Reykjavík Grapevine - 08.04.2005, Side 38

Iceland and Italy is that we have
a public broadcasting company.
And there are no discussions about
privatising it. Whereas they’re
privatising RAI in Italy.
My point is that while it is ensured
that we have diversity in the
Icelandic media, we need not worry.
That doesn’t mean we can allow
companies like Baugur to expand
without any limits. While we have
Morgunblaðið, while we have RÚV
and both news offices there, we’re
going to be okay.
Grapevine: So what would it take for
you to put forward your own media
bill?
Marshall: We are not going to
present our own media bill. We have
stated our point of view. We have
stated that banning cross ownership
doesn’t fit the Icelandic market.
Because it’s small. There has to be
a motive for people in the financial
sector to invest in the media. They
have to make money, as capitalistic
as that sounds.
I have no problem with companies
making money from the news.
It means we can apply for jobs at
different stations in Iceland. A
financially weak media company
weakens editorials. If a news office
is suffering due to lack of money it
immediately affects the china wall
that blocks news from advertising. It
is a good thing when companies that
are in the business of selling news
make good money.
It would be very good if we could see
more stability than there has been
in the last few years. We’ve seen
extreme instability in Norðurljós or
365 and it directly affects the quality
of the journalism. It means fewer
jobs, fewer reporters.
When we see a new media bill, that
would be something. It would have
to try to promote more stability in
the market.
Grapevine: A lot of journalists
who came here to cover Fischer are
talking about the Baugur-owned 365
media company, Stöd 2, your old
station, and the way they blocked
other news agencies from getting
an interview with Bobby Fischer.
From what I hear, it sounds like an
extreme violation of ethics.
Marshall: It’s something we haven’t
discussed here at this conference.
But... I’m not sure that it’s in
violation of any code of ethics. But
in competition between the Icelandic
media some might argue that this
was taking it a step too far.
What I was more surprised about
and what was a mystery to me
was why would anybody want an
exclusive interview with a completely
nuts individual like that who just
rants and nothing that comes out of
his mouth makes any sense.
Grapevine: Yes, I guess so. Makes
you wonder why would anybody
import him.
Marshall: I find the whole matter
an embarrassment for the Icelandic
nation. It’s an outrage. We should
never have gone this far with it. I
can hear from people following this
from other countries. None of them
understand why we did this. None of
them make any distinction between
him appearing in Iceland in 1972
and the hatred of Jewish people
and the unbelievable nonsense that
comes out of this man. They see
the whole thing as one package.
And the attempts of the Icelandic
authorities to isolate these things...
that he’s something special to the
local history, that just doesn’t make
sense to them.
It looks as though we are agreeing
with him. And it has already hurt the
reputation of Iceland internationally.
That’s me speaking as an individual,
not as the president of the
journalistic union.
Grapevine: Regarding Fischer?
Marshall: Yeah. But you can quote
me.
Róbert Marshall hosts a weekly radio
show on Tölstöðin, from 1-3 on
Saturdays.
THIRTY MINUTES WITH RÓBERT MARSHALL
Róbert Marshall, the 34-year old President of the National
Journalists’ Union, broke a big story this year. And I mean he
broke it. On January 26, Marshall rushed out a live feed reporting
that Prime Minister Halldór Ásgrímsson and Foreign Minister
Daví› Oddsson had lied about the time that Iceland had joined
the Coalition of the Willing, as documents in Washington DC
suggested they had signed on four hours earlier than they claimed.
Unfortunately for Marshall, the four hours difference was due to
nothing more malignant than time zones.
INTERVIEW
Unlike a prominent American
journalist, Marshall resigned
immediately. He has since rebuilt
his reputation. He spoke with the
Grapevine from Bilbao, where he
was attending an annual meeting of
the European Union of Journalists.
Grapevine: So you’re off
representing us union members?
Did the Journalist’s Union play a
role in getting rid of Auðun Georg
Ólafsson, the appointed news
director for RÚV with extremely
conspicuous ties to Prime Minister
Halldór Ásgrímsson?
Róbert Marshall: Absolutely. The
campaign that we waged with the
reporters at RÚV was extremely
important in this matter. And also
it showed what the international
support means to us.
What we wanted was that
professionalism and experience and
credibility would be the key issues
that those in hiring the radio news
would have in mind. With that one
interview the Icelandic journalists
showed what we value. (Referring to
an RÚV interview in which Ólafsson
repeatedly contradicted himself
regarding his actions and contacts in
government.)
Grapevine: If we’re speaking to a
foreign audience, is it fair to call you
the Icelandic Dan Rather?
Marshall: [Laughing] I wouldn’t
go so far. The decision that I made
was based as it has to be based: on
your own personal condition and
your feelings about your status as a
journalist. The first and foremost of
all principles in journalism is that
you do not tell the public anything
that is wrong.
We saw that in the interview on
Friday: the absolute principle is to
always tell the truth. You have to
show people that you really mean
what you’re saying. That it really
means something to you to be
truthful and to be accurate.
If and when you’re not, it’s going to
cost you.
Grapevine: That makes sense, but
I worry about punishing the one
journalist who bothers to investigate.
As I see it, no journalist in this
country reported a word on what was
going on with Iraq. We don’t punish
them for leaving the public in the
dark, for not doing their jobs.
Marshall: I wasn’t making the
precedent that every journalist
that ever filed a wrong story, who
made an honest mistake, had to
resign. In this instance, I was the
worst journalist to make this error
because of the history I have with the
government. Because of the media
bill last year. Because of the high
profile with this case.
But it’s true... Nobody denies that
on both sides of the Atlantic there
was a campaign waged to shield the
truth from the public. We’ve seen
that the media both in America
and in Britain failed. We’ve seen
that the media failed in reporting
the decision-making and also in
reporting the results.
There are still two lines of deceit that
are lingering on. One is that Saddam
has weapons of mass destruction.
The other is that he had links to
Al-Qaeda and Osama. And those
misleading lines are still lingering.
They still believe that.
Grapevine: Then I guess you’re
saying journalists aren’t doing their
job. How is the union going to fix
that?
Marshall: It’s something the union
should be concerned about. We
should be concerned about the
politicians who spin the truth away
from the public. It goes against the
principles of democracy. You should
have decision-making that is open
and clear and plain for everyone to
see and something happened in this
matter that made people forget this.
In my quitting I had taken into
account that I’d been talking about
higher standards in Iceland for two
years now. When you’re asking for
higher standards you have to follow
what you say.
As president (of the union) it would
be extremely difficult to report my
first wrong story and then just say
sorry. But I feel my reputation is
restored.
Grapevine: Going back to local
journalists. I consistently see the
Alþingi voting one way, and the
public going the other way in
opinion polls. Should the press be
serving as a middle man, telling
the politicians what people think,
and the people what politicians are
doing? Is something broken here?
Marshall: There’s a lot to be said
about the statements politicians
made, that they shouldn’t be swayed
by public opinion, they should
lead the public. But a government
that doesn’t listen to the public,
it’s a government that exists in a
vacuum. I think that’s what we’ve
been seeing. There doesn’t seem to
be a link between the government
and the public. The reason for that
is not enough access to the policies,
not enough access to the policy
makers. It’s an expensive problem.
It complicates the election process.
There’s a huge gap between what the
political parties are offering and what
the people want.
Grapevine: Let’s talk Baugur. When
foreign journalists recently came to
Iceland, they were comparing this
country to Italy, saying Baugur Chief
Exec Jón Asgeir Johanesson was like
Berlusconi.
Marshall: The difference between
by Bart Cameron
38