Cyprus / Media Complaints Commission, «Απόφαση εναντίον της εφημερίδας 'Αλήθεια' για δημοσίευμα με τίτλο: ‘Τρίτος Αττίλας στην Κύπρο!’, ημ. 27/01/2020» (Decision against the newspaper 'Alithia’ for the article entitled ‘Third Attila in Cyprus!’ of 27/01/

Country

Cyprus

Title

Cyprus / Media Complaints Commission, «Απόφαση εναντίον της εφημερίδας 'Αλήθεια' για δημοσίευμα με τίτλο: ‘Τρίτος Αττίλας στην Κύπρο!’, ημ. 27/01/2020» (Decision against the newspaper 'Alithia’ for the article entitled ‘Third Attila in Cyprus!’ of 27/01/2020) Complaint No. 06/27/01/20, 17 May 2020.

View full Case

Year

2020

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Sunday, May 17, 2020

Incident(s) concerned/related

Other forms of hate speech

Related Bias motivation

Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity
Religion

Groups affected

Refugees & asylum seekers

Court/Body type

High regulatory authority

Court/Body

Media Complaints Commission

Key facts of the case

The Media Complaints Commission examined a complaint against the national daily newspaper “Alithia” for an article entitled “Third Attila in Cyprus” published in January 2020. The article referred to migrants and refugees whom it resembled with the Turkish invasion of 1974, which had received the code name ‘Operation Attila’ and included phrases like “we are sinking” and “we cannot stand them any more”. It also included false data on the number of asylum seekers, whom it recorded as 43,000 whilst the actual number at the time was 17,171.

Main reasoning/argumentation

The Commission concluded that the newspaper purposely magnified the data on asylum applications and infringed the non-discrimination provision of the Journalistic Code, generating xenophobic sentiments leading to the intensification of phenomena of intolerance of diversity and criticized the repeated use of the term ‘illegal migrant’. With regard to the use of the term ‘third Attila’ the Commission found its use excessive and unjustified, leading to phenomena of xenophobia and fanaticism. It concluded that, through the inaccurate asylum figures and the catchy phrases it used, the article contained hate speech which infringed not only the Journalistic Code but also the law on combating racism.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

False or inaccurate data in the context of asylum and migration can lead to phenomena of xenophobia and fanaticism. The use of catchy phrases and journalistic articles equating vulnerable populations, like asylum seekers and refugees, with national tragedies and disasters is problematic as it can intensify phobias and perpetuate intolerance.

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The Media Complaints Commission obliged the newspaper to publish this decision and the newspaper complied. This is the only measure foreseen in the mandate of the Media Complaints Commission.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

"Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι το παρόν δημοσίευμα τόσο μέσω των ανακριβών πληροφοριών όσο και μέσω των φράσεων που χρησιμοποιεί προβάλει τη ρητορική μίσους, η οποία είναι αντίθετη όχι μόνο προς τη δημοσιογραφική δεοντολογία, αλλά και ενάντια στο νόμο περί Καταπολέμησης του Ρατσισμού"

"The Commission considers that this publication, through the inaccurate data and the phrases it uses, promotes hate speech, which is contrary not only to journalistic ethics but also to the anti-racist legislation."

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.