Nemani Delaibatiki is a former editor of the Fiji Sun and Fiji Times, founding editor in chief of the Fiji Daily Post, and former president of the Fiji Journalists Association and Fijian Media Association. This post is based on his remarks presented during the panel “Human Dignity and the Media in Oceania” at the Oceanian Perspectives on Human Dignity Conference held at BYU–Hawaii in Laie, Oahu, Hawaii, 23–25 April 2024.
Bula vinaka.
It has been made clear in this conference that human dignity is based on a set of core universal values and principles that transcends culture, ethnicity, nationalities, religions, socioeconomic status, and politics. The values that underpin human dignity include respect, equal rights, the freedom to choose, and access to essential services and goods that ensure a reasonable standard of living, security, and peace.
It is sad and even a tragedy that instead of embracing the richness of our diversity and using it as a powerful tool for development and progress, unity, peace, and prosperity, our differences sometimes give rise to intolerance, prejudices, contention, hatred, tension, civil unrest, and violent conflicts in several parts of the world. Human dignity and many other noble ideals are trampled and become casualties.
Role of Media
The media, referred to as “the fourth estate,” is an essential pillar of democracy. It upholds the universal narrative that all human beings are children of God and therefore equal before divine law and the law of the land and, as such, must be treated equally.
The important role of the media in our society cannot be treated lightly. It informs, educates, entertains, and helps shape people’s opinions. Its importance was highlighted by U.S. founding father Thomas Jefferson, the third U.S. president, author of the Declaration of Independence, and a champion for the media. He said that he would prefer newspapers without a government over a government without newspapers.[1]
The mainstream media operates on three criteria before it broadcasts or publishes a news item. The news must be
- accurate or factual,
- fair and balanced, and
- in the public interest.
Being fair and balanced means all parties quoted in the story are given the opportunity to comment, particularly on sensitive and controversial stories. If people feel their reputation and character have been maligned by a news item, they have the right to seek legal redress in a court of law.
Social Media
The advent of internet and digital media has transformed the media landscape. While the mainstream media operates on a set of criteria that protects it from litigation cases, social media knows no bounds and operates with impunity. The term human dignity is virtually nonexistent, and truth is often deliberately distorted to satisfy an insidious or clandestine agenda.
This is a global problem and a major challenge to many governments, to rein in unscrupulous keyboard warriors who post reckless and factually unfounded information that deliberately maligns and traumatizes victims. The human toll is difficult to measure or quantify. But suffice to say we cannot turn a blind eye to its negative impact, and we need to do something to address it.
I am not condemning all of social media but in fact believe that, when used positively and appropriately, it can bring about positive societal change. However, in my experience, mainstream media on many occasions have had to step in and clean up the mess and inaccuracies on social media, by verifying information from authoritative sources.
Media in Fiji
The news media in Fiji is fortunate because it now enjoys media freedom, a far cry from the political turmoil generated by the country’s four coups during which the media endured censorship, threats, and intimidation.
There have been attempts to deter and discourage people from criticizing the judiciary and from commenting openly about a case before the court in social media. It requires political will to enforce the law to effectively make people think twice before they post something that is illegal on social media. The mainstream media is aware that commenting publicly on a case before the court is sub judice and is contempt of court. Every time we talk about limiting public commentary, the libertarians jump up and down and question what they describe as an assault on the right to freedom of speech and expression. However, freedom as we know it in the media comes with responsibility; there is no such a thing as absolute freedom.
Personal Experiences
Even on a personal level we have freedom of choice. Our agency is a gift from God. But we are accountable for our choices. We have to face the consequences of our choices—good or bad. I made two professional life-defining choices as a journalist in the 1980s.
The first choice was when I decided to publish the content of a top-secret government document that was voluntarily handed to me by a high-ranking official. It highlighted the background of the strained relations between the army and its line ministry. The leak was designed to put information out in the public space so that something could be done about it. I was arrested and charged with breaking the Official Secrets Act, an archaic British law. Top criminal lawyers at the time told me that I would lose the case because of the “overwhelming” prosecution evidence. But I was later acquitted on technical grounds, and the prosecution did not appeal the magistrate’s ruling. The then–Fiji Sun editorial board supported the decision to publish the article because it was a matter of public interest.
Prior to that episode I had spent some time in the Middle East embedded with Fijian soldiers in the United Nations Peacekeeping Force. Some of the soldiers had shared their grievances with me. The two top issues for them were the pay disparity between them and their counterparts from other contributing nations in the UN Force and faulty, ageing rifles. They were matters of public interest because at the time a number of Fijian soldiers had lost their lives in the line of duty. At stake were the safety of the soldiers, their pay anomaly, and the anxiety of their families and relatives in Fiji. Not long after that, the issues were raised in Parliament and the grievances were addressed. They were the reasons for the deliberate leak of the top-secret document.
The second big choice I had to make was standing up against the first military coup in 1987, in defense of democracy. My house was raided while my wife and children huddled in a corner. I was interrogated at the military camp, and the newspaper of which I was editor was forcibly closed by the military.
So when we talk about human dignity, we are looking at a wide spectrum. These two examples from my personal experience are toward the extreme end of that spectrum. I do not wish such extremes on anyone.
During my more than 50 years of journalism and media experience, I found that those in power, authority, leadership, and/or public office have a moral obligation and responsibility to create a safe, free, and peaceful environment where people can develop, thrive, and enjoy freedom of choice and expression without fear of intimidation or reprisals from the establishment, in the true spirit of democracy and the rule of law.
Fiji and some small island nations in the region have had their share of civil unrest triggered by multiple causes, underlined by ethnic tension and economic disparity.
In Fiji, the right to housing, education, and health services are part of the Bill of Rights under its Constitution. While some progress has been achieved in attaining these goals, the reality is that a lot of work remains to be done to address glaring disparities in terms of infrastructure and services in rural and urban areas.
It is common knowledge that some cyclone victims in Fiji—in Cogea and Wainunu, Bua; in Nabavatu, Dreketi; and in Macuata—are still living in tents and have been waiting for a number of years for housing promised to them by the then-government. In another part of the country, students cross the river by punts, rafts, or swimming when their “Irish crossings” (low-lying bridges or crossing structures) are flooded during heavy rain. When the Fijian media visited them during a recent flood, they were reluctant to talk because previous publicity had not changed their circumstances. The effected people have virtually given up hope.
Obviously, a lot of work still needs to be done to improve rural people’s access to better infrastructure and services. The two scenarios I highlighted were reported by Fijian media on a number of occasions to alert the powers that be that these people needed urgent help. They underscore the important role of the news media as a public watchdog in national development. I am told that the new government has started processes to address the issues.
The media also must deal with the issue of cultural sensitivity from time to time in reporting controversial issues. Traditionally, they are hushed up and suppressed to avoid shame and disrepute to the family and clan or tribe. This is one reason domestic violence is a national disgrace in Fiji. While some progress has been noted in creating public awareness via the media, a lot more work is required to eradicate this scourge on our society.
Politics, Religion, and Ethnic Tensions in Fiji
Like many of its neighbors, Fiji is steeped in traditions and distinctive cultures. These traditions and cultures are a source of identity and belonging and give Fijians a sense of peace, security, and dignity, especially for iTaukei (indigenous Fijians).
Religions that hold sway among groups of people offer different perspectives. In addition, foreign influences permeate different levels of our society. Then throw politics and different ideologies in the mix, and the dynamics change significantly. The latter take precedence over cultural and religious values and have contributed to Fiji’s political turmoil since the first military coup of 1987.
Ethnic tension that had been simmering since Fiji became independent in 1970 exploded into the open when Fiji Indians (or Indo-Fijians) were used as scapegoats and targeted as unfortunate victims in the quest for indigenous political supremacy. Fiji has had four coups during which human dignity was ignored in a bid to achieve political objectives. Racial prejudices reared their ugly heads. They were exacerbated by an undercurrent of religious intolerance in which certain faiths were targeted.
History gives us an opportunity to learn from our past mistakes and make sure we do not repeat them as we move into the future.
The iTaukei who supported the first three coups believed that if political power were in their hands they could change their economic status. While they were described as asset rich, communally owning more than 91% of Fiji’s total land mass, they were cash poor. Since 1987, they have called for affirmative action by calling on the government to give iTaukei assistance to help them become equal partners in the mainstream of the economy, using the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (ILO) Convention No. 169 as their battle cry. The convention recognizes indigenous people’s right to self-determination within a nation state while setting standards for national governments regarding indigenous people’s economic, sociocultural, and political rights, including the right to a land base. But this narrative ran against the grain of the equality principle of the 2013 Constitution, which was implemented by the previous government.
Equality and Equity
In our quest to allow people to live with dignity, we need to consider certain issues, including equality. While equality sounds like a positive word, it can only work in a level playing field. In reality, the playing field is not usually level, and that is why we need to apply equity to level the playing field. It means helping the vulnerable, poor, weak, and needy to give them a fair go and equal opportunity in life to live with dignity. They may have the potential but not the resources to do well on the level playing field.
In my professional career I have seen countless people’s lives transformed through affirmative action when they are given the necessary help to start a business, gain an education, cultivate their land, or develop their natural resources for commercial purposes. Whether people are of a particular ethnic, religious, or cultural group should not matter. If there is a genuine need, they merit help. Sometimes equity is wrongly perceived as preferential treatment and discrimination in the political arena.
Media Challenges
The media is often caught in the crossfire of political debate when it is simply trying to ensure that every person is given a fair go and assistance is given to those who genuinely need it. In carrying out its role, the media today faces serious financial-related challenges because of the rapidly evolving digital space—challenges like retaining journalists in the newsroom. In New Zealand in 2024, Warner Bros. Discovery announced the closing of its Newshub operation, which resulted in the loss of 300 jobs.
In Fiji, the lack of understanding about how the media operates leads to hostile attitudes toward it. Politicians and those in positions of power need to set an example by respecting the media’s role. Sometimes they attack and criticize the media when a news item portrays them in a bad light, but if they do their work within the bounds of the law, they have nothing to fear or worry about. As a public watchdog, the media holds those in power and in public office to account because they are paid with taxpayer money. Abuse of office, embezzlement, and corruption are three forms of evil that they should shun.
The Fijian media, and I am sure our colleagues in the region, follow the same rules and ethics used by independent media operators in many developed and democratic countries to champion policies and actions that support and bring awareness to the importance of human dignity.
Conclusion
To conclude, I stress that a collaborative campaign is required, between the media and the organizations represented at this conference, to make certain that we spare no effort in ensuring that every person, irrespective of background, religion, gender, political ideology, or race, can live with dignity.
References:
[1] Extract from Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, Paris, Jan. 16. 1787, Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Jefferson Quotes & Family Letters (last visited 31 Mar. 2025).