Burmese Language
Journals suspended for Suu Kyi coverage
Nine news journals in Burma have been temporarily suspended after allocating key space in their publications for coverage of Aung San Suu Kyi’s release.
The majority of the nine, which include the Voice Journal and Myanmar Newsweek, carried front-page images of the opposition icon, who was freed from seven years under house arrest on 13 November.
One of the journals, the First Eleven [Sports] Journal which is owned by the Eleven Media Group, was banned for two weeks after carrying the headline: ‘Sunderland Freeze Chelsea; United Stunned by Villa & Arsenal Advance to Grab Their Hope’.
According to the Weeky Eleven Journal, a sister publication of First Eleven, the government Press Scrutiny and Registration Division accused the local journals of breaching media regulations.
It is the first time that a ban has been placed on multiple publications, and follows speculation that the ruling junta may ease tight restrictions on media following the 7 November elections.
Burma’s has some of the world’s harshest media laws, and all printed material is required to go through the censor board prior to being published. It ranked 171 out of 175 countries on last year’s Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index.
The Myanmar Times, the country’s leading English-language weekly, was suspended in 2007 after publishing an advert from Danish activists masquerading as travel agency that included the words ‘Killer Than Shwe’, spelt backwards, a reference to the head of the Burmese junta.
Other journals included in the 21 November ban are: 7 Day News, Venus News, Snapshot News, Myanmar Post, Pyithu Khit [People’s Era], and the Hot News Journal, which was also given a two-week suspension.
Comments
Other News, Politics Stories
- After losing members, party looks to restructure
- NLD members arrested in protest’s wake
- Fourth estate to be censor-free by June
- US eases sanctions, calls for prisoners release
- Massive protest shines a light on power cuts
- Military joins peace process with armed groups
- China prepares for influx of Kachin refugees
DVB TV
MPs returned to Parliament in Burma’s capital Naypyidaw
MOST READ STORIES
You need to log in to vote
The blog owner requires users to be logged in to be able to vote for this post.
Alternatively, if you do not have an account yet you can create one here.
Powered by Vote It Up
It’s disgusting that while the Burmese have to encode messages of resistance in headlines, the international community hasn’t been able to encode anything much more than “grave concern.” I say encode because those two words really mean “I just got bested by a two-bit dictator.”
This is intended for my brothers who believe that the 2008 constitution and the 2010 election cemented military rule in my country (BURMA) for many years to come.
What are the differences before and after the election? Before this election, we were under military rule. After the election, we are still under military rule. If they didn’t do this election, they still would have power. Everyone said that if they won they would have become the legitimate government. Now who said that this election is legitimate? Everyone knows that it is anything but free and fair. Military rule will continue as long as they have guns and as long as they are united, and as long as a nuclear superpower (CHINA) is protecting them. Military rule does not depend on this election or this constitution. What if we can get China on our side today? What if we can create a situation which can make them split and get the winner to our side? In that situation, will the constitution and the election continue to “CEMENT” military rule in BURMA?
I will give you an example. If General Shwe Mann, somehow, changes his mind and overthrows THAN SHWE tonight and transfers the power to DASSK tomorrow, do you think this election will protect that DICTATOR? This election is totally IRRELEVENT for their survival. Some young patriots of Burma gave up the idea of total freedom and started to think of negotiating with this regime because of this “DELUSIONAL CONCEPT” (created by some ALZHEIMERS).
If DASSK negotiates with this dictator or his party (USDP), the best thing we can get is, he will lift his pressure just a little bit and claim that he is sharing power while he actually maintains his grip on power. DASSK will find, in the future that, she had been fooled by that dictator. But many of our young daughters and sons’ lives would have been already ruined by then. This is something we could have prevented if we analyze properly and do the right thing now.
In the worst case scenario, she could be assassinated any time and Burma’s future would be buried with her.
I think compromising her life and her safety for her popularity and following her without question is irresponsible. I believe we should debate on whether it will be better if she tries to get freedom OUTSIDE BURMA.
If she died now we will all regret it. If she were put under house arrest again, we have to wait again as before until she is released. In the meantime all sorts of miserable lives and atrocities will continue.
This will not be an easy transition. Letting Aung San Su Kyi go is an enormous concession on the part of the junta, which would not have been given unless she remained resolute and the world’s eyes were firmly fixed on her situation. The junta have bowed to the pressure though, so perhaps they will again in due course. Either that, or they will not survive, and they know it.
In any revolution, even in “peaceful revolution”, we have to calculate or predict what the other side will do or say. The best way is to pretend you are your adversary. Put yourself in his (THAN SHWE) shoes and read his mind. Now you are THAN SHWE. You have the upper hand. You have controlled the whole country effectively for 22 years and, as far as DASSK is concern, when you need to put her under house arrest, you can do it with or without any reason and you know that no one can do anything about it.
NOW, WHAT REASON DO YOU HAVE, TO COME TO THE NEGOTIATION TABLE TO HAVE DIALOGUE WITH DASSK?
She needs to get a reason for him to come to DIALOGUE. I can’t think of anything as long as she stays inside BURMA. Can you? All I see is, she has been calling for DIALOGUE without any HOLD.