution, ar- rested and sometimes impris- oned under a number of laws... most notably defamation laws. Our first aim was to measure the prevalence: how many journalists have experienced this? But we also wanted to look at the fear factor. This is very important: even if you may not have experienced the vio- lence directly yourself, your col- league may have. A colleague may have received death threats for continuing to write about a cer- tain issue, and this may influence others. Lastly, we wanted to exam- ine the relationship between the actual unwarranted interference, together with the associated fear factor, and the issue of self cen- sorship. We know of many situa- tions where journalists are made to censor themselves... by editors, by management or by other powers that be. But self-censorship is very subtle. A journalist may use one adjective instead of another, which has a lesser negative impact." Self-censorship may be a less dramatic issue than violence or persecution of journalists; but it is also harder to quantify and there- fore, ultimately, more difficult to address. To what extent does it undermine (if at all) the ability of journalism to perform its function within a democracy? "The problem with all of this is that journalists are sometimes afraid to write the facts. Conse- quently, people are left in the dark; and this is a threat to our democ- racy. I would say it often arises di- rectly from psychological violence, as attested by the 69% statistic. Nearly 1,000 journalists respond- ed to the questionnaire: an equal number of men and women, most of whom had journalistic careers spanning 16 or more years. We also saw high levels of intimida- tion throughout: for example, in the last three years alone, 31% had experienced some kind of physical assault. But almost 70% reported psychological violence, including intimidation, harassment, belittle- ment, smear-campaigning, etc. "We also gave an option for jour- nalists to identify the source of psychological violence. We found that it emanated primarily from public authorities. This is a very worrying find. There was also a high level of intimidation by po- litical groups and other interest groups. And another major finding was that around 39% of journalists reported having been subjected to targeted surveillance. This is a major issue today, as it concerns the protection of sources. Again, we see about a third of the sample reporting that they actually had sources compromised as a result of targeted surveillance. About 70% felt they were unable to protect their sources. Clearly you can see how this is putting the journalism profession very much under pres- sure..." At the same time, however, the Council of Europe's member countries also include a number of states which are not associated with democratic traditions. Coun- tries like Belarus, Azerbaijan, and Turkey – which in different ways all have known issues concern- ing press freedoms – were also included. Could this have skewed the results slightly? "Up to a point, yes. But it is im- portant to note that intimidation and psychological violence is not limited to those countries. If we look at the experience of judicial intimidation: nearly a third of the sample reported having been ar- rested, prosecuted or threatened with judicial procedures under various laws. In both EU and non- EU Western European countries, defamation laws are still given pri- ority. Clearly, silencing journalists in these societies takes a different form. In countries like Turkey, you have anti-terrorism laws and 'state interest' laws. It is a different form of intimidation; but the pressures are still there in other countries. They may be more subtle..." At a certain level, one could also argue that the more subtle the pressure, the harder it is to counter. A blatant clampdown of journalism would be difficult to justify in contemporary Western democracies; but the long-term psychological effects of less overt methods may for the same rea- son be more difficult to expose, and therefore condemn. Does the study illustrate this in any way? "I wouldn't say 'harder', but it is equally difficult to address. In the 2016 Council of Europe report, the secretary general highlighted how the imprisonment of journalists has reached unprecedented levels. Obviously this is not happening in the UK, or in France. It is hap- pening in 'the usual suspects'. But we need to be aware that the fear factor associated with less direct methods will also have a 'chilling effect' on journalists' writing. It is not so much that they won't write about certain topics; but a not- insignificant proportion (around 20%) said they feel pressured to tone down critical stories... or that they would write a piece to suit their company's economic inter- ests... or that they would self-cen- sor, so that what they write may be phrased in more acceptable tones. Self censorship is clearly happen- ing, and this probably comes from the long-term fear factor associat- ed with psychological violence. We also gave journalists the oppor- tunity to add comments to their answers; there was a lot of inter- esting qualitative data, along with the quantitative results. Journalists wrote some about very harrow- ing experiences, which impacted their ability to do their job. But I do want to stress that it wasn't all doom and gloom; we also found Interview By Raphael Vassallo maltatoday, SUNDAY, 4 JUNE 2017 In the last three years alone, 31% experienced some kind of physical assault. But almost 70% reported psychological violence, including intimidation, harassment, belittlement and smear- campaigning PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE Journalism under Self-censorship is clearly happening, and this probably comes from the long-term fear factor associated with psychological violence FEAR FACTOR