The Law of the Land

With regards to journalists’ relationship with the police, motions 86 through to 92 were discussed. In 86 (covering also 87, 88, 89) the efforts, and subsequent legal victory of Sunday Tribune Northern editor Suzanne Breen were applauded and used as an example of why it is imperative for the NEC to “contact police forces in the UK and Ireland to emphasise to them the importance of the NUJ Code Of Conduct”.

With 90, the NEC was urged to continue its ongoing attempts to improve relations with the Police, while 91 focused on how relations were severely damaged by the heavy-handed treatment of journalists (especially photographers) by the police at the G20 demonstrations in London.

Motion 92 on the other hand, dealt with the flippant attitude in which the Police have adopted with the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE Act) and other legislation, thanks to the recent glut of anti-terrorism laws. It proposes that the NEC produce a ‘legal guide’ in which NUJ members can refer to , so as that they know exactly how protected they and their work are, should they ever come under the scrutiny of a police investigation or arrest.

All four motions were passed without incident.

The Misrepresentation of Women in the Media

Another successfully carried motion was that of Bristol Branch, in which, based on the findings of the “Representations of Women in the Media” project, the NEC were urged to promote positive representations of women in the media, and to tackle and debunk the misrepresentations.

Disability and Permission to report

The reporting of stories involving people with disabilities was the focus of both motion 108 and 110. Motion 108 wanted every member to recognise that people with disabilities were a growing population, not only in the general population, but in the NUJ as well.

As a result, it wanted to raise awareness of the importance of sensitivity when writing, and courtesy when dealing with affected members at work. 110 was more interested in the terminology used when reporting on ‘hate crimes against disabled people’, and how words such as ‘vulnerable’ could actually be detrimental to the victims as it creates a weak stereotype that many people could and do find offensive and demeaning. Both motions were carried.

Motion 109 wanted to amend the NUJ Code of Conduct to include the principle that “journalists should seek the permission of a parent, guardian, or other appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child with regard to a story about their welfare”. This motion was also passed.

War on Error

The big debate of this section was Oxford and District Branch’s statement that a majority of the British media was guilty of bias reporting on the latest Gaza conflict, and that the NEC  should set up a forum to discuss the ethical rights and wrongs on the reporting of the conflict.

This received passionate backing on both sides of the debate, with members from BBC World Service defending the coverage, and other NUJ members condemning it. Despite BBC World Service’s protestations, the motion was passed (with the branch’s own amendment).

Remission Possible

Not all motions were as successful as most, with motions:

• 93 (campaign to reform the PCC)
• 111 (reinstatement of former clause 8of the original Code Of Conduct)
• 113 (bridging the gap between the journalistic principles of the NUJ, and the new medias of blogging and twittering)

all remitted for the NEC to make a decision.

Attendees at the Media Workers Against the War fringe meeting heard a discussion of the British military position in Afghanistan.

By Stephen Fothergill and Julija Jegorova.

Speaking at the meeting were photographer Guy Smallman, who recently returned from Afghanistan, Nahella Ashraf, who chairs the Manchester branch of Stop the War, and Sue Glenton, mother of British soldier Joe Glenton.

Sue Glenton

Sue Glenton is the mother of British soldier Joe Glenton, who refused to go back to war in Afghanistan on a matter of principle and ethics.

She said: “When Joe was sent to Afghanistan he believed he would be helping to liberate women, stop the opium trade and bring down the warlords. Instead he found himself in a war of attrition which has led to the death of countless innocent people.”

She added that until he sent his letter to Gordon Brown on 30^th July 2009, he was up on charges of being Awol, which allows sentencing of up to two years in prison.

He is now up on the more serious charge of desertion which carries a maximum life sentence. She said: “We’re supposedly fighting in Afghanistan for democracy, really I think we should be fighting for our democracy over here.”

Guy Smallman

Guy Smallman spoke about his time in Afghanistan during the recent November elections. He expressed his dismay with Afghan democracy by saying: “I couldn’t find a single Afghan person who is happy with politics. They believe that their President was elected earlier in the White House.”

He went on to say that he believes that the war is doing nothing to help the Afghan people. Many people are far worse off than before the war started. He said: “Some people have to sell their children to feed their families.”

Stop the War

Nahella Ashraf, Chair of Manchester Stop the War, began her speech by reminding the audience of the main reasons Britain had gone to war.

She said: “We were told that we were looking for Osama Bin Laden dead or alive and to end Al-Qaeda’s movement.”

Other justifications for the war were to promote democracy and to fight for the rights of women in Afghanistan. She argued that this had not happened and in fact in many cases people were far worse off.

She said: “The support for the Taliban is growing. This doesn’t mean that the Afghan people support them, but rather they support anyone who fights against the people who are killing young men, woman and children.”

Links (open in new windows):

http://www.mancsagainsttanks.org/

www.stopwar.org.uk

133 papers, 3 spoiled

Brophy 73

Chapman 43

Conn 38

Gosling/White 85

Hammond 40

Harcup 68

Hunt 29

McCann 22

O’Neill 84

Quinlan 69

Youett 39

Professional Training

134 papers, 5 spoiled

Frost 97

Hammond 41

Harcup 62

McGowan-Lowe 40

Norris 85

Peasey 56

Theopilou 37

Wajid 68

Wheal 97

European Federation Steering Committee

134 papers 5 spoiled

Barsby 28

Fairley 11

Gosling 11

White 79

Emergency Committee

134 papers 3 spoiled

Barsby 31

Boumelha 79

Connolly 54

Davies 45

Delong 58

Lezard 93

Murray 78

Sutcliffe 37

Pensioners Committee

134 paper, 11 spoiled

Coltart 103

Foot 77

Flatt 36

Harckness 96

Healy 101

Jones 69

Norris 109

TUC Delegation

133 papers 2 spoiled

Beake 30

Davies 71

Delong 71

Halpin 92

Jewell 11

Norris 65

Equality (corrected)

134 papers 2 spoiled

Abouzeid 27

Charles 25

Coltart 83

Connolly 62

Elliott 3

Geraghty 61

Hammond 15

Healy 78

Jewell 9

Jones 27

Katwa 36

Keeping 8

McHenry 34

Moran 33

Ran 72

Smith 13

Tazib 30

Zaba 77

IFJ Triennial Congress

134 papers 5 spoiled

Barsby 41

Boumelha 95

Fairley 29

Maisokwadzo 24

Norris 58

Preston 3

Ran 66

White 93

Workman 21

Women’s TUC

Coltart 106

Cuddihy 44

Halpin 93

Hunt 50

Ladbrook 57

Neysmith 41

Rasbash 74

Disabled Members

130 papers 24 spoiled

Coghlan 85

Jones 17

Leak 30

Thornton 30

Leak and Thornton have agreed to job share

The fringe meeting, ‘When good bosses go bad & industrial action against progressive employers’, was organised as part of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) Annual Delegates Meeting (ADM), in Southport. It is part of a process to build a forum for journalists faced with issues from their organisations.

The NUJ members attending the meeting requested that they all remain anonymous, due to fears their employers might discover their complaints.

Pressure from bosses

The main topic of the meeting was to address pressures from bosses, which sometimes came in the form of bullying.

One delegate explained a situation faced by many journalists. He said: “We are facing lots of issues incluing even bullying from bosses.

“This adds to the problems we have already as to how we are going to carry on. Loads of freelances have gone out of business and it’s very difficult to know what can be done.”

Conflict between companies and their journalists

Part of the meeting focused on the conflicting interests of news organisations and their journalists, and how speaking out about problems can threaten jobs.

One delegate explained how some news organisations enforce their news values to maximise profit.

The delegate, who had to leave due to conflict over a story, said: “What led to my departure was the organisations’ inability to determine news stories from personal stories.

“The worst thing for me is that I want to do what the organisation wants to achieve, but it conflicts with my professional judgements.”

Another delegate explained how bosses have become more demanding over the past few years. The delegate said: “I’ve got a dream job as a journalist. Generally management are quite hands off.

“But when it goes bad it’s really bad. Without any decisions with workers money is spent on other areas.”

The delegate added: “I’m not saying they’re bad people but the values they have are bosses’ values which are above ours and the trade unions concerns.”

Trusts: a better model?

However one delegate expressed satisfaction with how some of the trust-run media deal with complaints. They said: “There is opportunity with trustees to bring up problems as you must report any grievances to the trustees.

“They often do not employ many people so they can often deal with your complaints once communications have started.”

The group exchanged personal details and agreed to meet again soon to discuss possible action.