Showing posts with label committee on information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label committee on information. Show all posts

Monday, April 24, 2017

At UN, DPI Drones On About Partnerships with Ad Agencies & Google, 600 Response Survey, Censors


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 24 – The UN which evicted Inner City Press 14 months ago after it sought to covering UN corruption in the UN Press Briefing Room on April 20 responded via the UN Department of Public Information's Officer in Charge Maher Nasser that it is fine to continue to confine it to minders, while giving much more access to pro-UN or state media like Akhbar al Yom and others which never ask questions, or challenge incompetence. Then on April 24 Nasser accompanied by other DPI officials including Darrin Farrant and Hua Jiang spend the afternoon bragging to a half-empty Conference Room 2 about DPI's “News” Center and partnerships with Google and advertising agencies. His predecessor and seeming mentor Cristina “The Censor” Gallach went mostly unmentioned - Iran did shout her out, as did Argentina for whatever reason - and what was called the “informal” portion involved Nasser droning on about a survey that got a grand total of 600 responses. A petition to reverse Gallach's no due process eviction, with more than 2000 signatures, has been ignored Nasser, Jiang et al. We'll have more on this. Whoever Team Antonio Guterres hands DPI to must answer; DPI should be held accountable, for censorship, waste and unresponsiveness.   Thismendacious answer also continued, by default, at an event in the UN Bookstore on April 21, video here. 
 Maher Nasser, for the second time the "Officer in Charge" of the UN Department of Public Information, was the moderator but did not even purport to answer Inner City Press' question about his prejudice against critical media. Nasser responded three weeks after Inner City Press' formal request by saying "U have same access as 3000 other journalists." This while his DPI has given the Resident Correspondent accreditation Inner City Press had for 10 years to entities which just arrived at the UN, or those like a Moroccan correspondent who in fact work FOR the UN. It is disgusting censorship. To become the new head of DPI under Antonio Guterres, candidates Inner City Press has reported on include Michele Montas, the Ban Ki-moon spokesperson who participated in meetings about excluding Inner City Press from Google News and threatening it along with Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, and a correspondents for a Saudi media openly lobbying Guterres officials. Both are, it's said, Americans. Will the US Mission, so recently bragging about transparency in the NGO Committee, allow a censor to head DPI? Allow the lawless, no due process regime of censorship of anti-corruption reporting to continue? Watch this site. The UN, demonstrating hypocrisy on both press freedom and transparency, evicted Inner City Press as it covered UN corruption in the Ng Lap Seng bribery case and restricts it even now, after the evicting official is gone from the UN's unaccountable Department of Public Information. A formal request for reversal, below, was filed 13 days ago. So far only a Kafka-esque one line response, followed by an accusation by the UN's lead spokesman Stephane Dujarric that Inner City Press' criticism of the UN and some of its officials is "harassment." Video here. When Dujarric was in charge of media accreditation at the UN, he summoned Inner City Press about a mere tweet, here. This, then, is censorship. And those who took over accreditation after Dujarric, in what's being revealed as the DPI of UN bribery indicted Ng Lap Seng can't even explain the basis of minders and metal detectors for Inner City Press while, for example, Egyptian state media Akhbar al Yom was nowhere to be seen, hasn't asked a single question in ten months. The UN is Corrupt - we'll have more on this.
   Having no response other than a forward to yet more UN DPI officials, Inner City Press asked and was told, Didn't [a particular] DPI official talk to you? Well, no. 
So Inner City Press put it in writing again: "Eleven days ago I wrote with several requests to the Department of Public Information, including regarding the ongoing restrictions in reporting that I face due to a no due process eviction ordered by the former USG of DPI. Other than a notification that my request was being forwarded to still others in DPI, Inner City Press has received no response, except today to be told that one of the addresses was supposed to, or supposedly, told Inner City Press 'there is no change at this time.' This is totally unacceptable. Only in the past few days, I was prevented from staking out the Rwanda genocide memorial as I have in previous years (the DPI escort or minder told me, very quickly, that I had to leave); as I have told DPI, I would have gone to cover the USG of DPA's counter-terrorism briefing today but for the requirement of a minder....This is a reiterated request for reversal or a written explanation of what the UN has done and is doing with regard to Inner City Press." The UN's response? A single line: "upon review of the situation there is no change in the current status." This was copied to UN DPI officials Maher Nasser, Hua Jiang, Hak-Fan Lau, Gallach-aide Darrin Farrant - and then others, on which we'll have more. 
This is the UN's "due process" after a more than one year, ongoing restriction for covering UN corruption? Inner City Press has written back, on which we'll have more: "This response, like the eviction imposed in 2016, does not meet the most basic threshold of due process. What was reviewed? Where are the requested files?  For the record: Inner City Press said in advance it would cover the meeting in the UN Press Briefing Room on January 29, 2016 specifically in order to see how South South News, described in U.S. District Court as Ng Lap Seng's bribery vehicle, was discussed.  For seeking to cover UN corruption, Inner City Press was by then DPI USG Gallach evicted without a hearing, no appeal, remains restricted. Today I asked the Spokesman about the guilty plea in the Ng Lap Seng / John Ashe case, which states that South South News violated U.S. law. Now the Spokesman says South South News is no longer in the UN. But Inner City Press, which covered and uncovered the corruption, remains restricted with no explanation... This is unacceptable: Inner City Press' coverage of the UN is being hindered, triggered by its coverage of corruption. The UN is not complying with basic due process, as noted by the Special Rapporteurs and others. As you know, there are more than 2500 signatories to a petition to the UN to this effect. Please state:  what was reviewed?" Etc - this too went to others, we'll have more on this. 
After the UN's head of Communications Cristina Gallach was given a strange farewell toast on March 30, the UN told Inner City Press that the "position will be filled by an Officer-in-Charge... while the process to find a new Under-Secretary-General for Public Information continues."
 On April 3, Inner City Press wrote to this Officer in Charge, who copied the request to several others to be named: 
"Four hundred and five days ago, without any hearing or opportunity to be heard, I was ordered out of the United Nations for having sought to covering a meeting in the UN Press Briefing Room that was nowhere listed as closed to some journalists and not others. Inner City Press, still without any hearing and no appeal since, was then evicted from its shared office S-303 which has sat largely unused since. I have been forced, for more than a year, to only enter through the metal detectors at the Visitors Entrance, and my pass has not worked on the second floor turnstile, precluding me from covering events on the second floor as other correspondents could. There are other restrictions and double standards, hindering reporting, of which DPI has been made aware.
 Yesterday was the last day atop DPI for the official who without speaking to me once signed the February 19, 2016 letter, and for the April 2016 eviction. The Deputy Spokesperson told me yesterday, in a noon briefing where I asked six questions (earlier the week there was a noon briefing where from the entire rest of the accredited press corps there were only three questioners), I was told that you are the Officer in Charge of DPI. In that capacity, this is a formal request that Inner City Press be restored to the office it was ousted from without due process... and that I be restored to Resident Correspondent accreditation immediately... I also incorporate this link to the Special Rapporteurs for Freedom of Expression and Human Rights Defenders letterand, again, this petition."
 Days later, no ruling, attempted jokes while Inner City Press worked to write up the Syria UN Security Council meeting from a bench in the UN lobby. We'll have more on this.
On March 28, forwarded not sent to Inner City Press, this: "UNCA will host a farewell reception in honor of Under-Secretary-General of DPI, Cristina Gallach, on Thursday, March 30th at 5:30 pm in the UNCA room (3rd floor, UN Secretariat Building, room 310). Food and wine will be served. Please join us for a farewell toast!" Toasting what? Allowing into the UN with no due diligence the Macau-based businessman Ng Lap Seng, as detailed in the UN's own audit at Paragraphs 37-40 and 20b? Evicting the Press without any hearing or appeal? The decline in media access? On March 29, Inner City Press asked among other things, "yesterday your Office replied, regarding the USG of DPI, 'We will announce arrivals and departures as they occur.' Now that your partner has arranged a farewell for this USG for March 30, what is the rationale for your Office refusing to confirm her departure and the status of recruiting a replacement?" The UN spokesman replied, "Regarding Under-Secretary-General Cristina Gallach, her position will be filled by an Officer-in-Charge upon her departure while the process to find a new Under-Secretary-General for Public Information continues." We'll have more on this.
  In early 2016, covering the UN corruption scandals which have resulted in two sets of indictments for bribery involving the UN, Inner City Press was ordered to leave the UN Press Briefing Room by then Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric.
  Other correspondents were allowed to stay in the briefing room, which Dujarric had "lent" them. But he insisted that Inner City Press leave. Video here.
  Inner City Press asked to see any paperwork that the event was closed; none was provided. Inner City Press stated that if a single UN Security official asked it to leave, it would. Finally one guard came and said Dujarric wanted it to leave. 
  Inner City Press immediately left, uploaded the already live-streamed Periscope video, and continued digging into the corruption that's resulted in the indictment for bribery and money laundering of Ban Ki-moon's brother Ban Ki Sang and nephew Dennis Bahn.
  But three weeks afterward, without a single conversation or opportunity to be heard, Ban's Under Secretary General for Public Information Cristina Gallach ordered Inner City Press to leave the UN, after ten years, on two hours notice. Order here.
   This was enforced, as Inner City Press worked on its laptop at the UN Security Council stakeout, by eight UN Security officers led by Deputy Chief McNulty, who tore Inner City Press accreditation badge off its chest and said, "Now you are a trespasser." Audio here.
  Inner City Press was marched down the escalator and around the UN traffic circle, without even its coat which was up in its longtime office. It was pushed out of the gate and its laptop, in a bag, was thrown on the sidewalk and damaged.
  The next work day when Inner City Press arranged for a fellow journalist to sign it in as a guest so it could cover the Security Council, UN Security official Matthew Sullivan said it was Banned from UN premises worldwide. Audio here.
   After three days covering the UN from the park in front in the sleet, and articles like this one, Inner City Press re-entered with a "non-resident correspondents" pass - to which it is still, more than eleven months later, confined.
  The then-US Mission under Samantha Power and Isobel Coleman, even petitioned by the DC-based Government Accountability Project, did nothing. Indirectly, a offer was made of an upgraded pass if Inner City Press would agree to a gag order, to which it would not and will not agree.
  There has been no UN opportunity for appeal or reinstatement. After having five boxes of Inner City Press' investigative files thrown on the sidewalk in April, Gallach is giving its office to an Egyptian state media Akhbar al Yom which rarely comes in, a correspondent Sanaa Youssef who had yet to ask a single question. 
Her only claim is that she was once, decades ago, a president of the United Nations Correspondents Association, the group to which Duajrric "lent" the UN Press Briefing Room, without notice or written record, on January 29, 2016. 
 Even as the scope of Ban Ki-moon's corruption is being exposed upon his return to South Korea, here, his successor Antonio Guterres has yet to reverse this year of censorship and no due process. On January 6 Dujarric and Gallach led him on a tour of... the UN Correspondents Association, which now wants him again in their clubhouse. (More on this to follow.)
 On January 27 as Inner City Press moved to cover Guterres at the UN's Holocaust event, it was targeted by UN Security and told it could not proceed without a minder, who did not appear for over 15 minutes. 
 All of this must change. This is a scam, and censorship: the UN's Censorship Alliance. We will have more on this.

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

As Ukraine & Russia Cross Info Swords, UN Radio Reported Ukraine's Speech As Given A Day Before It Was


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, October 22 -- Ukraine was scheduled to speak at the UN about its “Committee on Information” on October 21, but as UN speeches usually go longer than allowed, its turn was postponed until October 22.
That didn't stop the “UN Radio” Russian service from reporting on the speech on October 21 as if it had in fact been given that day. As translated, UN Radio on October 21 reported
The representative of Ukraine accused Russia of using the information strategy of the Cold War
One of the main prerequisites of violence in Ukraine became a propaganda information. This was stated by the representative of the Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations, speaking at a meeting of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly.”
  The UN's Fourth Committee did meet on October 21 - but Ukraine didn't speak. Instead it was the first speaker on the afternoon of October 22. Its speech, delivered in perfect French including the word “rigolo,” linked Russia to Joseph Goebbels.
  In reply, the Russian mission's spokesman brought up the recent Human Rights Watch report of the Ukrainian government using cluster bombs in and against Donetsk, and the lack of clarity on who called the snipers shots in Maidan Square.
  Later in the Fourth Committee meeting, Bolivia slammed “powers” who use information technology to intervene and violate privacy, bringing to mind USAID's “Cuban Twitter” and, of course, the NSA.
  Then Jordan said it was first among Arab nations to enact an Access to Information law, in 2007. The Free UN Coalition for Access has been pressing for a Freedom of Information Act at the UN, click here and here for that.
  FUNCA covers the Fourth Committee, including on Decolonization, and the Committee on Information, where at least theoretically the UN's descent into censorship could be raised and resolved. The old UN Correspondents Association, a part of this trend toward privatization of briefings and even censorship -- ordering Press articles off the Internet, getting leaked copies of their complaints to the UN's MALU banned from Google's search, here -- was nowhere to be seen. We'll have more on this.

 
  

Thursday, May 1, 2014

UN Language Wars in New Draft Resolution in Committee on Information, NHK Added to P3 TV, Farewell to USG


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 1 -- Sometimes the language wars at the UN go behind closed doors. Such was the case on May 1 when the UN Committee on Information considered, paragraph by paragraph, a resolution on the work of the Department of Public Information.

   Back on April 28, delegates from Argentina to Cuba and China asked why the UN Webcast archives are not in Spanish or Chinese, Russian or Arabic. 
  On May 1 the draft resolution's Paragraph 72 was directly on this point; the UN's excuse about its "MAMS" system was not considered compelling. Inner City Press, on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Accessasked about it on April 29:
Inner City Press: in the Committee on Information, various countries raised issues about why their languages aren’t represented, that the archives of UNTV are not presented in Spanish, Chinese, Russian. It wasn’t really clear to me what the answer on that was--
Spokesman Stephane Dujarric: I think the answer is that it’s an effort that we have tried, [the Department of Public Information] has tried to improve the situation in terms of languages. We are now able to webcast in the six languages; I know that they’re working the technologies to archive it in the six languages. It’s an issue of resources, it’s an issue of mandate, but it’s not an issue of will and of willingness to do more in many languages. And in fact, a lot of the UNTV programming is now done in different languages.
Inner City Press: This is a simpler one, I know it will be the last one for me, I know there’s an event down there, but I wanted to ask on the actual UN EZTV which has channels and it’s an in-house thing, it seems like now, there’s two French channels, there’s two American news channels, there’s Al-Jazeera, there’s no Russian or Chinese channel, so…
Spokesman Dujarric: We’re trying. Part of the issue is what we can get for free, we had to cut costs in terms of subscription so it was a cost issue, but I know it’s an effort on the part of [the Department of Public Information] to add more channels in different languages, but it’s also trying to do it in a way that doesn’t cost us a dime.
Inner City Press: It’s seems like P3 TV, do you see why?
Spokesman: Okay, that’s a comment, not a question.
Two days later there is an addition on UN in-house EZTV, but it is not Chinese or Russian: it's Japan's NHK. So G4 TV?
  More insidiously, France's outgoing Permanent Representative to the UN Gerard Araud on April 15 told a UN accredited correspondent (not this one) who asked a critical question, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." 
  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access has asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to convey to the French mission the UN's stated position, that correspondents should be treated with respect. So far it has not happened.
  On May 1 responding to a public invitation to a Q&A session with Araud -- for $20 mind you -- Inner City Press went to ask him this question and others. But once at the venue, a law firm on Lexington Avenue, Araud said it was off the record. Bait and switch, on World Press Freedom Day.
  The attacked correspondent has for days asked the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee to take some action -- as, we note, it did with respect to another media, and another Ambassador. But the attacked journalist tells Inner City Press that UNCA is "dragging its feet." Others are not surprised.
Footnotes: In fairness, initiatives like DPI's Brown Bag Lunch series with for example UN Security and the UN envoy to Libya were good, and we thank now outgoing Under Secretary General for Public Information Peter Launsky-Tieffenthalfor them. More is possible before he leaves in mid-August. The press and public should have input into the criteria and selection process, the Free UN Coalition for Access maintains -- just as its sign remains and will remain up, even as its most recent flier about reform was torn down April 30.
  We heard on April 30 that USG Launsky-Tieffenthal is leaving, and FUNCA out of respect wrote to him and asked. He is an Austrian civil servant and is being called back to service in Vienna in mid-August.  By contrast other Under Secretaries General like Herve Ladsous still openly refuse particular media's questions, and other USGs rarely if even take questions. Improvements, including a UN Freedom of Information Act and improved UN Media Alert, are needed. Watch this site.

 
  

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

At UN, Russia Cites Kyiv Junta, Ukraine Pushes Back, Of Language Exclusions and P3 TV: FUNCA


By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, April 29 -- After disputes about spying and the UN's failure to translate or treat languages fairly, the speeches in the Committee on Information ended on April 29 with replies by Ukraine and Russia.

  Ukraine's youthful spokesman criticized Russia for having referred to the Kyiv junta, saying that all countries except Russia recognize it. (He did not state the basis for this, after for example 58 abstentions in the UN General Assembly on the resolution against the referendum in Crimea.)

   Russia's spokesman kept his reply light and briefing, noting that he'd spoken of multi-ligualism in the morning, and now his Ukrainian colleague had learned Russian. Further speeches seemed sure to follow later on April 29 in the Security Council.

  On the topic of language inequality, Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access at the April 29 noon briefing asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman Stephane Dujarric why the UN's in-house EZTV has two French channels, France 24 and TV 5 Monde, CNN and Fox News from the US, Al Jazeera and BBC, but no channel in Chinese or Russian.

  Cost, Dujarric replied. But who votes on or oversees these budgets? When Inner City Press asked about (Western) "P3 TV," Dujarric said, That's not a question. No, it is not: it's a current fact.
    There are culture fights at the UN, and there are also language wars. Or at least skirmishes, as took place on April 28 in the Committee on Information. Delegates from Argentina to Cuba and China asked why the UN Webcast archives are not in Spanish or Chinese, Russian or Arabic. At least the question was answered, but the logic is not entirely clear.
  Even from the UN's in-house EZTV, which offers CNN and Fox, BBC and Al Jazaeera, TV 5 Monde and France 24, the Chinese and Russian channels have been removed, Inner City Press hereby reports and the Free UN Coalition for Access dubs "P3 TV" for the three Western permanent members of the UN Security Council.
  There are two French channels, and none in Chinese or Russian. Meanwhile as Argentina's delegate pointed out on April 28 in the Committee on Information, it is Spanish and not French that is the second most popular language for those visiting the UN's website. Que pasa?
  More insidiously, France's outgoing Permanent Representative to the UN Gerard Araud on April 15 told a UN accredited correspondent (not this one) who asked a critical question, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." 
  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access has asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to convey to the French mission the UN's stated position, that correspondents should be treated with respect. So far it has not happened.
  The attacked correspondent has for days asked the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee to take some action -- as, we note, it did with respect to another media, and another Ambassador. But the attacked journalist tells Inner City Press that UNCA is "dragging its feet." Others are not surprised.
  Amid all this, the UN will be celebrating World Press Freedom Day with none other than the president of UNCA, which is dragging its feet on defense of journalists inside the UN (after having attacked at least one, then engaged in censorship), and while UNCA does NOTHING on more serious attacks on press freedom in Ethiopia and Burundi. World Press Freedom Day, indeed. We'll be there: watch this site.
Footnote: In fairness, initiatives like DPI's Brown Bag Lunch series with for example UN Security and the UN envoy to Libya were good. But Under Secretaries General like Herve Ladsous still openly refuses particular media's questions, and other USGs rarely if even take questions. Improvements, including a UN Freedom of Information Act and improved UN Media Alert, are needed. Watch this site.

 
  

Monday, April 28, 2014

Of UN Language Wars and P3 TV in Committee on Information; Press Attacked Without Defense, FUNCA


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, April 28 -- There are culture fights at the UN, and there are also language wars. Or at least skirmishes, as took place on April 28 in the Committee on Information. Delegates from Argentina to Cuba and China asked why the UN Webcast archives are not in Spanish or Chinese, Russian or Arabic. At least the question was answered, but the logic is not entirely clear.
  Even from the UN's in-house EZTV, which offers CNN and Fox News, BBC and Al Jazaeera, TV 5 Monde and France 24, the Chinese and Russian channels have been removed, Inner City Press hereby reports and the Free UN Coalition for Access dubs "P3 TV" for the three Western permanent members of the UN Security Council.
  There are two French channels, and none in Chinese or Russian. Meanwhile as Argentina's delegate pointed out on April 28 in the Committee on Information, it is Spanish and not French that is the second most popular language for those visiting the UN's website. Que pasa?
  More insidiously, France's outgoing Permanent Representative to the UN Gerard Araud on April 15 told a UN accredited correspondent (not this one) who asked a critical question, "You are not a journalist, you are an agent." 
  Inner City Press on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access has asked UN Spokesman Stephane Dujarric to convey to the French mission the UN's stated position, that correspondents should be treated with respect. So far it has not happened.
  The attacked correspondent has for days asked the UN Correspondents Association's Executive Committee to take some action -- as, we note, it did with respect to another media, and another Ambassador. But the attacked journalist tells Inner City Press that UNCA is "dragging its feet." Others are not surprised.
  Amid all this, the UN will be celebrating World Press Freedom Day with none other than the president of UNCA, which is dragging its feet on defense of journalists inside the UN (after having attacked at least one, then engaged in censorship), and while UNCA does NOTHING on more serious attacks on press freedom in Ethiopia and Burundi. World Press Freedom Day, indeed. We'll be there: watch this site.
Footnote: In fairness, initiatives like DPI's Brown Bag Lunch series with for example UN Security and the UN envoy to Libya were good. But Under Secretaries General like Herve Ladsous still openly refuses particular media's questions, and other USGs rarely if even take questions. Improvements, including a UN Freedom of Information Act and improved UN Media Alert, are needed. Watch this site.

 
  

Friday, May 31, 2013

On Myanmar, UN Misleads With "Ban Welcomes Ceasefire Agreement in Kachin," DPI Spinning As on UNSC Media Access Reduction?


By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 31 -- What's wrong with the UN? On May 31 it said, of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Myanmar, that "Ban welcomes ceasefire agreement in Kachin."
There is only one problem: no ceasefire has been agreed to. Inner City Press has obtained and now puts online the actual agreement, here.
Likewise it is reported that Myanmar "and ethnic Kachin rebels signed a preliminary agreement on Thursday...The parties however, failed to reach an official ceasefire agreement."
So why would the UN, through its Department of Public Information, misleading announce that "Ban welcomes ceasefire agreement in Kachin?" (DPI's reporting was criticized during the recent UN Committee on Information meetings, which Inner City Press covered, as gently as possible.)
This is the same Department of Public Information which has been claiming for ten days that eliminating a media worktable that existed in front of the Security Council for years, before the relocation for renovation and since, is in fact somehow NOT a reduction in media access.
That claim is false. At best we can say that some atop DPI don't understand, or don't want to understand, how coverage of the Security Council has worked for years now, with reporters using laptops on a table in front of the Council in order to be there when ambassadors leave in the middle of meetings, or speakers come during all day open debates. To stand for hours is unnecessary: but it's what Ban's DPI and its partners are for now demanding.
Perhaps rather than inaccurately playing at reporting, DPI should pay more attention to its claimed role of ensuring the independent journalist can cover the UN and how deals are done here. Some deals are ugly, including deals to mislead, and misleading about deals.

So is it that the UN's DPI, on Myanmar, is intentional misleading about what was agreed to in Kachin? Or, like how the Security Council has been covered for years, is it that they just don't understand or don't care? We'll have more on this. Watch this site.

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

As India Tells UN Department of Public Information Not to Spin, How Evaluate DPKO's Herve Ladsous Grabbing Mic of UNTV?



By Matthew Russell Lee, CoI Day 2
UNITED NATIONS, April 23 -- Is the UN Department of Public Information's job to make people think better of the UN, to play Western journalist, or to tell the truth? 
  The issue was raised Tuesday in the UN Committee on Information, by India's Deputy Permanent Representative Manjeev Singh Puri among others.
  Manjeev Singh Puri said the the UN's meeting coverage should not, when a resolution is not adopted in the Security Council, use the word “failed.”
  That of course is the way most Western media reported it, when two resolutions on Syria were vetoed. But shouldn't the UN Secretariat answer to all of its members, not just the Western ones?
  This issue has also arisen in connection with the UN's withholding of its reports from the public, granting largely Western wire services 48 hours to spin the reports before they go online. Inner City Press spoke with more ambassadors on Tuesday, who criticized this practice.
  Most said that the UN should put the reports online as soon as they are finished, to avoid this type of spin, which hurts the UN's credibility. The issue has been raised, including to DPI, and that answers are forthcoming has been promised.
  Tuesday morning among other speakers, Iran complained that some of its TV channels are blocked by other countries. In the afternoon Cuba spoke of illegal broadcasts into its country, interfering with its duly registered stations.
  Russia spoke of the need to continue reporting on World War Two -- ironic in light of a recent “urgent” inquiry by DPI into a single tweet mentioning #WW2 -- and concluded its presentation by speaking in Chinese, in the spirit of multi-lingualism.
  Argentina bragged that Spanish is the Number Two language in which the UN is accessed online. One wondered about the “working language” of French and of its costs, as has The Economist.
  Lebanon's representative cited Tawakuul Karman of Yemen, again ironic given DPI's formal censure of Inner City Press for having signed her into the UN as a guest, and her subsequently daring to speak at the UNTV stakeout as the Security Council considered her country, Yemen.
 For the record, the stakeout rule cited can be respected - but what of DPI adopting other, pro journalist rules like due process in the accreditation and complaint process?
  UNESCO spoke of a UN Plan to protect journalists, which would be much needed. Not enough has been said about the editor in Mali facing charges for reporting on the windfall to coup leader Amadou Sanago
  It's unclear what the UN did while a reporter was in danger in Central African Republic recently. And what of Prageeth, disappeared in Sri Lanka? These are only examples.
  DPI's chief, only in place since August, spoke last and addressed questions member states had raised, including some we reported yesterday as not having been substantively answered. 
  On how DPI evaluates itself, reference was made to “results based management” -- polling done by UN Information Centers after their briefings, whether participants' “opinion of the UN improved after attending briefings.”
Should that be the measure? Certain it would be for the public relations department of a corporation. But is the UN different? Might it be DPI's job to simple increase information about the UN and to answer questions?
  Think, for example, of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's and his top lawyer Patricia O'Brien's decision that legal claims the UN inadvertently brought cholera to Haiti was “not receivable.”
  One approach -- actually adopted by the UN -- might be to stop answering questions about the decision, and hope it is simply not written about as much. But doesn't “Public Information,” as opposed to “Public Relations,” connote that answers should be given?
  And isn't there a theory in which addressing problems ultimately is better for an institution than refusing to answer them?
Who in the UN system evaluates the effectiveness of the communications strategy of UN Peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous? He refuses to answer including on DPI's UN Television any questions from Inner City Press, for example about the 126 rapes in Minova by the Congolese Army, then later spoon-feeds half-answers to friendlier media.
  How should the effectiveness of this communications strategy be evaluated? This wasn't answered on Tuesday.
  On UNTV, in fairness, while for months it would not stream on the Android platform and so one stopped even checking, Tuesday once prodded and checked, it works. So there's one improvement.
  There remain more than 10 reforms proposed by the Free UN Coalition for Access back in February, and after-arising questions about how photos taking while DPI was in control of Inner City Press' office were shared and then leaked to BuzzFeed, right after that publication contacted Ban's spokesperson about the raid. One hopes and expects that the answers promised include that one.
  Public Information means or should mean answering questions, and in the long run that is the best approach. Watch this site.