At
UN, UNviewable
Debate Plays
Bait &
Switch With
Stiglitz,
Partners
in Decay
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
February 4 --
The UN wants
to play in the
big leagues in
terms of
communication,
which is fine.
But there are
mounting
questions
concerning how
and if this is
being carried
out, and at
what
sacrifice.
Monday
afternoon
at the UN
illustrates
these
questions.
The UN
Department of
Public
Information
had promoted a
debate on
development
and good
governance,
set for 5 pm
in the Dag
Hammarskjold
Library
Auditorium.
This "Academic
Impact" debate
was to have
featured
Joseph
Stiglitz,
billed as
"Professor
of economics,
Columbia
University,
and recipient
of the Nobel
Memorial Prize
in Economic
Sciences."
But
at 5:10 pm
there was no
Stiglitz. The
moderator,
Maher Nasser
of
DPI's Outreach
Division,
described a
process of
point and
counter-point
that would add
up to 30
minutes. So
Inner City
Press
went to cover
the meeting of
the Sudan
Sanctions
committee
of the UN
Security
Council.
While
staking out
that meeting,
and ultimately
speaking with
the
committee's
chairperson
about using
"good offices"
to try
to resolve the
blocking
of one of the
sanctions
Experts,
it should
have been
possible to
follow the
UNTV webcast
of the debate.
But
also another
DPI official,
Stephane
Dujarric,
wrote on
February 1 to
the Free
UN Coalition
on Access
which raised
the issue back
in
December,
"Owing to
technical
issues that we
working to
resolve,
only some of
the live
meetings are
viewable on
iOs devices
(iPhones,
iPads)."
But
the platform
FUNCA
complained of
is the
increasingly
ubiquitous
Android, on
which the live
webcast still
does not work.
And
so Inner City
Press after
speaking with
the Sudan
Sanctions
chairperson
ran back to
the Dag
Hammarskjold
Library
Auditorium,
where the
debate was
still ongoing.
By now, one of
the three
non-Stiglitz
panelists was
leaving: Susan
Woodward of
the Graduate
Center of the
City
University of
New York."
Nasser
took
two more
questions from
the Internet
-- good -- but
then
distinguished
between those
in the room
from the
beginning of
the
event, or who
came in later.
Who did the
bait and
switch? And
why
can't DPI,
with its
budget, get
its webcast
working on a
platform as
ubiquitous as
Android?
The
session ended
with a mock
vote, on
whether good
governance
helps
development.
But the
question was
posed in such
a way that
many in
the audience
groaned and
asked for it
to be
rephrased.
In
this, it was
reminiscent of
an event in
the same
auditorium in
late
December, a
general
meeting of
DPI's "main"
(or only,
according to
Dujarric)
partner, the
UN
Correspondents
Association.
A
15 minute video, by FUNCA.info, is online here.
At
that meeting,
right after a
vote was taken
rejecting
naming and
shaming those
behind on
dues, the
president of
UNCA denounced
a
particular
member by
name. What's
the use of
voting?
Since then,
including the
same day of
this UN
Academic
Impact debate,
UNCA "leaders"
tore down
substantive
FUNCA flyers,
while DPI for
now allows
UNCA -- and
only UNCA --
to maintain a
glassed-in
bulletin board
on which for
months in 2012
UNCA displayed
a five page
letter
denouncing the
Press. Ah,
free speech.
Now
there's talk
of UNCA, under
challenge,
belatedly
moving to
amend its
Constitution.
But it already
violated its
Constititution.
Dujarric on
January 17
linked UNCA to
the League of
Nations. And
it appears it
should and
will go the
way of the
League of
Nations. Watch
this site.
Footnote:
one shame was
that of the
two remaining
debaters, it
was a return
by Jomo
Sundaram,
previously of
the Department
of Economic
and Social
Affairs and
now Assistant
Director-General
at FAO.
Earlier on
Monday Jomo
joked to Inner
City Press
that there are
no similarly
tough
questions at
FAO. But here
at the UN, no
questions
allowed - no
Monday
evening, and prospectively
not Wednesday
February 6 at
noon. UN
Department of
PRIVATE
Information?
Watch this
site.
, 
