While the millions of thinking people around the world are condemning the US for its statements and actions against WikiLeaks, the State Department announced yesterday that it would host World Press Freedom Day 2011. Says its press release:

The theme for next year’s commemoration will be 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. New media has empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events, and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals’ right to freedom of expression. At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals, and to restrict the free flow of information.

“Say what?” responded almost the entire internet.

Within minutes after the announcement, the World Press Freedom Day page on Facebook saw an avalanche of comments posted below its announcement. “This reads like an article from the Onion”, said one commenter. Yours truly wondered if PayPal, Mastercard and Visa would sponsor the event. And so on.

Within half an hour or so, the Press Freedom Day removed all these comments, and then I really got curious. Mocking them is one thing, but why not try to get a response from them about this wacky event? So, in the comments, your reporter had the following Orwellian exchange with the anonymous page administrator of the organization, with others weighing in:

World Press Freedom Day 2011 Thank you for your comments. Please note that in order to ensure a safe environment for all participants, we have removed posts that contain profanity, religious or ethnic slurs, and/or spam.
12 hours ago · Like ·

Okke Ornstein You have removed ALL comments earlier.
12 hours ago · Like

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Okke We have temporarily stopped wall posts simply because the traffic we’ve received far exceeded what are able to see and respond to right now! We simply had the structure wrong and weren’t ready for a wall with that much traffic, and once we have the logistics worked out, we look forward to continuing a robust discussion around press freedom ahead of World Press Freedom Day 2011!
11 hours ago · Like ·

Okke Ornstein Well, let me ask you two questions then.

1. Given the actions and statements of the US government, in particular the State Department and the Attorney General, about and against WikiLeaks, do you think it is appropriate to have a press freedom event hosted by that same State Department? Why or why not?

2. The fact that this announcement has provoked that you’re being mocked by media outlets ranging from the Guardian to the Nation and a great deal of others who exercise their press freedom on a daily basis – what does that tell you?
11 hours ago · Like

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Okke It certainly tells us that the world is more than ready to discuss and debate press freedom, and we hope World Press Freedom Day will be an opportunity to have that discussion in a respectful, engaging format.
11 hours ago · Like ·

Okke Ornstein That doesn’t answer my first question.
11 hours ago · Like · 1 person

Patrick Settle ‎@WPFD Temporarily preventing people from posting wall post is not the same thing as removing them all. And the excuse for deleting the comments of “we didn’t expect this much traffic” is laughable. Especially with the current relentless pressuring by the US government (State Dept. included) and US companies to shutdown Wikileaks.
11 hours ago · Like ·

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Okke The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts. Regardless of any individual’s position on a specific issue, American involvement in the important, broader discussions of press freedom is (as evidenced by today’s discussions here on Facebook) important!
11 hours ago · Like ·

Okke Ornstein You’re evading the question. It’s not “any individual’s position on a specific issue”, but the position of the US government, specifically the State Dept. which hosts your event. Why do you think that is appropriate? Is their position and are their actions against WikiLeaks supportive of press freedom in your view?
11 hours ago · Like · 2 people

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Patrick In order to ensure a safe environment for all participants, we have removed comments that contain profanity, religious or ethnic slurs, and/or spam. All other comments remain here in these threads and in the discussion tab.
11 hours ago · Like ·

Nick Bezuidenhout ‎@World Press Freedom Day 2011: You still haven’t responded to Okke Ornstein’s last question.
9 hours ago · Like · 2 people ·

Nick Bezuidenhout ‎…or can’t you get hold of the guy at the US State Department who is telling you what to say? :-p
8 hours ago · Like · 1 person ·

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Nick Quite simply, we are on U.S. East Coast time and some of us had to get to sleep by 3am.
6 hours ago · Like ·

World Press Freedom Day 2011 ‎@Okke and @Nick It’s not within the authority of the admins of this Facebook page to comment on that matter as this page, which predated yesterday’s State Dept announcements, exists solely to promote World Press Freedom Day 2011. For better or for worse, the timing of yesterday’s announcements has motivated many followers of this page (and this thread) to share their thoughts on press freedom and World Press Freedom Day, and I for one am glad to see social media being used as it should – for discourse and discussion and debate. Thank you for your comments.
6 hours ago · Like ·

Okke Ornstein ‎@WPFD “It’s not within the authority of the admins of this Facebook page to comment on that matter as this page”…

So the WPFreedomD admins are not allowed to speak – fair enough. Who will answer the question, then?
3 hours ago · Like · 1 person

Patrick Settle ‎@wpfd What do you mean you don’t have authority, this is the official Facebook page for World Press Freedom Day how can you not have the authority to post an official response from the World Press Freedom Day to their question? Which was similar to mine.

In simple terms.

How does the organizers of World Press Freedom Day justify allowing an organization currently engaged in the active suppression of media/press to host the event?
3 hours ago · Like · 2 people ·

Nick Bezuidenhout ‎@World Press Freedom Day 2011: Thanks for your response. Don’t you think it would be a good idea to get hold of someone in your organisation who has the authority to comment in this forum on the issue of the US State Department and WikiLeaks? Your organisation is getting egg all over its face here.
3 hours ago · Like · 3 people ·

World Press Freedom Day 2011 This page exists solely to promote World Press Freedom Day 2011 and we appreciate your comments. The questions you raise are being hashed out in discussions here — and we are glad to see social media being used as it should, for discourse and discussion and debate.
about an hour ago · Like ·

A press freedom club that deletes comments from its Facebook page, won’t answer a simple question and then cackles that they are “glad” to see social media being used for debate? Kafka couldn’t make this shit up.

So, I visited the web site for the World Press Freedom day 2010 (last year’s site, 2011 doesn’t seem to be up). Among its “valued sponsors”, we find no less than three Australian government institutions (Do I really need to link to what the Australian government has had to say about press freedom and transparency over the last week or so?). On this year’s announcement of the event on the UNESCO website, the organizers are listed as “UNESCO (CI/FED), State Department and United Nations”. The organization of the event is based in Washington, DC. In the true spirit of transparency, nowhere is there any information to be found about who is behind this press freedom fraud.

Fraud? Yes, that’s what this is. This circus has nothing to do with press freedom, it is a Washington beltway funding sponge run by impostors, influence peddlers and others who prefer being an “insider” over press freedom and honesty.