At UN, Ban Ki-moon's Carbon Footprint Incalculable, Of Airline Partners & Waste, FUNCA Sign & Space

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, June 22 – The UN talks about carbon reduction and austerity, but is vague about emissions while not only allowing but requiring waste.

  Early on June 21, based on questions the UN has left unanswered to many requesters, the new Free UN Coalition for Access asked the UN's “Greening the Blue,” which had been bragging about carbon reduction, “Can you / UN estimate Ban Ki-moon's entourage's travel emissions?”

  Greening the Blue uses social media, but which not answer this question from FUNCA's Twitter account, here. So at the June 21 UN noon briefing, FUNCA co-founder Inner City Press asked:

Inner City Press: there is something called Greening the Blue, I have tried to ask them directly and haven’t received a response, whether the UN’s Office of the Secretary-General estimates the carbon footprint, the carbon effects, of his travel, which obviously is quite necessary, but can you disclose what that the quantity is and whether it is in any way offset?

Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey: Well, we’ll try and get that information for you, Matthew.

   Six hours later, as the UN made other demands on Inner City Press and FUNCA (the very sign of which the UN and its partners have tried to ban), the following was emitted by the UN as a note to all correspondents:

In response to a question about efforts to offset carbon footprint at the United Nations, the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General has the following to say:

We do not have specific estimate of the Secretary-General’s travel, but we do estimate regularly the United Nations staff’s total carbon footprint as well as the share of air travel. According to the most recent Greening the Blue report, launched on 19 June 2013, the total emissions of 8,185 staff members at the United Nations Headquarters estimate 63,059 tonnes (CO2eq), of which 48 per cent is caused by air travel.

  On the question of Ban's travel impact, the UN did not have or provide an answer. But on the question of air travel, ironically, the same week Ban's Department of Public Information was tweeting about its multimedia partnership with the airline Royal Air Maroc, see here with model plane.

  The response – which did not provide the basic requested information about Ban's travel and is online in full here – added in a different font, as if an additional argument, that “[r]ecent renovations to the UN Secretariat building in New York were designed to reduce energy consumption by 50%.”

  In the new offices, at least for the press, lights go on automatically even if one does not want them. Meanwhile DPI has devoted a lot of energy to trying to order Inner City Press to take a simple Free UN Coalition for Access sign off the door to its office, while allowing the old UN Correspondents Association to have two prominent signs, a big meeting room, a separate office and even a locked UNCA pantry in which it stores its wine glasses.

  On Friday evening, as the (non) response on Ban's travel was sent out, DPI was informing Inner City Press that it planned to now put three separate media in the two-desk office behind the FUNCA sign. This was presented for the first time in front of one of the media.

  Now a series of questions have been raised. Why is an UNCA Executive Committee member next to Inner City Press given a private, one-media office? Why is the UNCA president, Pamela Falk, given a separate office? How can the UN put three media at two desks?

  The answer to the later is waste: media which have not requested UN space are told they can only get a so-called “White P” entry card if they request from the UN space they do not want. When asked about this wasteful absurdity, the answer is that these are the UN rules. But the UN makes its own rules.

  In the case of the new rule against signs – or signs other than UNCA's – the UN partnered with UNCA to put out a rule banning all competition. 

  Likewise, the UN Censorship Alliance announced limitations of use of the Security Council stakeout as media workspace, which is how new media coverage of the Council is possible, conversing with diplomats going in and out while writing a series of short pieces about a range of topics.

  The UN has been told that any removal of the FUNCA sign would be unacceptable censorship, an attempt to ban a new dissenting group or network; after a week of waste, it has been asked to confirm that it will not seek to force the removal of the FUNCA sign while leaving UNCA's up.

   The DPI official responsible for much of this, promoting the ban on dissent both below and above himself in DPI, now follows FUNCA (after previously blocking Inner City Press). What will come of this? Watch this site.

As UN Security Council Moves, UN Stonewalls on Rule Banning SC Media Workspace: When, & Who Favors?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 31 -- With the UN Security Council already moving from the basement back to the second floor, and the media table in front of it already gone, Inner City Press at Friday's noon briefing asked Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's deputy spokesman Eduardo Del Buey for the status of the draft rule which would for the first time ban media workspace in front of the Council. Video here, from Minute 10:04.

  Inner City Press for the Free UN Coalition for Access was shown, "for comment," a draft Media Access Guideline on May 20 which along other things would provide:

"f. The Security Council stakeout area, including the Turkish Lounge, is not to be used as a permanent workspace for the media. When the Council is not in session, correspondents should minimize the amount of time in the area, unless interviewing or conversing with a U.N. delegate or official."

  As FUNCA commented on May 21, and Inner City Press has reported in stories since, this proposed rule would reverse the media workspace -- a work table -- that existed in front of the Security Council before its temporary move to the basement, and that continued in the basement, until today.

  A week ago, Del Buey claimed that the rule would not reduce media access. Now he has been repeating to Inner City Press that it can only ask the Department of Public Information, whose Stephane Dujarric has not provided the date of implementation, nor acted on or even provided a substantive response to other complaints lodged with him.

(Beyond those complaints, including involving a UN Security camera about Inner City Press' and FUNCA's office door, other FUNCA members have raised their banning as non-resident correspondents from the Delegates' Lounge; the rules would also trample on free speech rights.)

  Del Buey on Friday again said, "Ask Stephane," saying that while Ban's Office of the Spokesperson is listed as a party to the Guidelines -- tellingly, so is the old UN Correspondents Association, although no membership meeting on these has been held -- it is DPI which "implements" the rules. 

 So it's DPI banning media workspace and access, using or being used by the Gulf & Western wires who run the UNCA board? UNCA's 2013 president Pamela Falk of CBS claimed to UNCA members who asked that she hadn't seen the Media Access Guidelines. More recently the spin is that it is up to Security Council members.

  Two anonymous social media accounts associated with UNCA / Reuters, and now analogized by one observer to "Mean Girls," have opposed the press for maintaining media workspace by the Security Council. And Ban's DPI?

  The incoming Security Council presidency has acknowledged that having a media table in front of the Council hurts no one, and helps coverage. So by what right would it be eliminated?

  The issue of the impending and unnecessary banning of media workspace in front of the Security Council has been raised above Dujarric, politely, with the offer of any additional information necessary. Watch this site.

UN Peacekeeping Stonewalls on Syria, Sudan & DRC, UK's Lyall Grant Answers on the Latter, UNSC Media Table in Play?

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 28 -- Tomorrow is the Day of Peacekeepers, but today at the UN getting information from or about the Department of Peacekeeping Operations was like pulling teeth. 

  At the noon briefing Inner City Press asked about Sudan, Syria and the Congo. By day's end, the only answer came not from DPKO but from the President of the Security Council for June, UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant. That's appreciated, but where's DPKO?

  It wasn't just Inner City Press getting stonewalled on Syria. Russian and Lebanese reporters started asking about the kidnapping of peacekeepers in the Golan Heights, to which Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey said, "Well, Mr. Ladsous will be here tomorrow."

  Since Herve Ladsous refuses to answer Inner City Press questions -- click here for video -- Inner City Press sought to quickly follow up with Del Buey:

Inner City Press: if I could just follow up on that, because I think on Friday I had asked you about a 22 May letter from the Syrian Mission to DPKO (Department of Peacekeeping Operations), what… whether they would say what the contents were. Were you able to ask DPKO that?

Deputy Spokesperson Del Buey: We do not divulge the contents of letters from missions to us or to them.

Inner City Press: But you are just saying that you are not aware of any requests to the Secretariat, so--

Deputy Spokesperson: I am not aware of any requests to the Secretariat for an investigation to Qatar, no.

Inner City Press: So that’s not what the 22 May letter is?

Deputy Spokesperson: I don’t have any information

  And so it went on reports of Chadian forces in Sudan, and reported delays in deployment of the UN Intervention Brigade in the Eastern Congo. On the latter:

Inner City Press: on the DRC, there are reports that the intervention brigade is actually being being delayed, that so far only 500 from South Africa and [the United Republic of] Tanzania have arrived, and there are credible reports that South Africa is dissatisfied with the leadership of the brigade being given to [the United Republic of] Tanzania, of MONUSCO’s (United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) force commander being from Brazil, and may in fact not deploy. Do you have any response to that?

Deputy Spokesperson Del Buey: I have no information on that, Matthew.

  Later on Tuesday UK Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant tweeted that he had just met with this Brazilian Force Commander, General Cruz. Inner City Press asked if he'd indicated when the Intervention Brigade might be fully deployed, and about any briefing of the Council in June, when Lyall Grant is president.

  Lyall Grant replied that two months sounded about right for full deployment of the Brigade, and that General Cruz might be one of the three Force Commanders to brief the Council on June 26. (These Force Commander fests can be newsy - click here for Inner City Press' July 2011 story, Sudan and South Sudan.) It's a new world, at least in social media or "digital diplomacy."

  It is not, however, yet a new world in UN communications. On Sudan and other topic, Inner City Press asked Del Buey:

Inner City Press: there are reports that the Chadian army has passed through Darfur and is now pursuing a JEM (Justice and Equality Movement) column in Southern Kordofan. Since there is a UN peacekeeping mission in Darfur, I am wondering, do they deny this, do they have any knowledge of this? And the in-house question is, I would again reiterate this concern about the draft media access guidelines which would limit media workspace in front of the Security Council, the posting of flyers that are substantive in the area and keep all but Resident Correspondents out of the Delegates Lounge. I’d like you to convey that to them and also to ask when those guidelines, it hasn’t been explained to me when they would actually go into force and therefore whether there is an opportunity to really get the Secretary-General to speak whether he stands behind them.

Deputy Spokesperson Del Buey: Well, that question is up to you and DPI to handle. I have already answered that. As much as I have answered last week…

Inner City Press: You are party to the agreement, [the draft Media Access Guidelines]. Is that…?

Deputy Spokesperson: …you’ve got the answer we have given. If you want any more information, you are in contact with DPI; do it with DPI. With respect to reports on Darfur, we have, UNAMID (African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur) visited the area and there have been no indications of any armed forces presence in that sector.

Inner City Press: In Southern Kordofan? They visited Southern Kordofan?

Deputy Spokesperson: No, they haven’t visited Southern Kordofan, but we’ll have to check on that. But so far their analysis is that there is no foreign presence there.

  Beyond Chad, there are reports of death and pull outs of Abu Karshola. So where is DPKO in all this?

Footnote: on the issue of the possible reduction in media workspace in front of the Security Council, specifically a table which was always in front of the Council before it moved to the basement, and was maintained in the basement, it is still not known what will happen on June 1. Video here.

  What seems most reasonable is to allow a table in the space between the steps down from the second floor lobby to the Council and the Turkish Lounge. That space is smaller than what the media had before, but a table to work on makes it possible for correspondents to cover entire Council sessions, and not just ten minutes at the beginning and end. 

  This is particularly important since Permanent Representatives, particularly on the Permanent Five members, often leave after they speak in consultations, and before the session is announced as over. If a journalist is not at the stakeout then, they (and the diplomat) lose the chance.

Also, Council presidents hold bilateral meetings in the Council, and the proposal rule would discourage any media presence outside the Council at those times, and the lack of a table would make presence even less likely. 

  The best way would be to stay or suspend the proposed rule and let it be figured out during June -- WITH a table in place. The sooner this could be clarified, the better. On May 29, not only Ladsous at noon, but also Ban Ki-moon himself is slated to take press questions, at 5 pm after Council consultations on the Congo. Watch this site.

At UN, Ban Ki-moon's Office Stonewalls on UN SC Media Access, EZTV Complaints: Follow the Money

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 28 -- Media access was again the topic at the UN's noon briefing on Tuesday, this time with four separate questioners on the topic. Last Wednesday, Thursday and Friday May 22-24 only Inner City Press asked, about the slated reduction in media workspace in front of the Security Council.

  On this topic, after a three day weekend to get a more credible answer, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Deputy Spokesperson Eduardo Del Buey on May 28 would not Inner City Press even on when the amended Media Access Guidelines, shown to the new Free UN Coalition for Accesson May 20, will go into place. 

  He insisted that only the Department of Public Information can answer this. But it hasn't.

  The other question raised, Del Buey also referred to DPI albeit less defensively. He said that he would inform DPI of the questioners concern about "EZTV" not working. 

  Inner City Press for FUNCA echoed and supported this complaint but wonders: if Ban's Office will convey press corps positions about EZTV, why not about actual media access and workspace to cover the Security Council?

  Some have concluded that the goal behind trying to eliminate a media table in front of the Security Council, which existed prior to the renovation, and also during the renovation at the temporary Council in the basement, is to drive reporters back into their offices, to only cover what they are given.

  In this theory, it is in the UN's interest to have reporters relying on "Easy" UNTV. So why not fix it fast?

  A table, as has been shown to the incoming Security Council president for June, could easily fix between the steps down to the Security Council and the so-called Turkish Lounge. So FUNCA continues to press the issue.

  Anonymous social media accounts associated with the old UN Correspondents Association -- and with Reuters, it must be and has been said -- even over Memorial Day weekend mocked the push for media workspace by the Council, comparing it to a push for a "massage table," or saying that a table should only be for "real journalists," presumably like their anonymous selves.

  But then where are they, fighting for anything but television reception in their offices?

Footnotes: Reuters sent both of its UN reporters to Tuesday's noon briefing, as if to show just how important this Easy TV issue is to the wire service (which today lost its social media editor Anthony De Rosa to Circa; more on that anon.) 

  Reuters apparently doesn't push for media workspace in front of the Security Council because they benefit from less access: they get reports leaked by Western members of the Council.

  Continued and unreduced media access to all 15 Council members serves and helps smaller investigative media, not them. And since their compensation is based on exclusives, even if inaccurately labeled and claimed, there appears to be an economic interest in reduced media access for others. 

  Who are they, then, to anonymously and false charge smaller media of being funded by terrorists? It is, in a word,disgusting. Watch this site.