No more space for the press?by Brian Harvey
|
| “Press” used to be mainly full-time journalists from well-established institutions from Aviation Week and Space Technology to Air & Cosmos to Flight International. But the nature of space reporting is different now. |
The IAF was set up in 1950 by the British Interplanetary Society (BIS), the Groupement Astronautique Français, and the German Rocket Society. They comprised amateurs and professionals, initially ridiculed as cranks and nutters. That criticism stopped during its eighth congress in Barcelona on October 4, 1957, when, by coincidence, Sputnik was launched. Since then, the IAF grew, attracting industrial, professional, scientific, and promotional organizations worldwide. Its annual congresses move globally, typically in Europe each other year, this year in Milan in October.
For the space press, it’s the biggest, most valuable, and important gathering on the calendar. In a large exhibition hall, the big space agencies, like NASA, France’s CNES), Germany’s DLR, and Italy’s ASI, put on displays of their latest designs and models, distribute leaflets, and make officials available for interviews. The Japanese space agency JAXA once displayed asteroid rock collected from the far end of the solar system.
The real meat is in the well-illustrated presentations by engineers, scientists, and experts on rockets, satellites, missions, and applications, anything from microsatellites to past history to future technologies. Heads of the space agencies speak. Astronauts come: the congress introduced to the world China’s first astronaut, Yang Liwei, and first space women, Liu Yang. Indeed, China has often had a major presence, exhibiting full-scale models of its lunar and Mars probes long before anyone else saw them, so it’s a photographic event. It’s also newsy: it is no coincidence that announcements and evolving outlines of future missions (e.g. Mars Sample Return) are made there. With the rivalry between east and west in full swing, American astronaut and NASA deputy administator Pamela Melroy spoke on the Artemis Accords.
Press are normally provided with a small room with desks where journalists file their reports. “Press” used to be mainly full-time journalists from well-established institutions from Aviation Week and Space Technology to Air & Cosmos to Flight International. But the nature of space reporting is different now. It’s not just that typewriters and phones have given way to laptops and mobiles, but it has become more diverse. As Jacqueline Myrrhe, publisher of Raumfahrt Concret and editor-in-chief of Go Taikonauts!, put it, “the press landscape of the last decade has undergone profound changes. Most mainstream media do not have any expert journalists for space any more. Freelance journalists and authors have become an indispensable source of high-quality and high-professional content for media, publishers and online media.” And they were welcome… until this year. (Full disclosure: although attending these events since 1999, this writer is one of those not welcome any more.)
This is how it works. Journalists normally apply for press credentials far ahead, in this case in May, sending in not only a passport but the one document that matters most, a professional press card, normally issued by a trade union. What’s new is that even if an applicant is acknowledged as a bona fide journalist, that of itself no longer ensures admission. Now the IAF applies “criteria” to decide if journalists should then be admitted, but will not disclose these criteria, making it intrinsically difficult, if not impossible, to argue one’s case. The criteria are known only to the IAF and have never been publicized, despite multiple requests to disclose them. Representations to reconsider have come from writers, authors, publishers, podcasters, political parties, academics, institutes from Europe and the United States, even founder member BIS, but have so far been ignored. The only clue lies in conditions just issued to approved journalists to “encourage” them to “prominently” feature IAF hashtags, logos, and banners of hosts, co-hosts and sponsors, as follows:
- All publications resulting from the IAC 2024 should prominently feature the hashtags #iafastro and #iac2024.
- For printed / digital materials you can incorporate the official IAF logo and the official IAC 2024 banner featuring the names and logos of the host, co-hosts, and sponsors of the event.
- You are cordially invited to the link containing useful materials such as high-quality logos, banners and a brief summary of the IAF.
Does the IAF now welcome only journalists who will publicize the organization, including its for-profit commercial sponsors? Journalists go to events to report on what they see and hear, not to do the job of the host’s publicity department. The dangers of favoritism and manipulating the purpose of the press are obvious. But it’s the only clue we have.
| Now the IAF applies “criteria” to decide if journalists should then be admitted, but will not disclose these criteria, making it intrinsically difficult, if not impossible, to argue one’s case. |
How widespread are refusals to admit press? We don’t know. The IAF was asked how many journalists had been turned away this year and in previous years, but won’t say. Are some countries preferred more than others? Big, influential states or small ones? Again, we don’t know: the IAF will not give the nationalities of those accepted or rejected, although it knows from the application forms. If these refusals happened in states adjudged authoritarian, there would be uproar (interestingly, there were no such cases documented when the IAF was in Beijing in 2013.)
France (where the IAF is based) and Italy (this year’s congress location) are members of the European Union and Council of Europe, which means bound by their laws and conventions. Keeping the press out like this is contrary to the:
- European Union (EU) Charter of Fundamental Rights;
- Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights;
- The new EU Media Freedom Act, which came into effect on April 11 of this year;
- EU directives and legislation against non-discrimination, for example on grounds of age, gender, disability, nationality, and political belief.
It is certain that the issue will be raised in the autumn session of the new European Parliament. The IAF was asked was it familiar with and trained in the application of these laws, and how was the refusal of individuals consistent with anti-discrimination law, but would not say.
Key words here are “press freedom” and “media pluralism.” Press freedom sets down the general proposition that press should be let in, included rather than excluded. It’s not as if there is not room for a handful of press among the ten thousand present, or that national security issues are at stake. Jacqueline Myrrhe again: “The participation of freelancers is not financed by media outlets or any other organization, all costs are on the individual freelance expert. Such commitment requires enormous dedication” for attending such conferences.
Media pluralism means recognition of media diversity: full-time, part-time, freelance, general, specialized, popular, technical, using a multiplicity of methods: printed, electronic, broadsheet, tabloid, magazine, journal,, and all the new social media (podcasts, websites, Twitter, Tiktok, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) Not just hashtag publicists.
A final, but intriguing question. Has IAF, unknown to us, introduced security vetting of journalists, the appropriate checking agency being presumably the French government’s Direction Général de Securité Extérieure (DGSE). That might explain some “no” decisions. The IAF would not say if it applied security vetting, or not, which is worrying. Does a blacklist exist? What’s really going on?
Note: we are now moderating comments. There will be a delay in posting comments and no guarantee that all submitted comments will be posted.