NUJ offers support and assistance to members following attacks during EDL protest

The NUJ has condemned attacks on journalists during the EDL protest in London on Saturday and the union has offered support and assistance to journalists who were abused.

Following the EDL event in East London, the union has received numerous reports of harassment, threats and abuse including physical assaults, racist abuse, bottles and fireworks being thrown at the press and photographers being punched and kicked. One journalist was subjected to a sexual assault and another NUJ member suffered minor burns after an EDL supporter used a flammable accelerant to set the photographer on fire.

Violence directed towards journalists who are simply doing their job is totally unacceptable and the deliberate targeting of journalists by the far-right is a violation of press freedom.

Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ general secretary said: “These violent attacks are an appalling abuse of press freedom and a clear attempt by members of the EDL to deter journalists from carrying out their work. These attacks are designed to intimidate NUJ members and those in the local community who are determined to stand up to far-right groups. The police need to take decisive action to ensure that the thugs who attacked journalists during the EDL protest are identified and prosecuted."

Jason N. Parkinson, NUJ London photographers' branch secretary said: "London Photographers' Branch condemns the attacks on journalists by supporters of the EDL during Saturday's protest. These attacks are just the latest in a long history of violence, threats and even fatwas issued against the press and there is only one reason behind them all - to intimidate and deter the media exposing the violent and racist behaviour of the far-right. An attack on the press is an attack on press freedom and on our democracy."

Further information:

Fatwas issued against the press
Redwatch targets the NUJ
Teenager who assaulted journalist jailed for football brawl
Outrage at far-right call to treat photographers as hostile

NUJ

Journalists launch campaign to challenge BNP in run-up to election

Campaigning journalists and media workers are to launch EXPOSE, a campaign aimed at "revealing the undemocratic and racist nature" of the British National Party

The new campaign will tackle the BNP's "attempts to construct a respectable public image" and support media workers who refuse to work on uncritical programmes or material, the group announced today.

EXPOSE aims to brief reporters and news editors to help them challenge the BNP's statements and spokespersons in the run-up to the UK election, the campaigners said.

A launch rally at the Amnesty UK headquarters in London on 23 February will feature Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, columnist and broadcaster; Mehdi Hasan, political senior editor for the New Statesman; Sunny Hundal, editor of the Liberal Conspiracy blog; and Peter Hain, secretary of state for Wales.

"The political and media consensus appears to be that the way to tackle the BNP is to meet it halfway, by talking up tough anti-immigration measures (...) this conventional wisdom must urgently be challenged," said one its founding supporters, James Macintyre, political correspondent for the New Statesman.

"The BNP is not an 'ordinary' political party (...) So why does the media, including the BBC, give them so much time, space and opportunity to spread their bile?" added his New Statesman colleague Mehdi Hasan.

The campaign is also backed by the unions, with speakers at the launch event including Michelle Stanistreet, deputy general secretary of the National Union of Journalists; Pat Styles, national official for BECTU, the media and entertainment union, and Weyman Bennett joint secretary of Unite Against Fascism.

"Journalists have a duty to hold up to the closest scrutiny the claims and activities of those who would foment racial tension and violence. The BNP's inflammatory rhetoric about immigration cannot be taken at face value," said Stanistreet.

journalism.co.uk

Journalists conflict over whether to keep fascists out of the media

Reporters and broadcast journalists engaged in a fierce debate at the weekend on whether to allow the views of fascist BNP members to appear in print.

A motion at media union NUJ conference, calling for "no platform" for fascists attempting to pose as respectable politicians, sparked claims of "censorship" from some journalists, but other delegates urged the union to back "any journalist who refuses to work with the BNP." The NUJ's press and public relations workers' branch collectively demanded that conference especially supports "black union members who refuse to allow BNP members to use their publication or TV or radio channel as a platform."

The sharp exchanges took place as a photograph of delegates arriving at the conference was revealed to have been posted on the Redwatch internet site, which fascists have used to target union and anti-nazi activists. As some delegates urged an immediate ban on all photography at the conference, student journalist Elizabeth Houghton insisted that the union should not be cowed by the fascists.

"If you say that photography must be banned because nazis may use any photo to intimidate journalists, photographers might as well grab their cameras now and throw them on the funeral pyre of freedom of expression," she declared.

Although a motion calling on the union to work to protect reporters and their families from BNP threats because of their coverage was passed, conference voted against the "no platform" call and, instead, "advised journalists to report the BNP responsibly." But Norfolk delegate David Peel insisted that the decision should not stop journalists standing up to the fascist party.

"I fought the National Front in the 1970s and it breaks my heart that I'm still in this fight, but I will refuse to work with the BNP," he asserted.

Conference also responded to the "deliberate media distortions" of the construction strikes earlier this year, when a fight over national union agreements was portrayed in the press as demands for "British jobs for British workers." Delegates urged the union to campaign "to remind journalists covering industrial disputes of the importance of reporting fairly all sides."

Morning Star

The BBC on the BNP - Radio 1's Newsbeat interview is shameful

'Young' BNP members Joey Smith and Mark Collett

Regular readers of this [New Statesman] blog will know that I tend to harp on about the self-serving, right-wing "myth" of the BBC's supposed "liberal left bias".

For those who remain unconvinced, let me point you towards Radio 1 Newsbeat's "interview" with two "young BNP members", on the BBC website. It is so staggeringly soft, woefully weak and uncritically unchallenging that I feel sick to my stomach. Here, in full, is the absurd attempt at rigorous and impartial journalism on the BBC (I mean, Radio 1, what is the point of it?):

'Do you think it's OK for people who aren't white in this country to call themselves British?

Joey: Civicly British they are. You cannot say they are ethnically British. It's denying our heritage. It's taking that away from us.

At what point do they become ethnically British? How long do they have to be here?

Joey: Well I think it would be an awfully long time before someone would become ethnically British.

So when you see someone like Ashley Cole play for England, are you happy to watch him?

Joey: If he wants to come to this country and he wants to live by our laws, pay into society, that's fine.

But if he wanted to call himself British that would be a problem?

Joey: He cannot say that he's ethnically British.

Why is the idea of races mixing such a bad thing?

Joey: If everybody integrated it would take away everybody's identity.

Mark: I would be upset if there were no more giant pandas, I'd be upset if there were no more lions, if there were no more tigers, so equally I'd be upset if white people weren't here any more.

But we're the same species which makes it a bit different, doesn't it?

Mark: You could say that but if all of a sudden there weren't any sparrows and there were only crows, I'd still be sad there weren't any sparrows.

Can you understand that some people are happy to mix?

Mark: No, I think people have been brainwashed. I think the media, the government, have forced it down people's throats and they've indoctrinated people.

You don't think people are bright enough to decide themselves?

Mark: I think when people are bombarded 24 hours a day to force multiculturalism upon them, people are going to succumb to that. We shouldn't have to bend our ways to people who've been here five minutes.

You're talking like people here are on holiday. They've lived here, some of them, for a generation, some of them for longer. Doesn't that count?

Mark: Are you trying to compare somebody, or a group of people who've lived here for maybe 30 years, to people who've lived here for 40,000 years? There's a vast, vast difference in time scale there, my dear.

My point isn't the difference in times between one group of people and another, it's saying they're not visitors, they are not holidaymakers, they are people living here.

Mark: If I went to live and work in another country, then I would still adhere by their culture and they should adhere by ours.'

Is anyone else as shocked as I am by the soft, naive, piss-poor questioning? Why the pleading tone from reporter Debbie Randle? Where in the interview are these two BNP "kids" properly challenged - on the criminal convictions and dubious backgrounds of leading BNP figures; the party's nakedly racist, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic discourse; the BNP's policies on (voluntary) repatriation and mixed-marriage bans, etc? Why is the piece headline "Young BNP members explain their beliefs", as if they are innocent members of, say, Amnesty International or on an Alpha course, rather than of a party whose members are banned from becoming police officers or prison officers?

In May, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) published "race reporting guidelines" for the media, which included this particular point:

'When interviewing representatives of racist organisations or reporting meetings or statements or claims, journalists should carefully check all reports for accuracy and seek rebutting or opposing comments. The antisocial nature of such views should be exposed.'

Does anyone think reporter Debbie Randle stuck to those (voluntary) guidelines, or even to basic common sense (i.e. if you're interviewing young members of a racist party, those members' views should be challenged and their racism exposed)? According to her profile on the BBC website, she is a "Senior Broadcast Journalist" and someone desperate to interview Prince William, who once wanted to be a singer, cites Jon Snow as her favourite "reporter" because "he's so cool" and had a first job working in a bingo club. Judging by this abysmal interview, and the pass she gives the odious BNP and its "young" members, she should probably head back to that bingo club while her Radio 1 bosses hang their heads in shame for commissioning this awful feature.

The normalisation of the BNP in our political and media discourse continues apace - aided and abetted, as usual, by our public-service broadcaster. It's disgusting and depressing.

Mehdi Hasan writing in the New Statesman

Ban BNP members from working in public sector, say unions

TUC calls for urgent talks with the government about extending the current ban on BNP members working in the police and prison services

Unions today called for a ban on members of far right parties such as the BNP working in the public sector. The call to bar British National party members from working in public services came as unions vowed to mobilise against the threat of fascism.

Delegates at the TUC conference in Liverpool unanimously backed the call for urgent talks with the government about extending the current ban on BNP members working in the police and prison services.

Janice Godrich, deputy general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, said the "BNP's message of hate and fear" stood in stark contrast to the values of equality and access for all on which public services were based.

"It is not acceptable that you can be a fascist at weekends, yet work between Monday and Friday accessing confidential information of members of the public," she said.

Tim Wilson, of the National Association of Probation Officers, said it was "wrong" that BNP members could work in the profession.

Colin Moses, president of the Prison Officers Association, rounded on the BBC for considering inviting the BNP leader, Nick Griffin, on to its Question Time programme, a view echoed by the National Union of Journalists.

NUJ delegate Tim Lezard challenged the claim that the broadcaster was duty bound to include the BNP in political programmes. "The BBC says they have to invite the BNP onto Question Time. No they don't," he said.

Godrich blamed mainstream parties for letting down voters and allowing the BNP to prosper at the European parliament, where they won two seats for the first time.

"Mainstream parties need to urgently address the serious gaps in the policies that allow the BNP and far right to exploit division to suit their own ends," she said.

Guardian

Calling Jews 'Nazis' may be criminalised

Parliament will be asked to consider whether the use of Nazi symbols and terms in reference to Jews, Israel and Zionism is breaking the law on incitement to racial hatred.

A new report by the European Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism (EISCA) has highlighted the increasing use of what it terms the “Nazi card” in antisemitic discourse and has called for a number of measures to try to combat its spread.

“Playing the Nazi card” has been defined in the report as the use of Nazi-related terms or symbols — for example intertwining the swastika with the Star of David — while negatively referring to Jews, Israel, Zionism or other aspects of what it calls the Jewish experience.

The report, which was jointly published by EISCA and the Department for Communities and Local Government, recommends that the Home Office, the Association of Chief Police officers (ACPO) and the Crown Prosecution Service should prepare new guidance for the police on whether this kind of terminology amounts to incitement.

The report says that universities and adult education colleges should be surveyed to establish how they deal with antisemitic discourse.

It also suggests that the University and College Union and the National Union of Journalists use the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia’s definition of antisemitism to improve their harassment policies.

Cohesion Minister Shahid Malik, who launched the report on Tuesday alongside EISCA chairman Denis MacShane MP, said: “It is vital to reiterate the significance which my government places on tackling this scourge which has blighted our world for centuries.

“Where antisemitic discourse flourishes unchecked, an atmosphere develops where Jews and other minorities — for it is certain that other minorities will also be targeted — feel isolated and vulnerable. Antisemitic discourse is not targeted at an identifiable victim but at Jews as a group. The tone in which issues affecting Jewish people are raised or addressed by politicians, the media, educators or the business world, affects the way in which Jewish people are perceived by the wider public.”

After the launch, Mr Malik said that the report’s proposals would be overseen by the cross-government working group set up as a result of the 2006 All-Party Parliamentary inquiry into antisemitism.

Also on Tuesday, the Community Security Trust published its second report on antisemitic discourse.

Author Mark Gardner, the CST’s communications director, said that while antisemitic discourse openly targeting Jews was “extremely rare” in mainstream British politics and media, “nevertheless, antisemitism is an important matter that must be better understood and challenged before it worsens any further”.

Contemporary antisemitic discourse, he argued, “is most often revealed in language and imagery that evokes the central antisemitic allegation of a powerful and hidden Jewish conspiracy against all non-Jews”.

As the British National Party’s first two MEPs took their seats in the European Parliament this week, the Centre for Social Cohesion published a report into the party’s online network, claiming that BNP members and self-professed BNP supporters continue to host, and link to online, material that is pro-Nazi, racist, antisemitic and homophobic.

Jewish Chronicle

Treat BNP the same as other parties says union

A journalists' union has entered the debate over coverage of the British National Party by calling for them to be treated on the same basis as other political organisations.

Last night, the National Union of Journalists held a debate over how reporters should respond to the rise of the far-right group which captured seats in the recent European Parliament and local council elections. But a rival union, the Chartered Institute of Journalists, says there is no need to single out the BNP for special treatment.

It says the election of BNP members as councillors and MEPs should be dealt with in the same even-handed manner as all other political parties.

CIoJ president Liz Justice said: "It is not an option ignoring views of elected members because they don't chime with your own political views. It is a reporter's job to report – and a sub's job to edit – without injecting personal feelings and prejudices into the story. It is not the job of a journalists’ trade union to dictate otherwise.

"That is why the Chartered Institute of Journalists is strictly non-political and urges its members to report the facts and let the readers make up their own minds. The electing public can make good decisions based on accurate reporting. Journalists are in the perfect position to let the public know what they are voting for when the next elections come along."

Hold the Front Page

How should journalists deal with rise of BNP?

The National Union of Journalists is staging a conference this week on how journalists should respond to the rise of the British National Party.

The far-right party's recent successes in the European and council elections have posed a dilemma over how its activities should be reported. While some editors have taken the view in the past that all publicity is good publicity, and that therefore ignoring them is the best option, others such as Paul Horrocks of the Manchester Evening News, have sought to confront the party's ideas head-on.

Now the union is calling on its members to join the debate, beginning with an event at its London headquarters on Thursday evening.

"The BNP's election victories have brought a new urgency to questions about how journalists should report fascists and racists," said a statement on the union's website. "There is a danger that racist ideas that ten years ago would have been considered unacceptable could become part of the daily business of politics."

One editor who has recently blogged about the dilemma is Keith Perch of the Leicester Mercury which has just seen the election of a BNP councillor on its patch in Coalville.

"Until now, we have mostly ignored them, but I sense that we have reached a tipping point and that it makes more sense now to challenge their policies and be sure that those voting for them know exactly what they are voting for," he wrote. "I blogged about this dilemma - to report or to ignore - previously and received a reasonable amount of feedback, almost all of which came down on the side of reporting, with the notable exception of someone employed full-time to worry about social cohesion who felt that it was still best to ignore. With the election of a BNP county councillor, we have decided that we cannot ignore the situation."

Hold the Front Page

If we believe in freedom of speech we must allow the BNP to advertise

I cannot share the National Union of Journalists' sense of outrage about newspapers accepting adverts from the British National Party. The BNP may advocate disgustingly racist policies, but it is a legally constituted party.

Journalists should support freedom of expression and accept that it means reading and hearing material that they find offensive. Better that we do that than play into the BNP's hands by censoring it.

Think about it for a moment. If a liberal society is prepared to stifle freedom of speech then it provides fascist parties with a justification for their illiberal policies. So I am relaxed about the decision by Newsquest to run BNP ads on the websites of several of its papers and would urge the NUJ to stop making a silly fuss about the issue.

A statement by Newsquest in Stourbridge pointed out that to refuse such ads "might be playing into the hands of those intolerant and anti-democratic forces that people condemn. It is for the electorate to cast judgment, not us."

According to the Media Guardian story, a number of video and banner ads appeared on the websites of titles such as the Bromsgrove Advertiser, Redditch Advertiser and Stourbridge News. It was initially thought that the ads had been removed, but Jon Slattery reported this morning that he had found them again. They proclaim: "British jobs for British workers".

A holdthefrontpage story also mentions the placing of online banner ads in the Basildon-based daily, The Echo. I could not locate them this morning, but Slattery later found small "Vote BNP" ads on the both the Echo site and that of the Colchester Gazette.

Newsquest has made out coherent arguments for running the ads. Note, for instance, the views of Martin McNeil, editorial director of Newsquest Essex, expressed to a complaining reader (and posted on the anti-fascist Lancaster Unity website).

"Thanks for your email regarding BNP advertising. We are accepting paid-for advertising from any political parties or candidates standing in the current elections.

"I appreciate how strongly many people feel about the BNP, but it would be undemocratic and against the principle of free speech to refuse to accept any party's advertising provided it falls within our guidelines.

"The Echo has consistently opposed the BNP in our comment column and will continue to do so. As editor, I have twice been taken to court, unsuccessfully, by a BNP activist who did not like my editorial stance. I also regularly receive BNP hate mail.

"Despite this, I feel I must defend the right of all parties to take out paid-for advertising is support of their election candidates."

That seems to me like a perfectly reasonable justification. Due to Newsquest's anti-journalistic custom of not speaking to the press, I couldn't cast any light on why the ads seemed to have been removed for a time.

No-one was prepared to deal with my query when I called its headquarters this morning. I was told: "The only man who can speak about this is the chief executive, Paul Davidson, and he's away until the middle of next week."

McNeil was also unavailable when I called him in Basildon.

Media Guardian

BNP's former top Scot denies list leak

A former Scottish secretary of the BNP has denied he is responsible for leaking the membership list which has triggered calls for some members to be sacked from their public sector jobs.

Kenny Smith, who lives in Falkirk, last night said: "There is absolutely no purpose for me in publishing a membership list. I spent my life protecting that information. I value the BNP members and I would never do such a thing. I haven't got the faintest idea who did do it, I honestly don't. I think whoever did it is despicable."

Mr Smith, who was expelled along with several other prominent members of the party last December, said he had been ousted for exposing incompetence and unprofessionalism within the party.

Publication of the 12,000-strong list – which includes around 450 Scots – yesterday led to the departure of Rod Lucas, a TalkSport radio DJ, and an investigation into alleged BNP links of a police constable in Liverpool. In Scotland, the BNP counts a doctor, ex-servicemen, a retired chief inspector and a driving instructor who offers discounts to fellow party members among its supporters.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown's own constituency, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, has a smattering of activists, while numbers are stronger in Glasgow. Two members of the Black Watch are also named on the year-old list.

The leak will worry those whose names are on the list, regardless of whether they work in the public sector or not. While it is legal to be a supporter of the party, its views ignite strong passions and private firms may be embarrassed to find their staff named as supporters of the party. There were reports that members had received abusive phone calls after the list found its way on to the internet.

The NASUWT teaching union said no member of the BNP should be left in charge of a classroom. Chris Keates, the union's general secretary, said: "I believe that the release of this list is nothing more than a cynical attempt by the BNP to present themselves as victims and to gain publicity for their vile agenda."

A ban is already in place on BNP members joining the police force or prison service, for fear of harming race relations. But Downing Street last night refused to be drawn on the position of public sector workers who had also been revealed as BNP members.

"This is really a matter for the relevant public sector professions. In relation to the police, membership of the BNP is prohibited," the Prime Minister's spokesman said.

Meanwhile, the party said the human rights of its activists had been breached. Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, said dissident former party executives suspected of leaking the organisation's membership risked going to prison. However, the National Union of Journalists accused the BNP of "staggering hypocrisy" over claims that the publication of the list of its members had breached their privacy. Jeremy Dear, the general secretary, said the BNP failed to condemn other websites which sought to intimidate journalists who exposed racist views of BNP members.

"We have never heard a single condemnation of this gross breach of privacy or unlawful harassment and intimidation from Nick Griffin or the BNP," he added.

Scotsman

BNP row prompts journalists' union to re-publish race reporting guide

The National Union of Journalists has republished its 'Race Reporting Guidelines' after newspapers carried adverts for the British National Party.

Regional publisher Archant has come under fire for its decision to carry advertising for the far-right party ahead of next week's local elections. The company later performed a u-turn, saying it would donate any revenue from the ads to charity.

Now, the NUJ has republished its guidelines, which later may have to include guidance to publishers on advertising too, according to equality officer Lena Calvert. She said: "It's very possible that we will have to take into account adverts. It seems that, if some organisations have thought this is the way to go, then we're going to have to add something in."

She added: "The union always had quite a hard policy on advertorials. We used to have huge debates about them as readers cannot always determine what's advertising and what's editorial. It's quite an ethical problem."

The Race Reporting Guidelines cover a wide variety of topics including immigrants, slang terms, racist organisations and travellers. The decision to republish also comes in the wake of a strongly-worded letter from NUJ general secretary Jeremy Dear to Archant chief executive John Fry. In it, he called it an "incredible decision" to accept money from the BNP by some of Archant's local titles.

He added: "The decision to accept money from them is reprehensible enough, to try to argue it is to do with free speech sickening. The NUJ does not have a 'no platform' position. We believe in challenging vigorously all political parties... but advertising is different. The Newspaper Society's legal guidance requires that editorial content, not advertising content, should be fair and balanced. What adverts appear in a title is down to the publisher's decision, with no such restrictions. By accepting such adverts you can only damage the reputation of Archant and the titles the advert appears in."

Download a copy of the Race Reporting Guidelines here.

Hold the front page

Journalists' fury over BNP ad in South Wales Evening Post

Journalists at the South Wales Evening Post have reacted with anger after discovering an advert for the BNP was to be published in the paper.

One insider told Press Gazette: "As journalists we find it abhorrent that the paper can carry an advert from the BNP and take their money, especially when we have put out editorial opposing this. We want to disassociate ourselves from this advert and from the views being put across by the BNP."

The advert shows a picture of a family next to the BNP's logo, encouraging voters to choose the BNP in this week's Welsh election with quotes including: "... because the politicians are wrong turning Wales into a foreign country without ever asking us."

The advert concludes: "That's why you know there will be so many people like you voting BNP on 3 May."

A sub-editor found out about the advert on Monday and it was published on Tuesday. Journalists have sent emails to South West Wales Media managing director Chris Rees and editor Spencer Feeney expressing their opposition.

The National Union of Journalists looked into taking out a similar-sized advert in the paper opposing the views put forward by the BNP and was told it would cost £1,000. The plan was scrapped on cost grounds and because the ad would not have appeared until after the election.

An NUJ member on the paper said the union enquired about writing a letter for publication instead, but they were told the paper had a policy of not publishing such letters during elections.

NUJ assistant organiser for the North and Midlands, and former organiser for Wales, Jenny Lennox said: "As far as the NUJ is concerned we don't think anyone should be putting out that kind of advert in the press. In Swansea, race relations have been quite tense and it is likely to make things worse. Journalists were so angry they wanted to walk out of the building yesterday, but the Post is a Northcliffe paper which is very anti-union and it is difficult for them to do that.

"We argue that when we have elections we should have balanced and fair reporting, but letting them take out an advert is effectively not letting any other side be seen. It's not putting a balanced argument forward at all."

The company declined to comment.

online press gazette