MEDIA HISSY FIT AT AFGHAN NEWS

WAR & PEACE INCORPORATED

By Sasha Uzunov

Australia’s big name journalists who write on defence and national security issues have the double advantage of making a lot of money as well as indirectly influencing government policy but without having to face the electors.

However, in recent times certain sections of the media have been chucking a hissy fit at the Australian Defence Forces and its public relations arm for allegedly denying journalists access to combat troop operations in Afghanistan.

Johanthan Holmes got on his very high moral horse on the ABC TV’s Media Watch: “By contrast, until this year, the Australian Defence Force only permitted what the media derisively calls 'bus trips' - a few days on the ground, most of them spent on heavily fortified bases, escorted at all times by an officer from Defence Public Affairs. www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2705312.htm

Self appointed Defence Expert Cynthia Banham, who wears two hats as a Fairfax journalist and as an academic at the ANU, is organizing a taxpayer-funded gabfest with the usual suspects, such as Paul McGeough, to bemoan:

“The Australian Defence Force, for instance, uses its own photographers and video operators to create the images it prefers. These then get posted on the ADF website where the public can access them directly, in the process cutting out the traditional news reporters who might have taken a more objective view of whatever story the ADF is trying to push.”

www.theage.com.au/opinion/how-twitter-is-changing-the-way-wars-are-fought-20091005-giur.html

All of this indicates that not all is well with the current crop of big name “war reporters” who because they have no previous military training are having a difficult time in navigating through a war zone. Should the taxpayer pick up the tab for reporters who make a killing, pardon the pun, in writing books, appearing on television and symposiums but who refuse to open up Australia’s defence debate and allow the taxpayer a voice?

Respected journalist and author Phillip Knightley in a brutally honest manner revealed:

“…we allowed those with a vested interest to exaggerate the terrorist threat. Counter-terrorism has proved a boom business, providing thousands of new jobs for security and intelligence officers, surveillance and forensic experts - and, yes, authors and journalists. All of these naturally tend to paint any threat in strong colours, because it is in their professional and financial interests to do so.” link: http://bulletin.syd.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=277788

Richard Farmer, a former ALP strategist, was hired in the early 1990s as a lobbyist by Australia’s Macedonian community to convince the Australian Federal government to recognise The Republic of Macedonia under its consititutional name. Neighbouring Greece had and still does object to that name. At a meeting at the Macedonian Community Centre in Epping, Melbourne, Farmer explained to his audience, largely made up of migrants who spent decades working in factories, Australia’s political process.

“Politicians are interested in only two things. They want to be elected and then re-elected.”

You could say that Farmer’s brilliant maxim, which people with low English language skills can clearly understand, still holds true. Politicians need the oxygen of publicity to achieve election and then re-election. Therefore, whatever big name journalists report or do not report has enormous influence. This would also apply to shaping government policy, namely on defence and national security issues.

It is the tax payer who eventually has to pick up the tab but journalists do not have to face the electors every 3 or 4 years.--power without scrutiny you might say. Commercial television stations are required to pay for a broadcast licence from the Commonwealth, that is they rent the airwaves from the landlord, the Australian public. But we know that the “tennant” holds more power than the “landlord.”

The media, both commerical and public owned, have in recent times scrutinized servants of the Crown: politicians who receive campaign donations, police officers and soldiers who take a leave of absence to work a second job as private security advisers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Should we not also examine currently employed public media journalists, those from the ABC and SBS, who take on second jobs and influence defence and national security policy? First and foremost, there is nothing immoral or unethical in a journalist, who is paid tax payer dollars, from using their initiative and creating a niche for themselves. But we have to look at whether the tax payer gets value for money.

In the past Australian soldiers and Air Force fighter pilots were required to serve a miniumum amount of years in order to pay off their training. Soldiers who undertook expensive training courses incurred a Return of Service Obligation (ROSO) and had to serve more than their allotted minimum to pay back the Commonwealth.

Trying to extract information from ABC and SBS journalists is like having your sore wisdom teeth pulled: its is very painfull but very necessary. In trying to discuss defence and national security issues over the past couple of years I have encountered either silence or a haughty manner from our public funded journalists.

Media tough guy Peter Charley has a reputation for speaking his mind. As Executive Producer of ABC TV program Lateline in 2006 he issued this statement to me over my criticism of why Lateline was reluctant to open up Australia’s defence debate:

“It is neither wise nor clever to suggest that "little ol' Lateline” is "afraid" to have anyone on the program…” (Friday 13 January 2006, email).

The rhetorical question is why is it not wise or clever?

I had observed that Lateline had only used one Australian journalist with actual military experience to comment on defence issues and that was legendary newsman Gerald Stone, the founding producer of Australia’s version of 60 Minutes on the Nine Network in 1979 and a former US Army officer. You would think that Stone would have been utilized more often and other journalists with military experience given a chance to speak on Lateline.

Sally Neighbour is an award winning ABC TV journalist with the Four Corners program who also writes for the commercially owned The Australian newspaper on terrorism and is an author of “In the Shadow of Swords.” Sally, who has no previous military, policing or security experience, also lectures on the lucrative public speaker circuit. In October 2007 at Monash University she thundered from her pulpit:

“I have to say I tire of people complaining that the media makes Muslims look bad, makes all Muslims look like terrorists. It may sound trite to say this, but the media didn't crash those planes or bomb those nightclubs. Militant Islamists did it, and they did it invoking the name of Islam. The media doesn't make Muslims look bad. Terrorists who kill civilians while shouting "Allah Akhbar" make Muslims look bad.”

We can safely conclude that Sally's expertise comes from her time as an ABC journalist, that is at the taxpayer's expense. We do not know whether the ABC, that is the taxpayer, receives a slice from her second income.

Then there is Peter Hartcher, a Fairfax journalist and strategic analyst with the Lowy Institute think tank, who boasts of his political influence:

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/StaffBio.asp?pid=372 “He has been called twice to testify as an expert witness to Federal Parliamentary inquiries into Australia's relations in the Asia-Pacific and commissioned to write essays on Asia for the Washington-based foreign policy journal The National Interest.

Not forgetting Greg Sheridan of The Australian newspaper:“Greg Sheridan is the most influential foreign affairs commentator in Australia. A veteran of over 30 years in the field, he has written five books and is a frequent commentator on Australian and international radio and TV.”http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/gregsheridan/

Freedom of speech is a valuable commodity and a two way street. If big name reporters from the ABC, SBS or Fairfax have a special licence to investigate, then that should also apply to humble freelancers, bloggers and the average Australian tax payer.

But it would appear that is not the case. Where ABC, SBS and Fairfax reporters believe they have a god-given right to go into war zones and stick cameras and microphones into people’s faces and on themselves wearing flak jackets to get the story, trying to scrutinise the credentials of these reporters is almost impossible.

I have emailed Paul McGeough of the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper asking him why he had never volunteered for military service in his youth considering his enthusiasm, passion and “expertise” in covering war but never got a response. Perhaps my question is more dangerous than facing a Taliban bullet or IED (Improvised Explosive Device)!

McGeough in defence of his “own freedom of speech” told the ABC:

www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2006/1624270.htm“If our government is eavesdropping on people's phone conversations and on their email, without having a warrant, without any check or balance in the system, I think we have a right to know. I think we have a right to debate it.”

What Jonathan Holmes and Cynthia Banham need to do is not blame the ADF when the media itself is too afraid to open up Australia’s defence debate.

Only one man is the exception and that is brave John Martinkus, who has been able to navigate his way through a battlefield without help from the Australian Defence Force.

In a thought provoking story for New Matilda: (What Does The Australian Military Have To Hide?)
http://newmatilda.com/2009/10/13/what-does-australian-military-have-hide Martinkus tells of his frustration at being denied access to speak to Australian troops on camera in Afghanistan. Having been to Afghanistan myself I can empathise with Martinkus but also understand that the ADF's micro-management of the news flow is because during the Vietnam War the Australian Army got its fingers severely burnt and soldiers' lives were destroyed by a bogus Viet Cong water torture story that was not true.

It propelled reporter John Sorrell to fame and fortune whilst Vietnam Veterans were tarred with the brush of brutal savages. www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=9187

(end)

MEDIA END CHEERLEADING OF DEF MINISTER

MEDIA END CHEERLEADING OF DEFENCE MINISTER
by Sasha Uzunov

It was a case of the Australian media finally laying down their pom-poms and ending the cheerleading routine in reporting how tough the Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon was in his war with his own Defence Department.

What civilians cannot understand is the Defence Department is a universe of its own. Outsiders who do not know how to operate in this environment get chewed up pretty quick. Mr Fitzgibbon, through no fault of his own, lacks two things: he has never served in uniform and secondly, he does not hold the aces when it comes to playing political poker with his own Defence Department.

Only one man, TEAM UZUNOV points out, is capable of doing so: Colonel Iron Mike Kelly, Federal Parliamentary Secretary for Defence.

It was a TEAM UZUNOV blog that first revealed the worsening relationship between the Minister and his own Department when an outsider, Mr Tim Holding, was being floated as go-between or trouble shooter in Afghanistan.

Later, TEAM UZUNOV revealed that because of the war between Mr Fitzgibbon and his Department that the only honourable thing was for him to fall on his sword.

The media have now revealed that Mr Fitzgibbon has apologised for not declaring trips he undertook to China

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25249324-601,00.html
Joel Fitzgibbon admits woman friend Helen Liu paid for China trips
Brad Norington and Patrick Walters March 27, 2009

Article from: The Australian
THE future of Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon was in doubt last night after he was forced to apologise for failing to declare two trips he made to China that were paid for by Chinese businesswoman Helen Liu.

The admission drew an immediate call by Malcolm Turnbull for Kevin Rudd to sack Mr Fitzgibbon.

Revelation of the trips came after it was reported yesterday a covert investigation by officials from Mr Fitzgibbon's own Defence Department allegedly unearthed security concerns about his links with Ms Liu. The Defence Department's internal security agency has begun its own urgent investigation into the allegations that Defence officials spied on the minister...
---

TEAM UZUNOV is not suggesting anything untoward in Mr Fitzgibbon's behavior and respects his privacy. However, with a real shooting war raging between the Taliban and Australian soldiers in Afghanistan the sideshow has taken the focus off that...

Mr Fitzgibbon was lightly rebuked by the Australian media when it was also revealed he had taken a mate on a joyride into a warzone on board a Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) flight.
http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/fitzgibbon-defends-friends-afghan-trip-20080730-3naf.html
Fitzgibbon defends friend's Afghan trip
Maria HawthorneJuly 30, 2008

Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon says he has no regrets about his decision to take a friend on an official trip to war-torn Afghanistan.

University academic Scott Holmes paid his own way to accompany Mr Fitzgibbon to the Anzac Day service in Gallipoli, with the trip also taking in Ankara and the Middle East.

But they made an unscheduled diversion to Tarin Kowt after Australian soldier Jason Marks was killed in Afghanistan on their last night in Ankara.

The opposition has labelled the trip "Joel's joy flight" and questioned the additional cost and security risk of taking Professor Holmes, an economics specialist and part-time adviser in Mr Fitzgibbon's electorate office, into Afghanistan.
-------------------------------------------------

It is a pity that the Australian media play follow the pack mentality when reporting defence issues. The recent change in that behaviour could be explained that Mr Fitzgibbon's position has become untenable so the media now feel safe to move against him, without losing the privileges of free embedded trips to the Australian Army base in Tarin Kowt, Afghanistan.

Such cynical behaviour by the media does not serve the Australian taxpayer and his or her right to know about the goings on with the Defence Department

-------------------------------------

Thursday, March 12, 2009
DEFENCE MINISTER MUST GO
By Sasha UzunovCopyright 2009

Regardless of the SASR pay dispute, you know it is time for Australia's Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon to fall on his sword when he publicly has to wage a media war to bring his department under control.So much has been made by some journalists, acting more like cheerleaders and unofficial spin doctors, about how tough, feisty and angry Mr Fitzgibbon is with the Defence Department.

He has launched a well crafted media campaign where he has vented his “anger” at his department over being kept in the dark on a number of issues and the break down in communication of events in Afghanistan. In an unusual move, his predecessor, Dr Brendan Nelson, from the opposition, backed him up in Federal Parliament. Subsequent events, such as the SASR pay dispute, have confirmed what many have been saying for a long time, and that is Mr Fitzgibbon is out of his depth.

read more...

http://teamuzunovmedia.blogspot.com/2009/03/defence-minister-must-go.html

---------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, January 30, 2009 - TEAM UZUNOV
MINISTER ON AFGHAN FACT FINDING TRIP?
ExclusiveTim Holding - Brumby’s man turned PM Rudd’s international man of mystery?

VIC MINISTER WON’T CONFIRM OR DENY AFGHAN TRIP
By Sasha Uzunov
Copyright 2009

Mr Tim Holding, a Victorian State government minister who is a former Australian Army Reserve Special Forces soldier, will not confirm nor deny speculation about him undertaking a short fact finding mission to Afghanistan on behalf of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
A prominent strategic analyst, who has the close ear of governments, and speaking on the condition of anonymity, said he wanted to “float the idea of Mr Holding undertaking a fact finding mission to the Australian base in Tarin Kowt province [in Southern Afghanistan].”

read more:
http://teamuzunovmedia.blogspot.com/2009/03/holding-peacemakercircuit-breaker.html
---------------------

The Age, Diary Column, Tuesday, 3 February 2009.
Timmy, don't forget to pack the water canteen
by SUZANNE CARBONE

TIM Holding was dubbed "Twinkle Twinkle" because he was considered a little star, and he's really made an impact in the water portfolio with those faulty four-minute shower timers that last for 40 minutes or four hours. But Dim's moment to shine may have arrived.

Former Australian soldier Sasha Uzunov, now a photo-journalist, writes in his blog that Holding (below) could be destined for Afghanistan as Kevin Rudd's "eyes and ears" on the ground. You see, Holding is well credentialed as a former member of the Army Reserve in the 1st Commando Regiment - and he's Tourism Minister.

A "prominent Canberra strategic analyst" told Uzunov: "Mr Holding is an intelligent young politician with links to special forces. The Australian media underestimate his ability, which is why he would be ideal for the mission: he would slip under the media radar."

The analyst claimed the PM was not happy with the flow of information from Afghanistan so the analyst would suggest Holding embark on a "fact-finding mission" to the Australian base in Tarin Kowt. Diary asked Commando Holding about swapping a fluoro vest for a flak jacket, and he said:

....read more

VICTORIA CROSS - NEW ERA OF HEROES

photo: Defence Dept

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8431&page=0

Friday, 23 January 2009

VC WINNER HERALDS NEW ERA OF HEROES

By Sasha Uzunov

The award of the highly prestigious Victoria Cross to SASR Trooper Mark Donaldson for outstanding bravery under fire in Afghanistan is not only significant because it is the first time in forty years since the Vietnam War but it heralds the end of one era and the beginning of another in Australian society.

“Trooper Donaldson's bravery will forever be engraved in Australian history,” the Prime Minister Mr Kevin Rudd said.

“Generations of schoolchildren will now know of the story of Trooper Mark Donaldson.”

Society now has heroes to look up to who are not media creations. As more and more heroes emerge from Australia’s war in Afghanistan the need for the media tough guy surrogate hero is probably finished.

Those who are highly paid observers or futurologists such as the well respected Bernard Salt should be taking note of this trend and passing it on to those powerful people who shape our media agenda such as news bosses John Westacott of the Nine Network and his Seven Network counterpart Peter Meakin.

The 1960s were a turbulent time in Australia’s history with Vietnam seen as a controversial war and a conservative society undergoing dramatic change. The notion of strong young men undergoing military service as a rite of passage was seen as anachronistic and this view probably lasted until the 1980s. Moreover, some within Australian society felt strongly that Australia and America were simply wrong to get involved in Vietnam.

Author Michael Caulfield, in his excellent book “The Vietnam Years” from the jungle to the Australian suburbs,” wrote of the 1960s:

“What was ‘now’, what was ‘happening’, was the photograph of a long-haired dissenter, courageously resisting a phalanx of overweight cops as they dragged him away to jail. He looked vaguely like one of Christ‘s apostles, definitely ‘cool’, a modern icon.”

A clever newsman Gerald Stone, a former US Army artillery officer and famous war reporter in his own right, probably sensed an Australian society needing strong masculine heroes to fill the void. Stone recruited three journalists, Ray Martin, Ian Leslie and George Negus.

As canny Mark Day, a newspaperman of the old school, observed:

“I guess we can blame Gerald Stone and George Negus for the emergence of the celebrity journalist--at least in Australia. “Stone was executive producer of the Nine (TV network) clone of CBS’s 60 Minutes when it launched here in 1979 with the premise that the reporter was the story.

“George, along with Ray Martin and Ian Leslie were sent into war zones, deep jungles, and dark places in search of ripper yarns, and the cameras tracked them tracking down the story.

“George, coat slung over his shoulder, embraced this role with a particular gusto, adding his idiosyncratic commentary into which he wove his personal beliefs.

“It wasn’t long before George was a bigger celeb than any of the news makers he pursued, even after being savaged by the likes of Margaret Thatcher.”

George Negus was dubbed the Balmain Cowboy after a tough working class inner Sydney suburb because of his macho image, even though he never served in Vietnam but was a school teacher who dabbled in journalism and later became a press secretary to a politician.

But with the resurgence of the Anzac Legend and in particular a new respect for those who serve in uniform, where does that leave the war reporter in society’s eyes after having fulfilled the role of surrogate “warrior” stereotype during the 1970s and 80s?

Rival Australian television networks, in a game of one up-manship, have inadvertently brought the notion of the warrior as reporter to the surface. A famous case involved veteran Nine Network reporter Jim Waley, who coincidently did not serve in the military in Vietnam, wearing a flak jacket in Iraq in 2004 as opposed to his competitor Adrian Brown of the Seven Network who did not. Both were metres away from each other in Baghdad.

Trooper Donaldson’s award of the VC has now well and truly put an end to the era of the media tough guy as society’s hero.

(end)