tv Listening Post Al Jazeera March 15, 2015 4:00pm-4:31pm EDT
the evenings, she takes her mother and daughter to the gravesite where her father is buried, searching for answers. >> i tried to tell myself that this was destiny or that he wanted t. and things that i can find to make myself feel okay that it's fine, but it's not. he tried to erase, unfortunately, it has not been irerationed in this country. >> reporter: as international forces withdraw, and the world turns its attention away rangina said that she fears that it will only bring darker days for the land that her father loved and died for.
[ ♪♪ ] hello, i'm richard gizbert, and you are at "the listening post," here are some media stories. india - the government blocks the trance mission of a documentary on the rape subject russia - a troll army invading comment sections on news stories. students on both sides of the moss co-kiev debate have it out on youtube and the return of a state-opened broadcaster india is reliving a nightmare goings back two years,
when the gang rape and murder of a student hit the headline. it's back in the headlines because of a film band called "india's daughter", it features an interview with one of the rapists saying women out on the streets after 9:00pm deserve with come to them, and the film would not have been killed if she had not resisted. it was made for bbc, but several stations in india plan to air it on international women's day. that's when the government banned it. one called it a conspiracy to defame india. one of the most widely watched english news channels backed the government announcing the time as voyeuristing and questioning why any broadcaster would want to show it. it's a story about a discussion on violence and rape in india,
an outrage machine in overdrive, and a government that is still new to the job, managing to give more attention to the film by banning it than it would have if it had allowed the station to broadcast it. ne delhi is our starting point. >> reporter: the network not allowed to broadcast the documentary showed this instead. for 60 comments it broadcast the title page. it was an hour long slept protest. the news ticker did the talking in the lower part of the screen. a stream of messages on the issue. thousands of miles away in london. the film-maker was watching the story unfilled. >> they have banned the film without seeing it. and that is quite app indictment when what you are doing is
clamping down on one of the bake pillars of a democracy, free speech. >> translation: it's atrocious. >> every spokesperson gives a different reason for banning it. some say it will cause disruption, violence. some say the parents are in pain. it is obviously just a knee-jerk reaction. that is why the government banned it. setting aside the sensitivities of government ministers, 88% of whom are me, this is the film they didn't want indians to
see. one of six me charged in the case, whose conviction and death sentence are under appeal, speaks extensively from his gaol. the film runs for less than an hour. he is on screen, or heard for almost one sixth of that, 9 minutes and 11 seconds. . >> this is a brilliant film. it's very matter of fact. and it's a business. and what makes it powerful. fundamentally, it says we think rape is obvious. we internalize the obviousness of the rape. worse, the man is perpetually
innocent, the woman is guilty india has dozens of news channels, nbt, and times now, two of the biggest english language channels on the air. >> i don't know what pleasure the film-makers gets getting a rapist to describe the brutality and extent of the actual rape. >> it's ridiculous take it gives a platform to the racist. it's trying to explore what makes a person do it. >> this is not journalism. it's foyerism. >> it's acceptable because of the hyper-competitive world that we live in. one channel trashing the other. when you see journalists asking for a gag, supporting a gag. i think it's - journalists in a country like india that doesn't have the constitutional protection like the united
states has, and india has a dismal record. >> they have gone out of their way, the teams group, to do a hate campaign against the film. i think they will hang their heads in shame when they see the film. this is the extraordinary thing, the reaction. people have made the outrageously negative comments, have not seen the film we requested interviews with names now and n.d.t.v. it was filmed in new york in hollywood and bollywood. they have seen if in britain. indians have to go online to see what the fuss was about. an activist screened the film, and has been taken in for questioning. the
the. >> immediately after their show, news coming from a rape convict dragged out from the gaol by a mob of thousands. publicly stripped. this same channel showed the entire stripping. it showed foot incident. >> but that was a case of indians telling their own story as opposed to the b.b.c. telling it to them. >> india is looking to play a prominent role on the global stage. but it's the government's job to protect india's reputation, not the media. times now and media times now forgetting that part of the job
description. it is not for them to advocate on the country's behalf, to spin india's story. they are just supposed to report on it. >> it's one of those things that when we react to something, something horrible happens to us as a family, let's say. we don't want to talk about it. we thick we were shamed. -- we think we were shaimed. let's talk about it. we can make it better. the phrase bringing india into disrepute. the film was made as a positive statement about the laws that were enacted. the media coverage, the protest and the glimmers of hope and the irony cannot escape me, which is the response of the indian government to the film, without having seen it.
is what is bringing india into disrepute. india, in its current idea of modernization cannot afford to let the message get out. it kaptcan't speak kooult our to bbc. i should air it nor. >> on the download our viewers weigh in on the documentary. and the fallout from the story. >> one of the most remarkable things is that deposits don't seem to learn around the world or in india that when you ban a piece of art people consume it more than originally. that's the case with the movie.
other media stories - greece - the syriza coalition government is preparing a bill for parliament which if passed will reopen the public broadcaster. the state-opened television channel was shut in 2013. the government said e.r. t was closed as an austerity measure and the management was corrupt and faithful. 2,500 people that lost their jobs did not take it well. some occupied the student trying to keep it on air. accusing the government of closing it because of their report, out of step with others that backed the government and austerity. it was replayed by
mnerek. a skeleton staff. they'll return to the new channel. the government saying most of those fired will come back. the funding will come from licence fees collected through power utility bills. ethiopian government as been accused of being behind cyber attacks. working at a chapel that covers the country. it's ethiopian television. according to a report from the toronto based watchdog, the journalists have been targeted by spy ware traced back to insa. citizen lab reported on these a year ago and identified spying software developed by hacking team, based in millon. citizen hack
said it works for the government despite being revealed last year. it is one of the independent organization, and the fear is some of the information will be known to other authorities. the committee to protect journalists say the government is among the world's leading gaolers of journalists the hs b.c. tax avoidance history brought to light by a leak and journalistic collaboration involving reporters in 40 countries may claim casualties. a non-executive director at hs b.c. since 2004. she chaired the audit committee, which one would think would put her in a good position to know about tax dodging. that's a part-time job. she's head of the bbc trust, the gorping body of the british state broadcaster and her line of defense on what she knew
about hs b.c., ignorance, was rejected by an opposition mp who urged her to quit her bbc job. >> i thing you should think about resigning, and if not, i think the government should tack you after the story broke, the chief political commentator at "the telegraph" resigned. he said that the paper refused to cover the story. barkley brothers are reliant on hs b.c. loops for business and did not -- loans for o bozs and did not want to lose the bank as an tower. the latest story coming out of a country where the media is a story of their open. a battle ground emerged in the information war between russia and western rivals. you can find it in the comment section of anyone news sited that covers russia, kremlin,
vladimir putin and the battle of you crane. if you go to war, it's best to have an army, in this case a troll army. the russian one is reportedly paid by the state to go online and comment favourably or pollute the discussion with profanity to the paint no one else wants to take part. news organizations did not see this coming but can't help notice the comment or nature. how do they handle it? shutting down the debate. russia is by no means the only government na does this. the listening post on the trol army that takes its marching order from the kremlin. >> reporter: when opposition leader boris nemtsov was murdered on february 27th, two days later tens of thousands of russians took to the streets
of moscow to protest. organized, galvanised online. it was the same story in 2011 when similar numbers protested against vladimir putin's decision to run for president. >> they did not pay much attention to the internet, and what was going on on the social media. facebook and twitter. control. >> they started paying more attention to what was happening conversation. >> so you will see, friendships, news story breaks on twitter, facebook, and you'll see the masses of accounts start commenting on what happened using the exact same sentence. this may look like an innocuous suburb in st. petersburg with employees on the way to work.
according to numerous reports, within these buildings. the kremlin is funding entire offices, so-called troll army, where russians are paid to operate social media accounts. they scan for stories relating to russia in the maybe stream media and comment on it and are known to post hundreds of comments. >> what the people do is compose posts based on directions given to them every day and comment on each other's posts. and, you know, the theme of the day can be anything. it's a peared down simplistic version of events as the kremlin wants to present them. >> i don't line it. they are paid from the west. they want a bloody revolution in russia, i don't trust it. i like vladimir putin, he's the best. blah, blah, blah. >> the goal is to pollute the discussion, making sure people
lead the discussion. there'll not be more people understanding the person who started in. the upsurge online has been noticed not only in russia, but across the globe. the newspaper reported that moderators revealed 40 comments a day, and found an oshing strayed pro-kremlin campaign. we prepared the number of comment of coverage received. on average, ukraine reports were attracting ten teems as many comments. one of the best characterizations of the trend came from a comment. about all the comments. >> one need only paying an article at random. any point in the comment at random and they'll find themselves in a sea of hostile
users who boast bays kaipt western fropa canneda that seems to be taken from a template. that's not a smoking gun or prove that the invisible hand of the kremlin is behind the trolling. there is a view that the we were media is bias. a view shared by many. we have 8 million ethnic russians, it's a problem touching a lot of russian families. when we had american media, western media telling us that the people in ukraine want to be with russia, that was a completely different thing. >> that is the urge question tonight. will the russians stop in crimea or invade further into ukraine. >> and when the western media got into the overdrive a lot of people were upset, offended, and vladimir putin didn't need to
ask anyone to comment or right. the overwhelming feeling was that the north americans stepped over the line. >> governments try to control what is said onlean. north korea created a sovereign internet. china piloters the net. blocks websites. web users are adept at circum veption rather than silence debate. more costs are trying to influence them. israel is bringing arguments to ain zionist websites. the kremlin's troll armies are by no means alone on the battlefield. television is the most popular medium in russia, with 74% of the country watching the channels. the top army was built to do its work, but influence reaches into
mainstream media. there's some sort of news breaking out. and then a flood of mass commenting or tweeting or posting by all these poem. then the may stream media run the story, titled bloggers unhappy with x, or internet user upset with y. and they basically point back to online. >> it shows that there's cooperation between television and what is called the army. so some sort of coordination that happens not systematically, but on the main points, on the main stories happens. >> this kind of manipulation is there, and powerful. i would say. you reentos, one platform the other. >> or you could use the platform
to sabotage, and the russian internet law, websites are liable for all concept on their peoples. in october, the moscow times suspended its comment section after the vitriol that the coverage attracted. >> a lot of websites closed the sections, not necessary for legal reasons, but there is to much mate and abuse that it was productive. >> this is when this kind of policies work. that leaves the discussion on line, the possibility of people to have their open mind. and that is exactly in the line of what the authorities wish. >> for those trying to connect with audiences, every discussion abandoned is an opportunity for the government in moscow much every report questioned is a battle run.
the kremlin's army marches on more voices on the download do. >> the russian government used a series of restrictive legal measures, extremism and the mandatory registration of popular bloggers with the media watch dog and more to kerr stale the freedom of independent voices to operate in the media landscape and increasing its own voice making the government voice the loudest and strongest in russia's media landscape.
to listen to their version, they responded in kind. they talked about the coverage of the crisis, the information barriers and the importance of verifying the news reported. not that a single piece of social media interaction is likely to shift the story, it's evidence on how ukraine was being covered. see you next time at "listening post".