Animals News

Peter Greste aims to gatekeep journalists with proposed policing body

By | | comments |
Peter Greste speaking at the National Press Club in 2023 (Screenshot via YouTube)

Through a proposed code and governing body, Peter Greste has his sights on controlling standards for journalistic integrity and diminishing free speech, writes Dr Binoy Kampmark.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNALIST Peter Greste has faithfully replicated a pattern: When established, well-fed and fattened, a credible professional tires from the pursuit. One can get complacent, flatulently confident and self-assured. From that summit, the inner lecturer emerges, along with a disease: false expertise.

At one point in his life, Greste was lean, hungry and determined to get the story. He seemed to avoid the perils of the mahogany ridge, where many alcohol-soaked hacks scribble copy, sensational or otherwise.

Greste had stints as a freelancer covering the civil wars in Yugoslavia and elections in post-apartheid South Africa. On joining the BBC in 1995, Afghanistan, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa fell within his investigative orbit. To his list of employers could also be added Reuters, CNN and Al Jazeera.

During his tenure with Al Jazeera, for a time one of the funkiest outfits on the media scene, Greste was arrested along with two colleagues in Egypt accused of aiding the Muslim Brotherhood. He spent 400 days in gaol before deportation. Prison in Egypt gave him cover, armour and padding for journalistic publicity. It also gave him the smugness of a failed martyr.

Greste then did what many hacks do: become an academic. It is telling about the ailing nature of universities that professorial chairs are being doled out with ease to members of the Fourth Estate, a measure that does little to encourage the fierce independence one hopes from either. Such are the temptations of establishment living — you become the very thing you should be suspicious of.

With little wonder, Greste soon began exhibiting the symptoms of establishment fever, lecturing the world as UNESCO Chair of Journalism and Communication at the University of Queensland on what he thought journalism ought to be. Hubris struck. Like so many of his craft, he exuded envy at WikiLeaks and its gold reserves of classified information. He derided its founder, Julian Assange, for not being a journalist. 

This was stunningly petty, schoolyard scrapping in the wake of Assange’s forced exit from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2019. It ignored that most obvious point: journalism, especially when it documents power and its abuses, thrives or dies on leaks and often illegal disclosures. 

It is for this reason that Assange was convicted under the U.S. Espionage Act of 1917, intended as a warning to all who dare publish and discuss national security documents of the United States.

In June this year, while celebrating Assange’s release (‘a man who has suffered enormously for exposing the truth of abuses of power’) evidence of that ongoing fixation remained. Lazily avoiding the redaction efforts that WikiLeaks had used prior to Cablegate, Greste still felt that WikiLeaks had not met that standard of journalism that comes with it ‘the responsibility to process and present information in line with a set of ethical and professional standards’. It had released ‘raw, unredacted and unprocessed information online’, thereby posing ‘enormous risks for people in the field, including sources’.

It was precisely this very same view that formed the U.S. prosecution case against Assange. Greste might have at least acknowledged that not one single study examining the effects of WikiLeaks’ disclosures, a point also made in the plea deal itself, found instances where any source or informant for the U.S. was compromised.

Greste now wishes, with dictatorial sensibility, to further impress his views on journalism through Journalism Australia, a body he hopes will set “professional” standards for the craft and, problematically, define press freedom in Australia. Journalism Australia Limited was formerly placed on the Australian corporate register in July, listing Greste, lobbyist Peter Wilkinson and executive director of The Ethics Centre, Simon Longstaff, as directors. 

Members would be afforded the standing of journalists on paying a registration fee and being assessed. They would also, in theory, be offered the protections under a Media Freedom Act (MFA) being proposed by the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, where Greste holds the position of executive director.

A closer look at the MFA shows its deferential nature to state authorities. 

As the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom explains:

‘The law should not be protecting a particular class of self-appointed individual, but rather the role that journalism plays in our democracy.’

So much for independent journalists and those of the Assange hue, a point well spotted by Mary Kostakidis, no mean journalist herself and not one keen on being straitjacketed by yet another proposed code. 

Rather disturbingly, the MFA is intended to aid ‘law enforcement agencies and the courts identify who is producing journalism’. How will this be done? By showing accreditation – the seal of approval, as it were – from Journalism Australia. In fact, Greste and his crew will go so far as to give the approved journalist a “badge” for authenticity on any published work. How utterly noble of them. 

Such a body becomes, in effect, a handmaiden to state power, separating acceptable wheat from rebellious chaff. Even Greste had to admit that two classes of journalist would emerge under this proposal, “in the sense that we’ve got a definition for what we call a member journalist and non-member journalists, but I certainly feel comfortable with the idea of providing upward pressure on people to make sure their work falls on the right side of that line”.

This is a shoddy business that should cause chronic discomfort and demonstrates, yet again, the moribund nature of the Fourth Estate. Instead of detaching itself from establishment power, Greste and bodies such as the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom merely wish to clarify the attachment.

Dr Binoy Kampmark is a Cambridge Scholar and lecturer at RMIT University. You can follow Dr Kampmark on Twitter @BKampmark.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.

Related Articles

 
Recent articles by Binoy Kampmark
BHP pays hefty price for deadly Brazilian dam disaster

Mining giant BHP has been forced to pay $47 billion after a settlement was reached ...  
Australia gets revenge as Bluey conquers the United States

While Australia has undergone Americanisation for many years, one TV show invaded ...  
Peter Greste aims to gatekeep journalists with proposed policing body

Through a proposed code and governing body, Peter Greste has his sights on contr ...  
Join the conversation
comments powered by Disqus

Support Fearless Journalism

If you got something from this article, please consider making a one-off donation to support fearless journalism.

Single Donation

$

Support IAIndependent Australia

Subscribe to IA and investigate Australia today.

Close Subscribe Donate