UNITED
NATIONS, April
15 -- Why
would the UN
withhold from
the public
digital copies
of its own
reports while
printing out
hard copies
for
the
correspondents
it accredits,
giving them a
head start to
write
the story, and
to spin
it?
To
whom is the
UN's
allegiance? To
whom is the
UN's duty?
Frequently
Inner
City Press is
contacted by
readers asking
for copies
of UN
reports
they've seen
summarized on
a wire service.
They say they
have
gone to the
UN's web site
but can't find
the report.
Why not?
For
some time, the
UN has put
paper copies
of its
forthcoming
reports in
a shelving
unit or rack
in the Office
of the
Spokesperson
for the
Secretary
General, which
is referred to
as “The Gray
Lady.”
First
hearing this,
Inner City
Press thought
the New York
Times was
being
referred to.
But no: it's a
piece of
furniture.
A
large part of
the work of
the wire
services which
cover the UN
is to
walk to the
Spokesperson's
Office, grab
copies of the
reports in the
Gray Lady and
go and
summarize
them... often
ideologically.
This
sequencing may
have made
sense in the
past, before
the UN had a
web
site and put
its documents
online for all
the world.
Then, the
reports may
legitimately
have been
ready only for
in-house
journalists
for a period
of time.
But
now, all
documents are
prepared on
computers. It
actually takes
more
work to print
them out and
put them out
for
journalists
than to put
them online in
the UN's
document
system. So why
is it still
done this
way?
In
a sense, it is
a way to “buy”
journalists --
many readers
think
these scribes
have worked to
get a “scoop,”
and rely on
the
wires'
analysis of
the reports.
Correspondents
serviced
in this way
are less
likely to be
critical of
the UN, or at
least of the
Secretary
General whose
Spokesperson
does them this
favor.
But
now, this
“favor” comes
at the expense
of the wider
public. The
report could
have been made
available to
everyone, but
is
affirmatively
withheld to
make a small
group look
good.
The process
should cease
-- and the Free UN Coalition for Access, which
fights to
protect free
press but also
the right of
the public to
information,
has put in
just such a
request, to
the Office of
the
Spokesperson
for
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon and
his Under
Secretary
General for General
Assembly
and Conference
Management,
DGACM.
FUNCA
has NOT made
the request to
the Department
for Public
Information,
for at least
three reasons.
One, DPI often
says that such
matters are
not its
affair, as it
has claimed
that the refusal
of Ban's Under
Secretary
General for
Peacekeeping
Herve Ladsous
to answer
Inner City
Press
questions, or
to distribute
information
fairly, is
not a DPI
matter.
Two,
the things DPI
has been asked
by FUNCA have
not been acted
on or even
meaningfully
responded to,
including at
least twelve
specific
proposed
reforms to the
UN's Media
Access
Guidelines and
the
Accreditation
rules --
the main
“club” DPI
holds over the
head of
the press.
Third,
it remains the
case that DPI
conducted a
non-consensual
raid on Inner
City Press'
office on
March 18,
rifled through
papers and
took
photographs
including of
Inner City
Press' desk
and bookshelf.
Then,
after
Ban's
spokesperson
was asked by
BuzzFeed about
the raid, the
photographs
were
immediately
leaked to
BuzzFeed
through an
anonymous
“Concerned UN
Reporter”
e-mail account.
Inner City
Press has
asked DPI to
identify who
it let into
its office,
what photos
were
taken and why
and precisely
how they were
leaked to
BuzzFeed.
These
simple
questions have
not been
answered.
FUNCA
proceeds.
Watch this
site.
, 
