The lack of women representation in parliaments across the world remains a vexed and contentious issue.

In Fiji, this problem has again surfaced for debate in response to Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica’s call for a quota system to increase women’s representation in Parliament.

Kamikamica was speaking at the “Capacity Building Training for Prospective Women and Youth Candidates in Local Elections” workshop in Suva in November last year.

• READ MORE: Other gender in Pacific politics reports

The workshop was organised by Suva-based civil society organisation, Dialogue Fiji, in collaboration with Emily’s List Australia and funded by Misereor.

Kamikamica noted that women’s representation in Fiji’s Parliament peaked at 20 percent in 2018, only to drop to 14 percent after the 2022 elections.

He highlighted what he saw as an anomaly — 238,389 women voted in the 2022 election, surpassing men’s turnout.

However, women candidates garnered only 37,252 votes, accounting for just 8 percent of the total votes cast. This saw only six out of 54 female candidates elected to Parliament.

Reducing financial barriers
He said implementing supportive policies and initiatives, such as reducing financial barriers to running for office and providing childcare support could address some of the structural challenges faced by aspiring female leaders.

While agreeing with Kamikamica’s supportive remarks, Suva-based lawyer and former journalist Sainiana Radrodro called for urgent and concrete actions to empower aspiring women candidates besides just discussions.

She identified finance, societal norms and more recently, bullying on social media, as major obstacles for women aspiring for political careers. She said measures to address these problems were either insufficient, or non-existent.

Radrodro, who participated in the 2024 Women’s “Mock Parliament”, supports a quota system, but only as a temporary special measure (TSM). TSM is designed to advance gender equality by addressing structural, social, and cultural barriers, correcting past and present discrimination, and compensating for harm and inequalities.

The lawyer said that TSM could be a useful tool if applied in a measured way, noting that countries that rushed into implementing it faced a backlash due to poor advocacy and public understanding.

She recommends TSM based on prior and proper dialogue and awareness to ensure that women elected through such measures are not marginalised or stereotyped as having “ridden on the back of government policies”.

She said with women comprising half of the national population, it was sensible to have proportional representation in Parliament.

Social media attacks
While she agreed with Kamikamica that finance remained a significant obstacle for Fijian women seeking public office, she stated that non-financial barriers, such as attacks on social media, should not be overlooked.

To level the playing field, Radrodro’s suggestions include government subsidies for women candidates, similar to the support provided to farmers and small businesses.

“This would signal a genuine commitment by the government to foster women’s participation in the legislature,” she said.

Radrodro’s views were echoed by the University of the South Pacific postgraduate student in sociology, Lovelyn Laurelle Giva-Tuke.

She advocates a holistic approach encompassing financial assistance, specific legislation to address violence against women in political contexts; capacity-building programs to equip women with leadership, campaigning, and public speaking skills; and measures to ensure fair and equitable media coverage, rather than stereotyped and discriminatory coverage.

Giva-Tuke emphasised that society as a whole stand to benefit from a gender balanced political establishment. This was also highlighted by Kamikamica in his address. He cited research showing that women leaders tended to prioritise healthcare, education, and social welfare.

While there is no disagreement about the problem, and the needs to address it, Giva-Tuke, like Radrodro, believes that discussions and ideas must translate into action.

“As a nation, we can and must do more to create an inclusive political landscape that values women’s contributions at every level,” she said.

Protection another hurdle
For Radrodro, one of the most urgent and unaddressed problems is the targeting of women with harmful social media content, which is rampant and unchecked in Fiji.

“There is a very high level of attacks against women on social media even from women against other women. These raises reservations in potential women candidates who now have another hurdle to cross.”

Radrodro said a lot of women were simply terrified of being abused online and having their lives splashed across social media, which was also harmful for their children and families.

She said it was disheartening to see the lack of consistent support from leaders when women politicians faced personal attacks.

She called for stronger policies and enforcement to curb online harassment, urging national leaders to take a stand against such behavior.

Another female rights campaigner, the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement executive director Nalini Singh, called for stronger and more effective collaboration between stakeholders — communal groups, women’s groups, local government departments, political parties and the Fijian Elections Office.

Singh highlighted the need for a major educational campaign to change the mindsets with gender sensitisation programs targeting communities. She also recommended increased civic education and awareness of government structures and electoral systems.

Temporary law changes
While she supported reserved parliamentary seats for women, Singh said temporary changes in laws or regulations to eliminate systemic barriers and promote gender equality were also needed.

Singh also highlighted the importance of bridging the generational gaps between older women who have worked in local government, and young women with an interest in joining the political space by establishment of mentoring programmes.

She said mandating specific changes or participation levels within a defined timeframe and advocacy and awareness campaigns targeted at changing societal attitudes and promoting the inclusion of underrepresented groups were other options.

“These are just some ways or strategies to help increase representation of women in leadership spaces, especially their participation in politics,” said Singh.

The views of women such as Sainiana Radrodro, Lovelyn Laurelle Giva-Tuke and Nalini Singh indicate not just what needs to be done to address this problem, but also how little has actually been done.

On his part, Kamikamica has said all the right things, demonstrating a good understanding of the weaknesses in the system. What is lacking is the application of these ideas and sentiments in a real and practical sense.

Unless this is done, the ideas will remain just that — ideas.

Monika Singh is a teaching assistant with The University of the South Pacific’s Journalism Programme and the supervising editor of the student newspaper Wansolwara. This article is first published by The Fiji Times and is republished here as part of a collaboration between USP Journalism and Asia Pacific Report.

Social cohesion is a national responsibility, and everyone, including the media, should support government’s efforts, according to Dr Shailendra Singh, associate professor in Pacific Journalism at the University of the South Pacific.

While the news media are often accused of exacerbating conflict by amplifying ethnic tensions through biased narratives, media could also assist social cohesion and unite people by promoting dialogue and mutual understanding, said Dr Singh.

He was the lead trainer at a two-day conflict-sensitive reporting workshop for journalists, student journalists, and civil society on reporting in ethically tense environments.

• READ MORE: The Pacific Media 2024 conference
• Other Fiji journalism education and training reports

The training, organised by Dialogue Fiji at the Suva Holiday Inn on November 12–13, included reporting techniques, understanding Fiji’s political and media landscape, and building trust with audiences.

Watchdog journalism
Dr Singh said media played an important public interest role as ‘society’s watchdog’. The two main strengths of Watchdog Journalism are that it seeks to promote greater accountability and transparency from those in power.

However, he cautioned reporters not to get too caught up in covering negative issues all the time. He said ideally, media should strive for a healthy mix of positive and what might be termed “negative” news.

Dr Singh’s doctoral thesis, from the University of Queensland, was on “Rethinking journalism for supporting social cohesion and democracy: case study of media performance in Fiji”.

He discussed the concepts of “media hyper-adversarialism” and “attack dog journalism”, which denote an increasingly aggressive form of political journalism, usually underpinned by commercial motives.

This trend was a concern even in developed Western countries, including Australia, where former Labour Minister Lindsay Tanner wrote a book about it: Sideshow, Dumbing Down Democracy.

Dr Singh said it had been pointed out that media hyper-adversarialism was even more dangerous in fragile, conflict-affected and vulnerable settings, as it harms fledgling democracies by nurturing intolerance and diminishing faith in democratically-elected leaders.

“Excessive criticism and emphasis on failure and wrongdoings will foster an attitude of distrust towards institutions and leaders,” he said.

Conflict-sensitive reporting
According to Dr Singh, examples around the world show that unrestrained reporting in conflict-prone zones could further escalate tensions and eventually result in violence.

The number one aim of conflict-sensitive reporting is to ensure that journalists, are aware of their national context, and shape their reporting accordingly, rather than apply the “watchdog” framework indiscriminately in all situations, because a “one-size-fits-all” approach could be risky and counterproductive.

Journalists who adopt the conflict-sensitive reporting approach in their coverage of national issues could become facilitators for peaceful solutions rather than a catalyst for conflict.

“The goal of a journalist within a conflict-prone environment should be to build an informed and engaged community by promoting understanding and reconciliation through contextualised coverage of complex issues,” he said.

A rethink was all the more necessary because of social media proliferation, and the spread of misinformation and hate speech on these platforms.

Challenges in maintaining transparency and accountability in journalism
According to Dr Singh, in many Pacific newsrooms today journalists who are at the forefront of reporting breaking news and complex issues are mostly young and relatively inexperienced.

He said the Pacific media sector suffered from a high turnover rate, with many journalists moving to the private sector, regional and international organisations, and government ministries after a brief stint in the mainstream.

“There is a lot of focus on alleged media bias,” said Dr Singh.

“However, young, inexperienced, and under-trained journalists can unknowingly inflame grievances and promote stereotypes by how they report contentious issues, even though their intentions are not malicious,” he said.

Dr Singh emphasised that in such cases, journalists often become a danger unto themselves because they provide governments with the justification or excuse for the need for stronger legislation to maintain communal harmony.

“As was the case in 2010 when the Media Industry Development Act was imposed in the name of professionalising standards,” said Dr Singh.

“However, it only led to a decline in standards because of the practice of self-censorship, as well as the victimisation of journalists.”

Legislation alone not the answer
Dr Singh added that legislation alone was not the answer since it did not address training and development, or the high rate of newsroom staff turnover.

He said the media were often attacked, but what was also needed was assistance, rather than criticism alone. This included training in specific areas, rather than assume that journalists are experts in every field.

Because Fiji is still a transitional democracy and given our ethnic diversity, Dr Singh believes that it makes for a strong case for conflict-sensitive reporting practices to mitigate against the risks of societal divisions.

“Because the media act as a bridge between people and institutions, it is essential that they work on building a relationship of trust by promoting peace and stability, while reporting critically when required.”

This article was first published by The Fiji Times on 24 November, 2024 and is being republished from USP Journalism’s Wansolwara and The Fiji Times under a collaborative agreement.

The founding members of the FijiFirst party, including former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama and ex-attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, have resigned.

Sayed-Khaiyum confimed that party president Ratu Joji Satalaka, vice-president Selai Adimaitoga, acting general-secretary Faiyaz Koya and treasurer Hem Chand have also resigned from the party, according to local media reports.

Sayed-Khaiyum said the other vice-president Ravindran Nair and founding member Salesh Kumar have also resigned.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji politics reports

He said the resignation letters were given to the Registrar of Political Parties last Friday, June 7.

One FijiFirst MP, Ketal Lal, posted on Facebook: “Sad day for Fiji” after the news was made public.

Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal said the “mass resignation of founding members and senior officials is probably one of the most ill-conceived moves on the part of the founding members of the FijiFirst party”.

Lal said the move will “severely weaken” the position of the two minor parties — Sodelpa and NFP — in the coalition government.

Minor parties losing ‘bargaining chip’
“It was always in the interests of NFP and Sodelpa that FijiFirst remained a strong, united and viable party, and with this latest development, this is clearly not the case any longer. Both Sodelpa and NFP lose their bargaining chip, with the demise of FijiFirst.”

RNZ Pacific has contacted the Registrar of Political Parties, Ana Mataiciwa, for comment.

Last week, FijiFirst confirmed that it had sacked 17 MPs after they voted for a pay rise — going against a party directive.

However, the expelled Fijifirst MPs said they were going to contest the decision and would remain parliamentary opposition, highlighting divisions within the largest single party in the Fijian Parliament.

Mataiciwa, who was also the Supervisor of Elections, said FijiFirst needed to amend its consitution by June 28 or risk deregistration.

She told local media the party’s constitution did not have guidelines on how internal party disputes were resolved, which was in breach of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

While steps are being taken behind the scenes by Fiji’s coalition government to review the country’s existing media legislation, civil society organisation Dialogue Fiji says coming up with a law that protects media freedom and safeguards against reporting that can have negative implications is difficult.

Speaking at the launch of the Fiji Media Industry Development Act 2010 – An Analysis report in Lami last week, Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal said Fiji’s punitive Media Industry Development Act was promulgated in 2010 and remained in place, although the new Fiji government had expressed its intentions to replace it.

The report was produced by Dialogue Fiji and contained important lessons and insights on the challenging issue of media freedom and regulation in a multiethnic society with conflict dynamics like Fiji.

• READ MORE: Lice Movono: Hopes for the return of press freedom in Fiji
• Other Fiji media law reports

“We will need to consider elements such as capacity of the Fijian market to sustain a multiplicity of media players. Media ownership has been a key element of the regulatory regime under previous administration and this will need to be looked at,” Lal said.

“The challenges to traditional media posed by social media in a small market context will need to be considered to ensure that media organisations remain financially viable and a robust and diverse media sector is maintained.”

Lal said many lessons had been learnt from the experience of the past 12 years, operating under a highly restrictive and punitive media regulation.

He said it was important that stakeholders be consulted at every stage of the review process of the media legislation, including pre-drafting.

Friction possible
“If the draft does not meet expectations, it is going to unduly create friction between the government, media and other interest groups such as CSOs,” Lal said.

The launch programme also included a panel discussion on the issue of media regulation and features of the media legislation desirable in Fiji.

A Fiji government video of the Dialogue Fiji media freedom discussion.

Lal said as an organisation that championed democratic freedoms, dialogue and deliberations, Dialogue Fiji believed it was important to create opportunities for Fijians to deliberate on issues that affected their lives.

“Media freedom is an important element of freedom of expression. We need the media to be able to exercise this right, which is afforded to them in Fiji’s Constitution,” he said.

The comprehensive analysis on the Act was authored by USP Journalism Programme coordinator Associate Professor Dr. Shailendra Singh, Nilesh Lal and the chief deputy Attorney-General of Arizona (US) Daniel Barr.

Dr Singh said a major complaint against the Act from the media sector and observers was the ambiguities in some of the provisions.

“Section 22 is a good example of this. Section 22 states no content must include materials against the public interest, order, national interest or anything that might create disharmony in society,” he said.

National interest ‘subjective’
“The national interest/order can be subjective matters. The question is, who decides what is national interest or public interest, especially when these terms are so ill-defined in the Act.

“The reality is that the media, government and the public all have different viewpoints about what constitutes the national interest in any particular time or year. Vagueness in some of the provisions in the Act is another shortfall when it comes to international benchmarks.”

For issues like hate speech, he said it was important to ensure key terms were first defined.

“The broader the definition, the more it opens the door for arbitrary application of these laws. Some people might say, in all its years of existence, no one has been charged or prosecuted under the Media Act. Sometimes this is touted as a positive development but the problem is, it can be invoked at any time,” Dr Singh said.

“Even though no one might have been charged or cited, it is still like an axe hanging over the news media’s heads. This is why Media Act is accused of instilling a chilling effect on journalism in Fiji.”

Penalties excessive
Dr Singh noted that penalties in the Act were also in breach of some international benchmarks, adding that excessive sanctions should be reserved for exceptional cases. In Fiji’s Media Act, penalties applied across the board regardless of the seriousness of the offence.

He noted that there was little evidence of the separation of powers in the Act and that all powers were invested in the Communications Minister and Attorney-General, breaching international benchmarks on independence of regulatory bodies of government.

“Any national media regulatory body should be independent from the government in a democracy. The A-G and Communications Minister, who have so much power in the Act, are part of government and are expected or required to work in the interest of government first and foremost,” Dr Singh said.

“So two ministers had so much powers and are expected to work in unison, rather than in the interest of media organization,” Dr Singh said.

“What we found peculiar is that, with the previous government, the Communications Minister and A-G positions were held by the same person, one person with two different portfolios controlling everything. When we talk about separation of powers, it was almost non-existent in the Media Act.”

Dr Singh also noted that a core grievance with the Act was the criminalisation of ethics, adding that Fiji was one of the few countries in which journalism ethics had been criminalised.

Under self-regulation, ethics are considered non-punitive breaches but under the Media Act, a breach of ethics is treated as criminal offences.

“Ethics are not set in stone; you cannot have the same response for every ethical dilemma out in the field,” he said.

“Another key analysis in the Act is the lopsided hearing and appeal procedures where the appeal provisions for the media are restricted. It raises some really serious questions, for example, why are complainants against news media given full appeal whereas media can only appeal decisions for penalties more than $50,000?

“There is non-compliance of universal human rights, all should be equal before the law, provided equal protection of the law.”

Dr Singh said the Act was well protected legally so that no court of any kind could entertain any challenges by any person or body in relation to the validity or legality of the Act, and any decision of the Tribunal except for appeals.

“The immunity clause shows how the Act and its entities are bestowed all the powers without being bound by some of the core accountabilities of the justice system,” he said.

Government’s commitment
Attorney-General Siromi Turaga, who joined the panel discussion alongside newsroom editors from Fiji’s mainstream news media, said the coalition government recognised the pivotal role that the media played in Fiji, in terms of ensuring the circulation and responsible reporting of information.

He reaffirmed the government’s support of a free, independent and responsible media and reiterated that the Media Industry Development Act 2010 would be reviewed with the assistance of a committee that would be established for the task.

While there was no set timeframe on the completion of the review, Turaga said this was a priority for government as it continued to encourage robust journalism, urging journalists to also “practise fair and balanced reporting, and most importantly, allow for the right of reply at all times”.

Turaga said the analysis by Dialogue Fiji provided an insightful commentary on the Act and was a helpful resource for the review process.

Republished under the journalism education partnership between Asia Pacific Report and the University of the South Pacific regional journalism programme.

Addressing the training development deficit in the Fiji media industry can stem journalist attrition and improve coverage of election reporting in the country, says University of the South Pacific journalism coordinator Dr Shailendra Singh.

Speaking during last week’s launch of the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections study in Suva, Dr Singh said media watch groups regarded Fiji’s controversial media law as having a “chilling effect on journalism” and “fostered a culture of media self-censorship”.

Dr Singh, who co-authored the report with Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal, said scrapping or reforming the 2010 Media Industry Development Authority Act was crucial to “professionalising journalism”.

• READ MORE: Scrap or reform Fiji’s media law, says new elections report
• Other Fiji media reports

“The Act does nothing for training and development or journalist attrition. In fact, the Act may have exacerbated attrition,” he said.

This situation, Dr Singh said, highlighted the importance of training and development and staff retention, which were longstanding structural problems in Fiji and Pacific media.

“This underlines the role of financial viability and newsroom professional capacity in news coverage.”

He said two core media responsibilities in elections were creating a level playing field and acting as a public watchdog.

“It seems doubtful that these functions were adequately fulfilled by all media during reporting of the 2018 Fijian general elections.”

Advertising spread
Dr Singh said the research also recommended the even distribution of state advertising among media organisations as well as the allocation of public service broadcasting grants fairly among broadcasters to minimise financial incentives to report overly positively on any government.

According to the report, the FijiFirst Party received the most media coverage during the 2018 Fiji general elections and this was expected given its ruling party status.

However, variance in coverage tone and quantity appeared too high.

“The largely positive coverage of the ruling FijiFirst party could be deemed irregular. It questions certain media’s ability to hold power to account,” Dr Singh said.

“Under a stronger watchdog mandate, ruling parties face greater scrutiny, especially in election time. Instead, media coverage put challenger parties more on the defensive which is curious.”

He said challenger parties were forced to respond to allegations in news stories and were grilled more than the incumbent during debates.

“It should be other way around. In such situations the natural conclusion is journalist bias but only to a certain extent,” he said.

Direct political alignment
While the report found that certain media outlets in Fiji seemed to privilege some political parties and issues over others, distinguished political sociologist and Pacific scholar Professor Steven Ratuva said this could be due to several reasons such as direct political and ideological alignment of the media company to a political party or conscious and subconscious bias of journalists and editors.

“Bias is part of human consciousness and sometimes it is explicit and sometimes it is implicit and unconscious. This deeper sociological exploration is beyond the mandate of this report,” Professor Ratuva said in the foreword to the report.

“Election stories sell, especially when spiced with intrigue, scandals, mysteries, conspiracies and warring narratives.

“The more sensational the story the more sellable it is. The media can feed into election frenzies, inflame passion and at times encourage boisterous political behaviour and prejudice which can be socially destructive.

“The media can also be used as a means of sensible, intellectual and calm engagement to enlighten the ignorant and unite people across cultures, religions and political ideologies.”

He said keeping an eye on what the media did required an open, analytical and independent approach and this was what the report attempted to do.

Research findings
The research found that after FijiFirst, the larger and more established opposition parties SODELPA and NFP, were next in terms of the quantity of coverage, but were more likely to receive a lesser amount of positive coverage and at times found themselves on the defensive in responding to FijiFirst allegations, rather than being principles in the stories.

The smaller, newer parties had to content themselves with marginal news attention and this was generally consistent across four of the five national media that were surveyed — the Fiji Sun, FBC (TV and radio), Fiji Television Limited and Fiji Village.

“The only exception was The Fiji Times, whose coverage could be deemed to be comparatively less approving of the ruling party and also less critical of the challenger parties,” the report found.

“Besides comparatively extensive and favourable coverage in the Fiji Sun, FijiFirst made more appearances on the major national television stations, FBC and Fiji One, as well as on the CFL radio stations and news website.”

The report noted that even in special information programmes where news media allowed candidates extended time/space to have their say, the FijiFirst representatives enjoyed a distinct advantage over their opposition counterparts in the two national debates, with regards to the number of questions asked, the nature of the questions, and the opportunity to respond.

“When the two major opposition parties were in the media, it was often in order to respond to allegations by the ruling party, or to defend themselves against negative questions,” the report noted.

“The results could explain why the government accuses The Fiji Times of anti-government bias, and the opposition blame the Fiji Sun and FBC TV of favouring the government.”

However, there were other factors other than media/journalist bias that could be attributed to the lack of critical reporting.

“These could range from the news organisation’s and/or newsroom’s partiality towards the ruling party politicians and its policies. The reporting could also be affected by the inexperience in the national journalists corps to report the elections in a critical manner.”

This observation, the report highlighted, was supported by “issues balance” results indicating that key national issues, such as the economy, were understated.

The focus was instead on election processes, procedures and conduct. Another factor in the reporting could be news media’s financial links to the government.

Election reporting
As Fiji prepares for its next general election, Dialogue Fiji’s Nilesh Lal said it was important to put the spotlight on factors that impinged on an even electoral playing field.

“Given the importance of news media in disseminating electoral information and shaping public opinion, it can profoundly influence electoral outcomes, and therefore needs to come under scrutiny,” he said.

“There may also be imperatives to consider safeguards against the negative impacts of unequal coverage of electoral contestants through legislating as other countries, like the US, for instance, have done.

“Alternatively, media organisations can self-regulate by instituting internal guidelines for election reporting. A good example is the BBC’s Guidelines on election coverage. Another alternate could be the formation of an independent commission/committee made up of media organisation representatives and political parties representatives that can set rules and quotas for election coverage.

“For example, in the UK, a committee of broadcasters and political parties reviews the formula for allocation of broadcasting time, at every election.”

Lal said the purpose of the report was not to accuse any media organisation of having biases but rather to show that inequitable coverage of electoral contestants was a problem in Fiji that required redress at some level if “we are sincere about improving the quality of democracy in Fiji”.

He said the co-authors hoped the report would initiate some much-needed public discourse on the issue of equitable coverage of elections by media organisations.

Wansolwara is the student journalist newspaper of the University of the South Pacific. It collaborates with Asia Pacific Report, which prioritises student journalism.

“We need to scrap or reform the Media Industry Development Act.”

This is one of the key recommendations in the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections Report.

Co-author and University of the South Pacific (USP) journalism coordinator, Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, said the Act was supposed to promote professionalism in journalism and did not address journalism’s lack of training and development.

• READ MORE: News Coverage of Fiji’s 2018 General Election Campaign: Insights from a Content Analysis of the National Print and Broadcast Media
• Behind the Fiji censorship: A comparative media regulatory case study as a prelude to the Easter putsch
• Other reports on Fiji media freedom

Dr Singh added that state advertising needed to be evenly distributed among media organisations, and public service broadcast grants needed to be allocated evenly among broadcasters.

The National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections research was presented by Dr Singh and Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal.

The report provides a content analysis of the media coverage of the 2018 elections.

It focuses on a number of indicators such as direct quotation space and time, frequency of appearance, directional balance in terms of positive, negative or neutral representation of political parties or election candidates and issue balance in relation to prioritising coverage of various issues.

• Pacific Media Watch reports that Fiji’s Media Industry Development Act was originally a military decree imposed in 2010 after the 2006 Bainimarama coup and became codified law in 2015. It is widely regarded by critics as draconian.

Social media is a mixed bag, with both democratic and undemocratic tendencies.

But then few things in life are perfect.

And in that regard social media poses a major dilemma. Not just in Fiji, but many countries are grappling with how best to tackle social media.

• READ MORE: Social media ‘to the rescue’
• Dialogue Fiji

This includes even developed countries like Australia.

But it is in fragile states like Fiji that the threat of social media is more pronounced.

This is partly because of long-standing ethnic tensions and political differences.

The ills of social media — racism, xenophobia, cyberbulling and hate speech — are rife in Fiji.

Disinformation peaks around elections
We have also seen sophisticated examples of disinformation, which peak around elections.

The election period has been the riskiest time in Fiji, even before social media.

There were appalling examples of disinformation in the 2018 elections.
Some of it was so convincing that it may well have swayed some voters.

We might even see more disinformation in this year’s elections.

However, in Fiji, as in many other countries, social media can be empowering and liberating as well.

Even then, it seems disenchantment with social media’s undemocratic traits is greater than the appreciation for its democratising tendencies.

I hope I’m wrong, but I suspect that social media is sometimes over-demonised, under-appreciated.

This is a major challenge.

Access to mainstream news
Not everyone has access to mainstream news media to express views.

But any Tom, Dick and Harry can have their say about governments, or about anything and anyone, on social media.

This is priceless in controlled countries.

In Fiji, social media is pivotal because mainstream media are hampered by the punitive Media Industry Development Act 2010.

Social media is also important because mainstream media can also be biased.

We analysed mainstream media coverage of the 2018 Fiji elections, to be published soon.

We found that all national media gave overwhelming positive coverage to the ruling party, except one.

Opposition parties shut out
The opposition parties were shut out — this claim is not based on hearsay but solid research.

Besides The Fiji Times, the only place to find dissenting views during the 2018 elections was social media.

When mainstream media fails to hold truth to power, social media is the saviour for the opposition and the pubic.

Unlike social media, mainstream cannot be everywhere 24/7. Social media created citizen journalists out of citizens.

This is not to say that social media and mainstream media are always competing. Not only do they complement each other, each is a check and balance on the other.

My main point is, we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater by over legislating social media or under appreciating its value.

Education, not just legislation is the way to deal with issues like disinformation.

Many disillusioned with social media
In Fiji, this is not as simple as it seems: Many people are disillusioned with social media, with good reason.

And government is bent on legislating social media as well, with a certain level of public support.

We should remember that mainstream media are also caught in the crossfire of social media legislation. Their space is also restricted even though professional journalists are not normally party to the abuse of social media.

Education would mean more than just how to spot disinformation, or use social media responsibly.

Education also means understanding the value of social media and the need to protect our access to it, rather than unknowingly surrender these rights.

Education should become part of the school curriculum.

This is because any government, by nature, will try to control social media to curtail criticism, win elections and stay in power.

Only if the population is well educated in what social media means in a democracy will they challenge governments trying to take over social media.

Dr Shailendra Singh is associate professor in Pacific journalism and coordinator of journalism at the University of the South Pacific. He is the 2022 Pacific Research Fellow at the Australian National University. His views are not necessarily shared by the universities that he is associated with. This address was made at a “Building public confidence in elections in Fiji through civil society action” panel discussion at the Coral Coast, Sigatoka, Fiji, on 29 April 2022.