Although I usually refrain from commenting on current events in Cambodia when I am not there one bit of news caught my eye when I glanced through the SRP-mouthpiece KI-Media recently. It is only there that one can usually find little tidbits about Cambodia that are not reported in the international press, or even in the English papers in Phnom Penh. As an aside, only one of the two is of significance, and that is the Phnom Penh Post. The Cambodia Daily is usually very thin on domestic news and practically only prints wire services news. As for the Khmer-language papers, their standard is pretty poor. They publish uncorroborated stories and have no qualms about taking money for presenting one particular viewpoint; all this besides their normal blood and gore stories.
But back to the main point. I read that the Tom Lantos Commission on Human Rights of the U. S. Congress is going to hold a public hearing on Cambodia. According to a report on Radio Free Asia, that commission plans to invite Mu Sochua and others to testify on the state of human rights abuses in Cambodia. Now first, I was wondering why Cambodia showed up on the commission's radar all of a sudden. In the past U. S. politicians rarely showed an interest in what was going on in Cambodia – probably for a good reason. Perhaps they did not want to be confronted with Cambodia’s history and the U. S.’s involvement there, e. g. toppling Sihanouk in 1970, illegally bombarding Cambodia, thereby killings thousands of Khmer, supporting the Khmer Rouge against the Vietnamese, etc. So I checked with the commission whether this hearing was really on the agenda. As it happens, it is not. There is no hearing scheduled for September at all. So I don’t know where RFA got their news, but it sounds like a little bit of misinformation. RFA is somewhat controversial to begin with. It is financed by the U. S. Congress, but many question its reason for existing these days. If I remember correctly, there was even a call by a Congressman to stop financing it. After all, to disseminate U. S. propaganda they have the Voice of America. But the Congress has more important matters to deliberate on these days so this was forgotten and fell through the cracks of the political machinery. RFA is supposed to reach people that don’t otherwise have access to free news. That doesn’t seem to be the case in Cambodia. Even if most of the press is government-friendly, people have access to the internet, can read the New York Times or any other newspaper online, can watch BBC news on cable TV, and so on and so forth.
Why then does RFA have a Khmer service? Maybe there is a power group that successfully lobbies for this service to be maintained. Surely, the SRP must have a hand in this, as both Sam Rainsy and Mu Suchua are frequent guests on their programs and get a nice forum for free - nothing reprehensible about that actually. Now that actually makes me scratch my head again. Why do these two seek out mostly overseas forums for their interviews and reports on Cambodia? Well, I can imagine that they don’t get as much play in the Khmer press as in RFA-like media. But who actually listens to RFA in Cambodia? I would bet they don’t reach a whole lot of regular Khmer, and it would appear those are the ones they need to reach with their message. It is as though they are preaching to the choir. They don’t need to convince overseas Khmer, or foreigners for that matter, now do they? If they are playing to foreign governments or nations, they should have realized by now that these may lend an open ear to their complaints but for the most part won’t act. I am an ardent follower of news about Cambodia, even when I am not there. I find the international press is mostly silent on Cambodian affairs. So then why don’t these two use their efforts on the Khmer at home - or are their appearances overseas just for fundraising purposes? I guess so.
Posts
14 comments:
To contradict your statement and accusation to the effect that there is no hearing scheduled by the US Congress on the human rights violation in Cambodia, that you insinuated was wrongly reported by Radio free Asia, here is a title in the Phnom Penh Post (September 1, 2009) titled 'US House to discuss right in Camboddia" which contradicts what you had said on it. You are definitely a hidden Hun sen supporter. N tith
Well, I read that article in the PPP myself. It is the same article in verbatim that was reported on RFA. I had checked with the commission in Washington and a staffer told me there was no hearing scheduled for September. I am re-checking just to set the record straight - not that this so important. If they hold it that's ok. I don't care either way. I was just wondering at the discrepancy.
I don't see anything accusatory in my post so I guess you got off on the wrong tangent. Thanks for your comment though.
PPP
Tuesday, 01 September 2009 15:02 James O'Toole
"US House of Representatives plans to hold a hearing to discuss the current political and social climate in Cambodia, the US Embassy in Phnom Penh confirmed on Monday."
PPP
Wednesday, 02 September 2009 15:04 James O'toole
"Ministry spokesman Koy Kuong said the hearing by the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, a congressional body that monitors human rights norms around the world, is "biased", as no one from the Cambodian government has been invited to testify.
"
Your post "sounds like a "lot" of misinformation".
Basically, all this is sort of moot. As I said before, if they hold the hearing it's ok, if they don't that's ok too. This is not a body that wields a lot of influence in the U. S. Congress. It can only issue recommendations. It is not a committee. It also pays to check the voting record of the members.
I read about this the first time on KI-Media on Aug. 28 or 29. I checked the commission's website. There was no hearing scheduled for September. As a matter of fact, the last one was in March 2009. So I called the office and after several tries got a staffer on the line who wasn't aware of any hearings.
Then I read the PPP on Sep. 01 and saw that the U. S. embassy confirmed the hearing. On the same date a press release dated Sept. 01 was published.
What intrigued me was that RFA reported this on Aug. 27 whereas the release was dated Sept. 01. I have another call in to the commission to find out. It is remarkable though, that neither their website nor both the co-chairs' websites show this announcement; Licadho's website doesn't either. Even Mu Sochua is silent on the matter.
Anyway, be that as it may, it's just not that important. Let's wait what happens. We can then discuss the matter further, at least those of you who are interested in this. I dug into this because of RFA's role as a propaganda mouthpiece for the U. S.
All the evidences available showed that RFA meets expected reporting ethical standard (“Even Mu Sochua is silent on the matter”).
The remaining question is your judgment.
Whatever your political opinions, its your freedom to choose, but don't denigrate the opposition nor media without hard evidence.
8:09
In my view it's not reporting standards but what you select to publish, and whether you take sides. I think the media should be neutral, and just report the hard facts, as opposed to blogs, which can publish just about anything they wish, although I stay with what I know for sure, but mistakes can happen (see below).
12:11
I did not denigrate the opposition nor the media. It is a well-known fact that both the Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, which are both funded by the U. S. government or Congress respectively, and which used to be run or closely associated with the CIA - which should say it all - are not members of the normal media as such, as they are supposed to propagate the U. S. government's position. That position does not always correspond to the respective country's position and interests.
When I wrote it sounded 'like a bit of misinformation' I based this on information I received from a staffer in Washington (I am currently in the U. S.). It turns out that information was incorrect, as I now learned from a reliable source. Sometimes these things happen and nobody should get their 'knickers in a twist' about this.
The subject of my post was RFA per se and its use by the opposition as a forum to air its views to the overseas Khmer community, which, of course, supports the SRP financially. In principle, there is nothing wrong with that, I just believe overseas Khmer aren't vital to the SRP, besides their financial support. SRP voters and potential voters are in Cambodia, and it is there that the political debate takes place.
Where do you get the idea that RFA is for overseas Khmer community and not for voters in Cambodia?
I didn't say RFA is for overseas Khmer; RFA broadcasts in Khmer language to Khmer wherever they can receive RFA. But the fact is that only a few homeland Khmer listen to RFA or view their websites, simply because they aren't aware of the station, aren't interested, or don't have internet access. We know that only a minuscule number of people use the internet regularly for news and information in Cambodia. If you lived in Cambodia you would see that. This will change over time though.
So the logical consequence is that by using RFA the SRP people play to a mostly overseas Khmer audience. It would be interesting to get RFA's media data, like the Nielson ratings in the U. S. In my view RFA's service in Khmer is redundant as access to the international media is unrestricted in Cambodia. The people RFA now reaches in Cambodia is probably the educated elite, both young and older, and those can watch CNN, BBC, or news in other languages, like French, Italian, Spanish. Of course, the Khmer media are in the majority leaning towards and supportive of the CPP, and the media supporting the opposition have a hard time. If all papers played by the rules they wouldn't have those problems, I think. Look at the Phnom Penh Post as an example. They simply report the news, often news that is critical of the government. But it is not their view they print, but somebody else's view they report.
To meet civilized standard, would you clarify your statement that "only a few homeland Khmer listen to RFA"?
1%? 10%? 50%? 80%? 100%?
Is there any supporting evidence?
I don't know what you mean by 'civilized' standard, but by deductive reasoning the share of RFA listeners in Cambodia is less than 1%. As I said it would be interesting to get RFA's media data if there were such a thing. But we know that Cambodia has less than 1% Internet users. RFA listeners would, again by assumption, be more sophisticated and more educated people based on RFA's content. Putting RFA listeners on the same level as Internet users in terms of sophistication and interest, the number would also be less than 1%, although one only needs a radio to listen to RFA, which should make its range more widespread, but I don't think the rural population for the most part even knows about RFA. I have a nephew who studies media communications in Phnom Penh. I am going to ask him. He probably has exact data.
Do you know how many radio stations broadcast RFA Khmer program ?
More than you thought.
5:56
Tell me. I know some of the reports are re-broadcast by other stations, but I am not aware of any station carrying the entire program, except of course the different language programs, e. g. Chinese, etc.
Post a Comment