Liutauras Ulevičius

XXI a. kasdienybės dienoraštis

Page 157 of 218

Ieškomi. Ne skubiai ir kokybiški.

Teoriškai Vilniaus arkivyskupijos šeimos centro kursus jau įpusėjom, tai belieka paskelbti, kad ieškau ne itin skubiai ir kokybiškų:

  • siuvėjo(s);
  • juvelyro(ės;
  • floristo(ės);
  • muzikantų / grupės;
  • styginių instrumentų kvarteto;
  • vedėjo(s);
  • sumuštinių gamintojų;
  • furšeto aptarnaujančio personalo (sumuštiniams ir vynui);
  • oro baliono;
  • laivo;
  • šokių mokytojų;
  • fotografo / operatoriaus;
  • limuzino;
  • pirotechnikų;

Beje, Romos katalikų bažnyčios organizuojami kursai šiek tiek dviprasmiški – bažnyčia de facto konstatuoja, kad Lietuvos Respublikos švietimo sistema piliečiams nesugeba įdiegti žinių apie:

  • Bendravimą šeimoje;
  • Santuokos sakramentą;
  • Santuokos sakramento teisę;
  • Šeimos planavimo būdus ir gyvybės vertę.

Šiek tiek keista, bet turiu pripažinti, kad kai kurias mintis iš tiesų verta išgirsti, nors ir sumaišytas su katalikų propaganda (pavyzdžiui, teiginys, jog tik Romos katalikų bažnyčia turi savo teisės sistemą, būtų juokingas visiems musulmonams).

Propaganda: 1983 m. rugpjūčio 9 d. „Vakarinės naujienos“ (IV)

Neatsitiktinai krepšinis tapo ta sritimi, kur tautiniai jausmai veržėsi pro cenzūros gniaužtus.

Laimėtos pasaulio krepšinio čempionato finalo rungtynės prieš JAV suteikė progą ne tik pagirti „daugelį metų neturėjusias sau lygių oficialiosiose varžybose“, bet ir pažymėti Lietuvos Tarybų Socialistinę Respubliką atstovavusias sportininkes.

Ką dabar veikia anuometinės TSRS rinktinės narės?

 

Inspector of journalists' ethics: blogs should obey public information rules

Today inspector of journalists' ethics has announced his decision Nr. SPR-9, which equally identifies questionable information available for public access in newspapers „Giružis”, „Panevėžio rytas”, „L.T.”, „Respublika“ and blog www.blogas.lt/kaboom.

Such decision strengthens my position, that bloggers and journalists should enjoy the same rights in order to require them obey similar rules.

P.S. interesting question in this case – should inspector's decision be implemented by blog's author or the blog-farm owner, who is in charge under notice-and-take-down procedure.

Citizens – their rights – journalism

Yesterday AFP introduced to the global community my quest for accreditation in our parliament, therefore I feel obligation to explain a few additional issues for guests not reading Lithuanian.

Firstly, the factual background – I've applied for the accreditation in the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania as a blogger. Yesterday a formal decision to deny access was made simply on the argument, that I have no employment or similar contract with a media channel. Clearly, no blogger has such a contract (except rules of blog-farm provider – the parliament described them as not sufficient “to be valued as a contract”).

Secondly, the main question to be answered is:

Should bloggers have the same legal rights and obligations as journalists?

If yes – it's ok and all citizens are encouraged to participate and use internet as the medium for communication and information transfer

If no – journalists would become a separate legal category, which would undermine rights of self-expression for every other citizen. From the legal point of view (as I'm a PhD student) such an answer contradicts to US theory of “lonely pamphleter”, but it is unclear, how should it be valued from the perspective of European Convention of Human Rights and its Article 10 (freedom of expression). The legal question is, whereas the status of journalist should depend on formal qualifications (e.g. diploma, employment contract) or real activities (e.g. gathering information and dissemination).

Simple example:

Scenario A (“yes”) – a blogger, using internal information, posts a public message, that employee X from public institution Y is laundering money into his own pockets. The court provides him right not to disclosure the source of this information. Blogger is protected as every journalist. People are necouraged to write about public problems.

Scenario B (“no”) – a blogger, using internal information, posts a public message, that
employee X from public institution Y is laundering money into his own
pockets. The court does not provide him right not to disclosure the source of
this information, the source is opened for everybody. Blogger is not protected as every journalist. People are
demotivated to openly discuss and write about public problems.

« Older posts Newer posts »