A swastika image has received a lot of hate and criticism from the Swiss population.
The SBB is the national railway company of Switzerland. It hung up the sign as a protest against immigrants being allowed into Switzerland.
According to the Tages Anzeiger, a Swiss newspaper, customers of the SBB have been deeply hurt.
Technically, the SBB must allow such advertisement. According to a rule made in 2012, the open spaces in train stations count as public space. However due to many strong reactions from customers the SBB has removed the sign.
As this sign is pretty well known to most of the population, it received a lot of media attention from all over Switzerland. No matter that the sign was only present in a few train station, people were not happy. This in return got the attention of the media, which caused even more people to read about it.
Newspapers and radio stations went to the train stations to talk to people, and ask them their opinion. It was no shock that all the interviewed customers did not want the sign up. This caused the news media to write and report about the feelings the people had. With the help of the news media the sign was removed, which makes a lot of people happy.
Last week, Colombia faced a major wiretapping scandal, which led to the resignation of various public officials.
The scandal started when prominent radio host, news anchor and journalist, Vicky Dávila published a secretly filmed video of a 2008 conversation about gay sex between Senator Carlos Ferro and Police Capitan Anyelo Palacios.
She stated that she released the video as an attempt to expose alleged grave sexual misconduct within the National Police, a complaint that has been investigated by other journalists for months.
The content of the video was so strong that it immediately forced the resignation of Ferro, vice minister of the Interior and National Police Director General Rodolfo Palomino, who had already been charged with sexual harassment.
After the scandal, the whole country, including the news media, was divided in two. People joined either one side or the other; there was no neutral opinion in this case.
One side believed that Dávila published the video in order to help the state with the investigation of the “Fellowship of the Ring,” an alleged gay prostitution network in the police force, which cannot be tolerated. People such as Dávila, those who supported the publication of the video, concluded that the information released served as a proof of the prostitution ring.
The other side, the one I support, claimed that the broadcasting and publishing of this extremely intimate video shows zero evidence of any involvement in prostitution; instead, it only publicizes private matters of professional politicians. Yes, the video proved that the former parliamentarian had had a relationship with a policeman, but it also showed that it would have been consensual.
How are we journalists covering things? Should our beliefs affect our objectivity?
Here is where the journalism’s role as the watchdog of the public interests at its heart should be brought into question.
Colombians might be interested to know where and with who their public figures sleep at night, but since this conduct doesn’t interfere with their assigned work, it should remain private. These persons should be judged by their professional performance, what they do for sexual pleasure, as long as it’s legal, should not be considered a public concern.
The pressure and comments from social media were so explosive that the video was removed from the networks and Dávila resigned as well.
So, did she have a genuine public interest in revealing this or was it something more personal? Despite the reason, journalists should be more careful with what they are publishing.
Words are powerful, they can contribute a lot, but they can also destroy; as Ferro, the victim of this whole story said: “I hope that justice can give me back the dignity journalist Vicky Dávila wanted to snatch from me.”
On Thursday afternoon, Feb. 18, 2016, as CNN was covering the Republican Presidential Town Hall, news broke that highly radioactive materials in Iraq had been stolen.
Reports have gone on to say that the device, which uses the radioactive material, Iridium-192, was reported stolen from an oil services company back in November.
Iridium-192 has a half-life of about 74 days, which means that by now the material has all ready decayed by half. Analysts on news stations are clarifying that these types of situations happen more frequently than they are reported on the news. Also, they believe it is highly unlikely that the material would be used in a terrorist attack and if it were used in a “dirty bomb,” it is likely that the explosion from the bomb would cause more harm than the Iridium-192.
What I am concerned about is why this news is being reported now? If the Iridium was stolen from an oil company in Iraq, in November, why should we care?
From what the online reports and analysts are leading onto, the repercussions of this incident alone will not be severe, yet they mention the possibility of radioactive materials being the next step in chemical warfare due to the availability of such materials around the world and the rising number of cases of stolen materials.
It seems to me that this news was reported too late. Now the nation is focused on the South Carolina primaries, an incident of stolen radioactive materials from November is not as important. I believe the mindset audiences have now is “Nothing has happened yet, so why should we care.”
If the news media were to have made this a bigger issue when it happened— instead of three months later— it would have garnered more attention and certainly would have been a talking point at the debates we have seen in the past months.
This week, thousands of Americans were given a very personal look into controversial Australian detention centers that have kept hundreds of refuges from gaining asylum.
Hailed by the Australian government as the “Pacific Solution,” the detention centers opened in 2001. Located in Naru and Manus Island in Papa New Guinea, they were created as a response to the increasing number of people seeking asylum in Australia by crossing international waters.
From the beginning, controversy has surrounded the extremely isolated centers. While it is difficult for those held there to speak out, reports of beatings by officers, rape and violence between refuges continue to surface.
The United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and Australian citizens have all condemned the Australian policy due to what can best be called the camp conditions.
According to BuzzFeed News, in 2014 a report from the Australian Senate committee gathered overwhelming accounts of the horrible conditions including dead flies in the food, overflowing toilets, abuse by guards, and detainees suffering heatstroke while waiting for food.
With the influx of refugees becoming a powerful international issue, it’s surprising that both the American news media and public have devoted such little attention to the Australian policy. Little recent information can be found about the detention centers, especially not from major U.S. news outlets.
This comes as both especially surprising and disappointing since, as of Feb. 6, the company operate the centers, Broadspectrum, extended its contract for another year. With another five-year lease, this does not come as a hopeful development to those against the policy.
As debates about what the solution is for handling immigrants and fears of terrorism rise internationally, the detention centers show no signs of closing soon. Hopefully, the American public will identify with the cause before the situation worsens.
We’ve been ingrained with the idea that journalists hold a significant amount of power in society. Like it or not, it’s just how it is. Whatever is released and exposed to the public depends on whether a news story is newsworthy and relevant, in other words, “journalist-approved.”
What if the role of the viewer and that of the news media’s were to overlap? I’d say that would be pretty catastrophic. Imagine viewers dictating and interrupting news segments that are going on live. Surely, that would be disastrous.
Recently, Esmeralda Labye, a Belgian reporter from Radio Télévision Belge de la Communauté Française (RTFB), was sexually assaulted during her live broadcast. Labye was reporting on the Cologne carnival in Germany when a man kissed her on the neck and made obscene gestures while she was reporting live.
The story has gained considerable attention with several renowned news websites such as CNN, BBC and The Guardian reporting on the sex attack. A similar pattern persists across all these reports where Labye has been delineated as competent in the manner of how she handled the situation.
Irrefutably, Labye can be commended for the professionalism she showed. It would be difficult to be in a situation similar to what she was in, where she managed to remain calm and have her emotions in line. Her actions exhibit her credibility as a reporter. Above all, professional was seen through how Labye prioritized news delivery before her personal concerns for the time being.
Likewise, the decision of RTFB not to publish the video online is an issue of ethics. Ethical journalism has always been a sensitive topic when it comes to news reporting and the fact that the station decided not to release it online only shows accountability towards its staff.
News stories similar to this come and go but, from what I see, this story will serve as a landmark for future stories to come. RTFB handled the situation in their own hands making sure their reporter would not be more humiliated than she already was. In fact, the station’s decision not to publish the video online was solely for the best interest of Labye.
Mexican journalist Anabel Flores Salazar was found dead on the side of a highway Tuesday after being abducted from her Veracruz home in the early morning hours Monday.
Salazar, who reported crime for the Mexican newspaper El Sol de Orizaba, was found naked and bound in the state of Puebla, according to the Puebla Attorney General’s office.
According to Salazar’s aunt, who witnessed the abduction, the kidnappers entered the home with an alleged warrant for Salazar’s arrest.
The death reports that followed are unfortunately the norm in many countries outside of the U.S. According to CNN, Salazar was one of 11 reported journalist murders in the Veracruz state within the past five years. Regrettably, that number doesn’t include at least 10 other Mexican journalists who have gone missing or whose murders remain mysteries.
Although Mexico boasts a special prosecutor for crimes against freedom of expression, the very fact that such a thing exists in the country is evidence that major changes need to be made to protect journalists’ rights.
It is the 21st century and freedom of speech and the press should be a fundamental right for all journalists worldwide, let alone all people, without fear of persecution.
This request may be difficult to make a reality given Mexico’s longstanding crime and corruption and it’s impossible to keep journalists safe from all harm, but it should at least serve as some motivation to take action.
It’s an extremely sad day for the world as a whole, when a person is killed for doing her job courageously and attempting to uncover the truth.
Major changes needed to be made for reporters in more dangerous countries, and how to make those changes will be an even more strenuous undertaking. But, as of now, justice will come only when the Mexican government convicts Salazar’s killers and develops a system to more fervently protect its reporters.
My grandmother believed that we, the people of the “technological era,” are very fortunate. “You have access to every piece of information you want, INSTANTLY!” she said and she was right. What she didn’t notice was that sometimes the news media build a completely wrong image of something and mislead millions of people.
Sadly, this is a common problem when reporting on the Arab-Israeli conflict. We have to admit it is a very difficult thing to understand, but that can’t be the excuse to portray inaccurate and misleading information.
It seems as a routine, anywhere in the world the news of a terrorist attack is always on the victim when the terrorist attack is in Israel news is about the terrorist dead.
CBS News report on Feb. 3, 2016, wasn’t an exception. “3 Palestinians killed as daily violence grinds on,” read the distorted headline, without mentioning that they were killed after attacking and killing a 19-year-old female officer.
Although they were shot dead at the scene as a matter of defense, readers of the news site will surely think Israel is at fault of the death of three “innocent” men, who were actually terrorists.
After causing a storm on Twitter and thousands of complaints, the headline was changed to: “Israeli police kill 3 alleged Palestinian attackers.” That’s definitely a better headline for the story that followed it, but it was insufficient to satisfy the police narration, which stated that the Palestinian men planned to use guns, knives and explosives during an attack near a holy site.
Surprisingly, this time, other news sites recognized for posting anti-Israel news, such as BBC, had neutral headlines: “Israeli border guard shot in Jerusalem attack.”
CBS didn’t issue any statement or response over the headline, however, the unsatisfied readers accomplished their goal victoriously and opened our eyes to make us realize that if the news media can’t choose the side of facts, we can make sure that the true story is told.
Every news station, newspaper and social media network alike has been fixated over Zika.
Zika is a virus, native to Africa and found in South America, that has wildly spread to Latin America, the Caribbean and some places in the United States. While the side effects aren’t life threatening (flu-like symptoms, pink eye and fever) the virus is most dangerous to pregnant women.
If women are infected with the virus while pregnant, their child has a high likelihood of being born with microcephaly. Microcephaly stunts head growth early on in fetal development, causing the child to be born with an abnormally small head and metal disabilities.
The World Health Organization has advised pregnant women not to travel to Latin American countries. They have also advised women who live in Latin American or South American countries not to get pregnant for at least two years.
Recently it was reported in Texas that the disease can be sexually transmitted, which exponentially increases the spread of the viral epidemic.
As a young person, student and someone who cares about my future health, the media have refrained from answering what I think is the most important question: If I am infected with the Zika virus and I want to have children in the future, will they be born with this defect? I know a virus’s symptoms run their course, but will the effects of the virus affect future children?
Do we fear this virus because it is new or because of how it could affect us?
All the news reports are the same and, as informed citizens, the media should make efforts to report on different aspects of the same topic rather than reiterate the well-known facts.
While it is understandable that we do not know enough about the spreading virus, the media should make serious efforts to investigate the case and report information about the disease as fast as possible.
The recent Zika virus outbreak has caused concern around the globe and continues to dominate headlines and newscasts each day.
Zika is a virus transmitted through infected mosquitoes in tropical regions, namely South and Central America. The disease is most problematic for pregnant women, as the virus has been linked to a birth defect known as microcephaly.
Any person who turns on a television or a computer to stay up-to-date on current events can tell you that Zika is spreading rapidly.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, was recently quoted as saying, “It isn’t as if it’s turning around and dying out, it’s getting worse and worse as the days go by.”
Comments like Fauci’s, which many Zika-related stories seem to be filled with, have the ability to spark fear in millions of people around the globe.
However, a recent article by CNN Specialist Dr. Tom Frieden paints the virus in a different light.
According to Frieden, who is a director at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “from the information we know now, widespread transmission in the contiguous United States appears to be unlikely.”
And while the Zika threat definitely should not be taken lightly, Frieden also states that “science doesn’t have a crystal ball, but the CDC has great laboratories and the world’s best disease detectives.”
Frieden’s article highlights one main point: Zika virus is a serious issue, but it is important to put a health crisis like this into perspective.
The likelihood of many Americans being infected by the virus is small, and the CDC has also dealt with serious crises like Ebola and avian influenza in past years.
The media tend to take disease outbreaks and cover the situation in excess, causing people to assume that each and every new disease has the potential to exterminate humanity.
It is undoubtedly important to do your research and stay informed during an outbreak. But, before you let Zika virus dictate how you live your life, keep your eyes open for lesser known facts and opinions that the media may not put on the front page.
Currently in Switzerland, the Gotthard Base Tunnel is under construction. This is supposed to be the longest railroad tunnel, which will allow passengers to travel from Uri to Ticino, Switzerland.
Reading the newspapers and watching the television news in Switzerland, a lot of media is geared towards this project. The SBB, which is the Swiss Federal Railway, has established some harsh rules. Some of these include, no collisions possible due to two separate tunnels, a vent which in case it burns the smoke leaves the tunnel and does not interfere with the other trains running in the other direction. Additionally only healthy trains will be allowed to carry passengers.
The SBB has let the news media know all this information with the aim of trying to bring as much attention to it as possible, so that once the tunnel is ready and the trains are running, there will be a large number of people wanting to travel this route.
Being this open about all the rules may, however, not be very positive in the future. If an accident were to occur once the tunnel is ready, the company will be questioned as it ensured the safety of all passengers.
Nevertheless the Gotthard Base tunnel will be ready Dec. 11, 2016. Until then a lot of more information and excitement will be heard in the media from SBB.
There has been a 42-year drought since the Philippines claimed the Ms. Universe crown and now that a Filipina holds the title, the Philippine news media cannot stop talking about her.
It has been more than a month since Steve Harvey, the 2015 Ms. Universe host, mistakenly announced that Ms. Colombia, Ariadna Gutierrez, instead of Ms. Philippines, Pia Alonzo Wurtzbach, was the winner of the 2015 Ms. Universe Pageant.
Ever since the crown was removed (literally) from Gutierrez’s head and placed on top of Wurtzbach’s, Philippine news media have portrayed Gutierrez as a bitter first runner-up while Wurtzbach’s grace and humility have been put under the spotlight.
The phrase “love your own” certainly holds true in the case of Philippine media coverage of the pageant and of Wurtzbach. By all means, it is only typical that Filipinos show pride and favor towards their chosen representative in an international event. It does however become questionable when journalists come into the picture and compromise professionalism with nationalism.
Content that is viewed and published on a national scale must be kept transparent regardless the news that is being reported on. The pageant is no exception.
Negligently, Philippine media covered the turn of events in such a manner that merely highlighted a one-sided Filipino perspective. Whenever Ms. Colombia is mentioned on Philippine news websites, there has been a prevalent pattern suggesting that video clips and quotes have not been acquired as primary sources.
Although it may be unlikely and too costly to send reporters to Colombia, Philippine media could have made an effort to contact Gutierrez through phone call, at the very least.
Perhaps the emergence of the newly strained relationship between Philippine and Colombian fans has also played a role for the Philippine media to not reach out any further. After all, who would want to heighten the existing awkwardness going on between the two countries?
I, like most people, have been deeply saddened by the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, Beirut, and saddened even more by the reaction from the news media and my friends.
Social networks like Facebook and Twitter were buzzing with everyone adding their two cents to the situation. In the past few days everyone has heard the sentiment, Americans need to calm down, be mature, level headed and stop generalizing all Muslims based on the actions of an extreme minority.
I agree with the sentiment of the statement, but the irony is palpable. The statement at its core conflicts with itself. It has turned into: Do not generalize Muslims based on the actions of a few, you giant collective of dumb Americans.
The United States has had an admirable reaction to the terrorist attacks. An outpouring of support for France and Beirut, and a constant reminder of how to appropriately react to the tragic events that have come to pass. While the media is focusing on the angrier, more visceral reactions, the majority of people are not generalizing or making bigoted remarks.
It is obvious that ISIS is attempting to splinter Europe and create a Muslims versus everyone else mentality. This is the only way they can make moderate Muslims feel alienated enough that they would want to join ISIS’ cause. Now more than ever it is important to stay unified and show solidarity among one another because that is truly more powerful than any weapon.
On a recent PBS Frontline, the impending chaos of ISIS was shown. While the current situation is grim, a new longstanding threat is being made. Children as young as three years old are being taught jihad and the violence that comes with “defending the faith,” like how to shoot guns, throw grenades, and behead “infidels.” The documentary gave viewers a firsthand look at the crisis that is being passed onto another generation.
With the recent Paris attacks and the hinted threat to Washington D.C., ISIS has generated the momentum that they want in terms of media fame. They want to be recognized as a threat, and are proving just that with these terrorist attacks.
Journalists live dangerously, as Najibullah Quraishi risked his life to give us this story. Journalists must have a wide variety of adaptable skills, as shown by Najibullah’s determination to get this story to us. Camped out in an ISIS controlled community, he narrates the story of these young children being exposed to all of the violence so early on.
The news media have the power of unleashing the ugly truth, but it is what we need to see in order to realize what is going on. Many people may be unaware of the whole situation and only recently heard of this threat when the Paris attacks occurred. This is why the media needs to show the hard truth in order to illicit a response that can multiply into awareness and eventually bring on change.
The Frontline documentary, in which a journalist went on site into an ISIS dominated community and saw how jihadists were teaching young children how to use weapons and fight, provided a look into the future, as the passing of this ideology makes one think: will this terrorism ever stop?
Last week, late Friday night, reports of terrorist attacks in France killing more than 100 people. Every local, national and international news network covered the story from the moment the attacks happened and every update that has taken place since then.
It seemed as though all of my Facebook friends changed their profile pictures with the semi-transparent overlay of the French flag. Almost four million people, gathered to march in support of France. Several world leaders flew to France to show their support and speak on the issue and express their nation’s solidarity with France.
Support for France and the outcry against the attacks was expressed worldwide via social media, news coverage, and public marches. Many people raised the question: Where is the outcry for the attacks in Nigeria? Where is the support for the people of Syria? Where is the outcry for Lebanon?
In Nigeria, it is believed that Boko Haram orchestrated a terrorist attack killing 32 people and injuring more. Thousands of Syrians are fleeing from their own country in fear of ISIS. In Lebanon, 40 people were killed and left more than 200 wounded victims of bombs at the hands of ISIS.
Where are the flags for these countries on people’s Facebook profile photos? Where is the international outcry for the victims of these attacks?
People on social media have called out several Western news networks for the biased coverage of terrorist attacks happening all around the world. In response to the claims presented on social media, CNN responded during a segment of their morning show “New Day.”
Michaela Pereira, a “New Day” co-host, raised the question if the West should be doing more to fight Boko Haram. One of the show’s guest speaker, James Marks (a military analyst and executive dean of the University of Phoenix), stated that the reason the West isn’t doing more or showing support to countries such as Nigeria or Lebanon is simply because, “they are not a priority.”
Marks also stated that, “The United States, unilaterally, could do anything it needed to do to root out Boko Haram. It would be a long-term effort, but it could be done. The U.S. has the capability…but it is not a priority—that’s the problem.
Marks went on to say, “‘Black’ West Africa is not a priority. If we were to see Boko Haram appear in ‘White Africa’, which is North Africa, we would be alarmed.”
The Washington Post lists the following reasons contributing to why the attacks in Paris received mass coverage as opposed to other terrorist attacks.
France is an unusual target.
Paris is a top global tourist destination
Random civilians were targeted using shocking tactics
Are we seeing a new battleground for the Islamic State?
This was a complex, coordinated attack. And that’s worrisome.
The Washington Post wrote, “The Paris attack shocked the world for many reasons. It’s true that terrorism in less-developed countries is worth our attention as well. Crises, such as the Syrian civil war, deserve much more media coverage and policy focus.”
To conclude, I agree with The Washington Post. There are several other reasons that contributed to the mass media coverage that the Paris attacks received, other than race and urbanization. However, I do believe that because France is not a Third World country, they received more coverage. The prioritization of what is considered to be news to the West is problematic, because one could conclude that the amount of coverage a nation receives indicates their level of importance and whether or not they, and their lives, matter.
At least 129 people have died from an ISIS attack, according to Paris city officials.
Terrorists staged attacks at six locations throughout Paris late Friday. These places consisted of the Bataclan concert venue, the Stade de France, Petit Cambodge Cambodian restaurant, the Le Carillon bar, Rue de la Fontaine au Roi, and La Belle Equipe bar.
At least 368 people were injured in the attacks, leaving seven terrorists killed. The dead attackers who have been identified by officials are 28-year-old Samy Animour, 20-year-old Bilal Hadfi, 25-year-old Ahmad Almohammad, Omar Ismail Mostefair, Brahim Abdeslam, and Salah Abdeslam. Abdelhamid Abaaoud who organized the attacks was announced dead early Wednesday. Authorities have said that they believe at least one suspect is still on the loose.
French President Francois Hollande declared a state of emergency across France. People’s movements are now limited, there are imposed zones of security and border controls are tightened. Hollande said that he would like the state of emergency in place for three months.
The aftermath of Friday’s attack led to French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve saying that Paris mobilized 115,000 security forces. There have also been multiple raids and airstrikes over Raqaa, the Ismalic State’s de facto capital.
On Tuesday, France also sought a clause in the Treaty on European Union that obliges other member states to provide it with aid and assistance. All of the 28 member states agreed.
Nations find themselves frightened as ISIS released a video promising more attacks. Law enforcement officials in the U.S. capital are increasing security as the terrorist group mentioned targeting Washington.
George Washington University student Sarah Albright says, “I’m scared to see what will happen next. It’s hard for people to just continue their every lives when there is so much fear inside of us.”
According to ABC News, at least half of the country’s governors are refusing to take in Syrian refugees in their states amid heightened security concerns following last Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris.
ISIS has claimed responsibility for the Paris terrorist attacks, in which 129 people were killed. Since Friday’s attacks, ISIS has threatened to attack Washington, D.C., and New York.
This chilling effect has influenced several United States governors to refuse Syrian refugees. Ultimately the federal government decides on matters of immigration, not the states.
Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas has taken to Twitter to express his opposition to allowing refugees.
This tweet caused a mostly negative reaction from his followers and media consumers alike.
An individual with the twitter handle @jonvox responded to Hutchinson’s tweet saying, “ You are a horrible man and make me embarrassed to be an Arkansan.”
Likewise, Facebook and YouTube have been flooded with political comics and videos that compare the current refugee crisis to World War II.
Those who support the relocation of refugees in the United States have compared the current government opposition specifically to the opposition towards Jewish refugees.
The dissenting opinion of the U.S. governors is less likely to be accepted by media consumers on social media because of the chilling effect of terrorism.
It was heartbreaking to hear the news that terrorists bombed a concert in Paris last Friday and killed more than a hundred people.
News media coverage instantaneously responded to the tragedy. The criticism of the terrorism, condolences from international leaders and follow-ups on Paris keeps popping up on different media. Soon many people on Facebook added a French flag on their Facebook profile as a way to demonstrate that they expressed their sorrow to France.
At the same time, many people criticized that news media are biased and racism because at around the same time Japan experienced a 7.0 earthquake and a subsequent tsunami but received almost zero media attention.
I think news media have their own standard of evaluating whether a piece of information is newsworthy or not. Audiences have heard about a lot of outrageous terrorist activities in the Middle East and are conditioned to associate the region with terrorism and get used to receiving this terrorism news from those places.
But in France, in Paris, which people fantasize as a place of romance and fashion not terrorism, was actually under attack of terrorists. The unexpectedness and rareness would attract more attention.
Japan is an island country that constantly under threats of earthquake and tsunami. It is reported that Japan would go through more than 10 earthquakes a year, ranging from some earthquake people may never feel about to some big ones that may trigger tsunami. Considering no casualty has been reported, the Japanese earthquake might not be equally newsworthy as the bombing in Paris.
For the first time since 1944, the city of Paris in France is under state of emergency after the city was under terrorists attacks. Several explosions were heard near the largest stadium of the city where France was playing a soccer match against Germany. Not only that, but the police launched an assault on the Bataclan concert hall where around 100 people were held hostage and two men were reportedly armed. 140 people have been killed in Paris terror attacks. Also, other attacks have been held at central Les Halles shopping mall and restaurants.
President Francois Hollande said that everyone should stay home tonight, the borders will be closed and no one leaves nether enters France.
Throughout all social media, the people are asking and some demanding that the military service should take control of the country because they are scared.
Chinese President Xi Jinping and Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou shook hands ahead of an historic summit in Singapore last weekend. It is the first time since the Chinese Civil War ended and the nations split in 1949 that leaders from both sides have met.
Xi said the meeting “has opened a historic chapter in the cross-Strait relations, and history will remember today.” He also emphasized, “We (China and Taiwan) are one family.”
Relations between China and Taiwan have improved under Ma since he took office in 2008, with better economic ties, improving tourism links and a trade pack signed.
It is unfathomable why the meeting has taken place at this moment. From Ma’s side, there is a presidential election in Taiwan in January. Ma might take this meeting as an opportunity to give a boost to his party’s candidate, who is trailing in the polls. Also Ma built his presidency on his closer connection to China, so it is a good chance for him to meet Xi.
On Xi’s side, first, Xi wants to exert more of his political control over Taiwan. If he showed his favor in a certain party, in this case, the Nationalists, it might influence many Taiwanese voters’ decisions. If a Nationalists is elected as the upcoming president in Taiwan, it will maintain the policy of being close to China, which will be the ideal outcome for China.
We cannot foresee whether Xi’s meeting with Ma will boost the Nationalists or backfire. During the meeting, many Taiwanese protesters threw stones at the Taiwanese Parliament to demonstrate their anger on Ma’s intention of building a closer connection with China.
Interestingly enough, in Ma’s welcome address, he expressed his sincere hope for continually building peaceful and friendly relation between the strait. Neither side put fingers on serious political conflicts and territory disputes. They both referred the other side as “sir” rather than his political titles. It is the first time ever in Chinese political reporting that no political titles were involved.
South Korea President Park Geun-hye and Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held the first high-level meeting in Seoul on Monday. The meeting was postponed for more than three years because of historical issues and territorial disputes between two nations.
Before this one-and-one-half hours meeting were the months of diplomatic negotiations. However, they produced no breakthrough. South Korean KBS reported that Korea-Japan summit mainly discussed the issue of so-called comfort women — tens of thousands of Korean and other Asian women sent to work at front-line brothels for Japan’s World War II military. Park asked Japan to give a sincerely apologize and compensate the comfort women before they left the world, while Abe claimed that all the problems from Japan’s often brutal colonization of Korea from 1910 to 1945 have been resolved in Treaty on Basic Relations Between Korean and Japan in 1965.
According to the Japanese reports, Abe told Japanese reporters that he agreed to try to find an “early solution” to the subject of comfort women. He said he did not want to “leave an obstacle for the future generations in building” relations with South Korea.
The news has triggered uproar among the social media in Japan and Korean. One of the interesting topics is the summit didn’t prepare a luncheon for Abe, so Abe and the Japanese ambassador went to eat barbecue in Seoul themselves.
Sankei Shimbun reports that, according to the shop, Abe ordered Korean beef tenderloin and spiced pork. The lunch also lasted one and a half hours and Abe finished all of his meal. Many Japanese netizens expressed their dissatisfaction with Park Geun-hye. They criticized Park Geun-hye, saying the leader had no common sense.
The meeting was a chance for both Park and Abe to save face, but both were in an awkward position. It is still unknown if the two countries can possibly reach a final agreement.
