Bulgaria: RSF condemns refusal to investigate reporter’s violent arrest October 2, 2013 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Interview with Genka Shikerova on media freedom in Bulgaria Related documents Интервю Генка ШикероваPDF – 223.65 KB News Receive email alerts Organisation BulgariaEurope – Central Asia News Follow the news on Bulgaria Help by sharing this information She was interviewed for Reporters Without Borders by Desislava Kyurkchyeva on 23 September. The original version in bulgarian of this interview is attached at the bottom of this page. Any news about the investigation? Police probe into the case but it is impossible to complete the investigation within a week. I have already been interrogated once and it is quite a routine procedure. They are working on the case; however, I have no idea how far they have reached. In this case, have the police offered you protection? Yourself, have you requested protection? The procedure in this case is of a different kind and this is not on the agenda. This way or the other, I don’t want any. I received full support from the TV channel: the News department director offered me to hire a guard but I refused because I do not plan to change my lifestyle because of what happened. Did you receive any calls, messages or threats in whatever form prior to or after the case? Can you relate them in any way to your work, be it such done now or in the past? No, not before that happened, nor thereafter have I received any threats or messages related to this incident, nor do I have any conflict to relate it with. I tried to recall any, since the police asked me the same questions but I cannot find any relation. Could you confirm the reports of several media that you associate the case with your journalistic work? I have definitively not made such a statement. I cannot find a connection between escalation of political tension and this arson. The only Bulgarian media I have spoken to is bTV. The materials are on the website and all the rest is far-fetched interpretation of my words. I cannot and do not want to jump into any conclusions. Are you fearful about your health and that of your relatives? I really want to believe that this is an act of vandalism. I try not to think about it, nor analyse it. This is why I do not let fear permeate my thoughts. This did happen and I hope that the probe will yield results but if that does not happen, I do not plan to become a victim of arson. I suppose you are aware about opinions that related what happened to your interviews with Lyutvi Mestan and Sergei Stanishev. Some qualified them as biting. In this case, I cannot have an opinion because I have no evidence and it would be absurd to lay the blame on anyone.I asked the adequate journalistic questions for this situation, questions which any colleague would have asked and to which he/she would have wanted to get an answer. This is why from a journalistic standpoint; I believe I have done my job. How would you evaluate your work in the morning show of bTV “This morning”? Have you ever felt any pressure? It is clear that the timing is very special in view of the political context in the country. You, personally, have you felt any difference in your work ever since you have been anchoring the morning show? Me, personally, no because I have always had the freedom to ask questions, both as a reporter and as an anchor.Many colleagues refuse to believe it but so far I have never been subject to any pressure. I have indeed not been object of any. I can definitively assert this. Due to the limited number of political shows, the morning show of bTV has an exceptional role in shaping public opinion in the country. It is often an object of criticism. How does this affect your work? This is why it is interesting because it offers a broad platform for comments, analyses and discussions. Anyone is entitled to personal opinion and new media give the opportunity for this opinion to reach out to more people. By now anyone is an expert and understands what journalism is about. For this reason, comments are rife and I find nothing bad about it. In the interview with the leader of the Socialist Party and the Party of European Socialists Sergei Stanishev, he asks you to draw a parallel with the attitude of the former Prime Minister Boiko Borissov to the media. You answered that PRs keep being insistent over the phone. What does this mean? Of course, they call, we hear them on a daily basis and this is normal. It is another issue how often and what we talk about but these are internal matters which are part of everyday life and are not an exception. If one says that pressure has changed since today and yesterday there was none, one will lie. This is an everyday struggle and this is part of the profession. It is another issue to what degree does the journalist succumb, to what degree the person wants to be objective… But if go back to investigative journalism: is it more difficult now to do investigative journalism in Bulgaria than it used to be five years ago? I can give you an answer to this question next year since I do a thesis on this topic. I make observations on all investigative journalism pieces done in recent years at bTV and Nova TV. I want to see what the trends are in terms of the number and type of investigations, as well as to see what was aired in the individual periods. I believe that the conclusions will be curious. This is very intensive work but it is only then when one can assert for sure… too many assertions have been circulated. If you allow me to be a bit more insistent: if you do such a study, this means that you start with some hypotheses. My hypothesis is that the number of journalists doing investigative journalism in Bulgaria is on the decline. Would you agree? Investigative journalism is difficult in its nature and it requires too much effort of a purely personal nature and the issue is whether we have enough journalists to devote their time and do the effort to achieve results. I doubt that there are many people willing and able to do it. I am not sure if it is the circumstances that put us in the situation of having fewer and fewer investigations. Of course, I do not rule out the effect of the market. Investigative journalism is expensive and time-consuming but it is the cherry on the pie. And is it more dangerous to do investigative journalism now? I do not know if it is dangerous. I do not feel threatened. I have not received any threats. All the more, it is necessary to look around and see what is going on in Bulgaria in terms of quality to have any grounds to claim that. Several days ago it emerged that two Bulgarian correspondents of Deutsche Welle, Emi Baruh and Ivan Bedrov, were fired on ethical grounds. In the public domain, this was again interpreted as them affecting certain political interests. What is your opinion about this? We invited them both in “This Morning” on September 25. I familiarised with the letter of the bank and the official statement of Deutsche Welle. The position of Deutsche Welle is not substantiated and adequate. How is it possible that the editorial department at Deutsche Welle claim that the allegations toward their colleagues are unjustified and at the same time terminate relations with them. Besides, the work of these authors has always been subject to editorial review. Where is his responsibility in this case? I also do not understand the analysis made by the representatives of the bank. My colleagues’ articles are published as commentaries. This article type has its specificities which have not been taken in consideration. Ivan and Emi told me that Deutsche Welle’s assertions that they have been familiarised with written standards and rules in the beginning of their collaboration, are not true. I have worked with Ivan Bedrov in bTV and he is an exceptional professional. I am convinced that he approached the matter professionally. To me, the attitude toward both journalists is a reason for concern and sends a bad signal. How do you expect that events unfold from here onwards in political terms, do you expect pressure to escalate? I have no idea where things will go but we as journalists have to first get our own things square and if we are to work professionally and in the public interest, we will be in the best position possible.Photo credit: bTV News to go further Bulgaria’s general election: RSF publishes 10 proposals to rescue press freedom News RSF and 60 other organisations call for an EU anti-SLAPP directive BulgariaEurope – Central Asia The car of Genka Shikerova, a journalist known for her incisive interviews of Bulgarian politicians, was set on fire outside her Sofia home on the night of 16 September, reviving concern about freedom of information and the safety of journalists in Bulgaria. Reporters Without Borders, which condemns this act of arson, is publishing an interview with Shikerova. RSF_en February 11, 2021 Find out more March 10, 2021 Find out more December 2, 2020 Find out more
Alex Wong/Getty Images(DALLAS) — The student-led March for Our Lives inspired adults into action also, including one woman who is helping lead visual demonstrations during the National Rifle Association convention this weekend.Susan Levine told ABC News that what she saw during that March 14 demonstration prompted her to take action now in her city of Dallas.“I was watching all the speeches on TV and I was so incredibly moved and blown away by how articulate and powerful these children were,” she said, adding she “really felt like ‘Wow, I really want to do something to help this movement grow and amplify it.’”She decided that the best way to chime into the national gun debate was to “cause some sort of disruption … in a peaceful way” during the upcoming NRA convention.Levine is collaborating with four gun safety groups including gun violence prevention group Giffords to arrange guerilla projections of gun victims on buildings in downtown Dallas near the site of the convention on Friday night.The projections will begin at nightfall, hours after both President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence speak at the event earlier in the day. Pence’s address, which was announced prior to Trump’s, sparked some controversy because the Secret Service banned the presence of guns and knives in the room during his speech.On Saturday, the visuals will move to the streets, with five double-sided mobile billboard trucks “weaving around the street closures,” Levine said.Both the projections, which will range from eight to 15 stories tall, and the displays on the billboard trucks will show the pictures and names of 24 gun victims, along with the model of gun used in their death.The victims range in age from 6 to 51, and they were chosen, with permission from their relatives, to show the diversity of gun deaths in the U.S.Victims from high-profile shootings like those in Aurora, Sandy Hook, and Pulse nightclub will be interspersed with others like Brishell Jones, 16, who died as a result of a drive-by shooting, or Aaron Rocha, 17, who was the victim of a “random road rage” shooting, Levine said.“It’s not just about mass shootings. It’s about the things that happened every day,” Levine said, citing violent break-ins, suicides, and instances of being “in the wrong place at the wrong time” as often overlooked examples of deadly gun violence.Levine said she hopes that the visuals make the tens of thousands of convention-goers think about the impact of their weapons.“It’s really not about being a liberal or a conservative or being for guns or completely against them,” she said. “It’s about life and I really don’t want people to lose sight of that so the focus of the campaign really let’s the power of the victims and their stories of gun violence do the talking.”While she has familial ties to Parkland, Florida, which was the site of the deadly school shooting in February, she does not have direct ties to victims of gun violence. That isn’t the case for Peter Ambler, the executive director of Giffords, which is one of the groups partnered in this demonstration effort.“I’m somebody who’s lost a colleague to gun violence. I worked with [former Rep.] Gabby [Giffords] when she got shot and it’s important that the NRA leaders and the politicians that they control are able to see with their own eyes the real tragic cost of their political agenda,” Ambler told ABC News.“There’ll be lots of macho talk but very little reflection on Congress’s inability to address the country’s gun violence crisis,” he said.Copyright © 2018, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.
ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr continue reading » CUNA’s Compliance team has received a number of questions regarding which provisions of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s short-term, small-dollar (payday) loan rule are delayed and which will become effective in August.In response, staff has created a CompBlog entry detailing the effective dates.The CFPB finalized the payday rule in November 2017, and it addresses two separate topics:Mandatory Underwriting Provisions, which cover the underwriting of payday loans, most notably an ability-to-repay determination requirement; andPayment Provisions, which establish requirements and limitations for lenders to attempt to withdraw payments from member accounts in ways that could deviate from what the borrower expects or result in excessive fees.A June 6 final rule from the CFPB delays the compliance date for most of the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions to Nov. 19, 2020 (they were originally set to go into effect Aug. 19 of this year).