Reykjavík Grapevine - 28.08.2010, Side 6

6
The Reykjavík Grapevine
Issue 13 — 2010 It's a whole page of opinions! if you're looking for the awesome
Mayoral Address that we've been running, flip back to page 2.
The cool statistics come from our cool friends at DataMarket.
They've got an almost endless amount of sexy data, free for all,
at www.datamarket.com. Also check out www.grapevine.is/
statistics for interactive graphs and other statistics!
Opinion | Íris Erlingsdóttir
At a hearing in the case of the state
against the “Reykjavík nine” on August
17th, Ragnar Aðalsteinsson, counsel to
four of the accused, quoted one of the
greater legal minds of England, Viscount Gordon
Hewart: “Not only must Justice be done; it must
also be seen to be done”.
Ragnar was arguing that the case be
dismissed and the judge recuse himself as the
defendants could not trust his impartiality. Ragnar
had learned that the judge had personally made
the unprecedented request that a large police
force be present at every hearing, thus in no
uncertain terms declaring that he considered the
defendants such a threat to the public order that
they could not be allowed inside public buildings
without a large police guard.
Ragnar argued that the police presence had
created an intolerable working environment - the
police has determined who is allowed to enter the
courtroom and who is not, even refusing some
of the defendants entry. The trial could not be
considered truly open to the public, justice could
not “be seen to be done”.
The original quote comes from a landmark
1924 case, and reads: “it is not merely of some
importance but is of fundamental importance,
that justice should not only be done, but should
manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
That is, the foundation of a just legal system
is open justice which is above suspicion, that
the rule of law requires that the public be able
to observe the administration of justice in the
courts. The public must be able to see with
its own eyes that justice is carried out without
prejudice, coercion or violence.
This principle is inscribed in the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article
14 of the covenant states that anyone accused
of a criminal charge is “entitled to a fair and
public hearing by a competent, independent
and impartial tribunal established by law.” Now,
obviously, there can be exceptions – trials may be
closed “for reasons of morals, public order […] or
national security”.
These exceptions, however, must be used only
in exceptional circumstances, lest the appearance
of justice be undermined. By reserving an
arbitrary right to keep trials closed or partially
closed, dispatching dozens of police officers
to monitor the comings and goings of people
who stand trial or wish to be in attendance
undermines this appearance. The distinction
between the executive and the justice system
vanishes and the public is given the unmistakable
impression that those standing trial are a threat
to public order and national security. The trial is
turned into a national security theater.
And this, unfortunately, is what has happened
in the case against the Reykjavík nine.
The threatening and violent conduct of the
police at the trial so far has been completely
unacceptable. But the decision of the court to
call in the police, and its decision to effectively
condone its excessive use of force raises
questions that are far more serious.
In an open democratic society and
Rechtsstaat open trials not only serve the
purpose of administering justice, they serve the
purpose of educating the public on how justice
operates, how it is administered, thereby assuring
the public that the state is built upon the just
application of the laws: That the foundation for
the rule of law is justice. In police states, however,
trials serve a different purpose altogether: To
demonstrate to the public the might of the state
and the police, to impress upon people that
resistance is futile, that protest will be met with
the crushing power of the state, and that it is not
afraid to use this power.
And no one who has followed the trial against
the Reykjavík nine is left with much doubt as to
which category it falls.
What Are We Worth?
It is no secret that the role of news-
papers today is in a state of flux. The
widespread dissemination of free in-
formation on the internet, television,
and radio has broadened the scope of informa-
tion available to the public, while at the same time
permitting individuals to isolate themselves in co-
coons of like-minded souls scattered across the
planet.
The dilemma facing journalists (and, indeed, all
information providers) is how to make money pre-
senting information to a public that now expects
to receive it gratis. There appear to be only two
viable models.
One model is to use provocative stories to attract
readers to what is, in essence, a marketing flier.
Under this model, the newspaper is distributed
at no charge to residences or is placed in widely
accessible locations, such as shopping malls and
busy pedestrian streets. Whereas a marketing
piece containing nothing but an advertisement
will generally be tossed without a glance, a news-
paper containing information of interest to the in-
tended market will be retained and perused at the
reader’s leisure.
A second model is to charge a fairly high price for
the timely delivery of specialized information that
is essential to professionals, such as attorneys or
financial analysts. If a lawyer does not have access
to the most recent laws, if a stockbroker does not
have instant access to market information, they
are at a distinct disadvantage, and will gladly pay
a premium.
Both of these models appear to be fairly success-
ful, but between these two extremes is a waste-
land. In Iceland, Fréttablaðið is the best example
of the first model. It is distributed to all house-
holds in Iceland free of charge, and is full of ad-
vertisements, as well as news of the day, editorials,
sports, etc. Fréttablaðið is owned by 365 media,
which also owns the television station Stöð 2 and
other media. 365 media is 90% owned by famous
“outvasion viking“, Ingibjörg Pálmadóttir, wife
of Jón Ásgeir Jóhannsson, one of the country‘s
most controversial figures surrounding the finan-
cial collapse. (How people under investigation for
their part in Europe‘s biggest financial swindle of
the last century and indebted to the tune of bil-
lions can still be “owners” – and board members;
Pálmadóttir is also chairman of the board of 365
media – of the country‘s largest media business
is in itself a subject worthy of study and concern.)
Fréttablaðið likes to boast in full page ads of its
popularity, but of course, it‘s easy to be “popular“
when you‘re in a position (thanks to the owners’
ready access to the nation’s savings) to give your
product away. Unfortunately, the Fréttablaðið
model is not available for us peons who don’t own
half of the country, and consequently don’t have a
slew of businesses readily available to purchase
ad blocks at (tax-deductible) premium costs.
Morgunblaðið does not appear to fit this model
since it is subscription-based, but I’d argue that it
is as much a rag as Fréttablaðið. It is, in essence,
owned by the Independence Party and its spon-
sors. Once the nation‘s most widely read paper,
Morgunblaðið is now a shadow of its former self.
Its market is the voting populace, which is why the
appointment of Davið Oddsson as editor-in-chief
(throwing out his very able predecessor, Ólafur
Stephensen) despite his lack of experience in the
field, is perfectly logical. (To put it in context, hir-
ing the former prime minister and Central Bank
chairman as the paper’s editor would have been
similar to the Washington Post having, following
Watergate, hired Nixon as its editor). The pres-
ence of apparently objective stories, rather than
hack political pieces, is useful in sucking in the
unsuspecting. The selection of stories, rather than
their content, presents an alternative reality in
which the past can be rewritten and/or forgotten,
and the attempts of the government to clean up
the mess created by Oddsson and friends scorned
and ridiculed.
I had hoped that the free websites like Eyjan and
Pressan were going to give the plutocrat and the
ideologue a run for their money. It was the explo-
sion of opinions critical of all political parties that
made them unique, and underlined the cartoonish
nature of the simplistic, ideologically-driven drivel
with which the traditional newspapers insulted our
intelligence. But, alas, it seems they do not have a
viable business plan or a clear vision of what they
want to be. Unfortunately, the sites’ directors have
been unable come up with a plan to pay the ma-
jority of contributors. There are some ads on the
sites, but not many, not enough to compensate the
most dedicated and talented bloggers even a to-
ken amount for their time and effort.
It is a mantra of the modern age that the internet
has changed everything, but the reality is that you
can’t get something of value for nothing. Now that
the fires are dying down and our cynicism is on
the ascendancy, it’s hard to justify sacrificing so
much of our lives to fight the beast without some
recompense.
Media viewpoints on Icelandic banks 2006- 2008
Source: Report of the Special Investigation Commission
(citing: Creditinfo Ísland hf.) and DataMarket
PositiveNegative Neutral
CSI: Reykjavík
Iceland | Statistics
Our stats this issue may be grim, but there’s a per-
fectly reasonable explanation. The murder of Haf-
narfjörður resident Hannes Helgason on August
15 has put the topic in everyone’s brain, particu-
larly for its unusual circumstances in this coun-
try. In an interview with Fréttablaðið on August
21, criminologist and professor at the University
of Iceland Helgi Gunnlaugsson said that this case
was particularly special because it is still under in-
vestigation. According to the article, most murders
in Iceland are solved very quickly as the killer and
victim usually have obvious connections, mainly
crimes of passion with rapid confessions. The
absence of connection between people involved
in murder cases usually implies organized crime,
however these are also associated with unsolved
cases, which there are very few of.
Overall, Iceland has an overwhelmingly low
murder rate, the lowest of all Nordic countries and
one of the lowest in Western Europe. There are
also many years in which no murders have been
committed at all, so we can usually worry about
other things, like the price of beer and the poor
quality of vegetables.
Check out an interactive graph at www.datamarket.com
(short link: www.url.is/3vx)
REBECCA LOUDER
PáLL HILMARSSON
0
20
40
60
80
100
2008 Q32008 Q22008 Q12007 Q42007 Q3 2007 Q22007 Q12006 Q42006 Q32006 Q22006 Q1
Media viewpoints on Icelandic banks 2006- 2008 by quart rs
Source: Report f he Special Investi ation Commis ion (citin : Creditin Ísland hf.) and DataMarketHealth) and DataMarket
NeutralPositive Negative
5
10
15
20
25
Males
Females
20082007200620052004200320022001200019991998199719961995
Female
Male
People incarcerated for murder 1995 - 2008
Source: Statistics Iceland (citing: Ministry of Justice and Ecclesiastical Affairs,
Prison and Probation Administration.) and DataMarket
FACTS. INSIGHT. BEAUTY.
Witnessing a show
trial or seeing justice
being done?
Opinion | Magnús Sveinn Helgason