1988. április (71-108. szám) / HU_BFL_XIV_47_2
| «H VNe^RMÍt (Ő) OCTOBEBV J (§™£ Editor: György Krassó * 24/D Little Russell Street * London, WC1A 2HN * Tel. 01-430 2126 (írom abroad 441-430 2126) 86/1988 (E) 19th April, 1988 Club Debate About Qpenness The agitprop department of the Hungárián Socialist Workers Party Central Com- mittee, the Hajdu-Bihar County Party Comraittee and the Journalists Union’s info- rmation section and the Hungárián Political Science Society organised a national debate in Debrecen entitled "Politics and Publicity". In the debate - vhich did nőt succeed in squaring the circle or reconciling press freedom with censorship - János Berecz made a speech in which he said that "openness, lack of discipline and verbiage do nőt all mean the same thing" and asked the press to reviev the institute system rather than to concern themselves with independent movements. The Young Sociologists Club held a debate on the same subject in the Budapest Kossuth Club just two days after the official conference’s Saturday Plenary Meeting. The opening speeches vere made by three guest lecturers - Gábor Halmai, Richard Hirschler and Miklós Haraszti. The other invited speakers - three well-known figures in Hungárián telecommunications and József Csikós the deputy director of the Party*s agitprop department - did nőt appear. The first lecturer Gábor Halmai said that the contemporary press serves the interests of power bút has no power itself, it is bopnd to Party guidance, to censorship and self-censorship. The Party must stop exercising power over the press and press freedom and civil rights must be enacted. Richard Hirschler, a member of Heti Világgazdaság (Weekly World Economy) - who is oneof the organisers of the journalists Glasnost Club -,gave a number of examples of Party "information contrivance", fór example the information strategies used in connection with the Bos-Nagymaros hydro-electric plánt: orders frora above controlled and control by vhora, when and how this subject is written about. Some- times it is possible to voice local interests in Hungary bút only 10% of Hungárián towns have their own paper. Subjects which are taboo do nőt appear: the press cannot write about the reasons fór the profound economic and political crisis, it cannot criticise the Party*s or the government’s work, it cannot give information about the Party*s finances, the closed Parliament sessions or the numerous public opinion research data, it cannot call intő question the myth of Party unity or state integrity and with regard to recent events it could nőt give coverage to those who were expelled from the Party or the formation of a new independent youth alliance. Neither can it diverge from the official foreign policy line: today fór example it must call something "armed resistance" or "oppositionist,, when nőt long ago it was only known as the "Afghan counter-revolution". Miklós Haraszti a writer and one of the editors of the samizdat periodical Beszéld (The Talker) spoke about the history of the Hungárián independent press. There are demands fór reform oh the samizdat agenda, it does nőt abandon democratic traditions - eg. the 1956 revolution - , it keeps the memory of historical person- alities such as István Bibo and Imre Nagy alive, it tests the limits of the autho- rities’ tolerance and proves that despite house searches which result in great losses it can mantain itself, while a large part of the official press has a deficit. Samizdat - said Haraszti - does nőt strive to create conflict. Subscribers can use or quote the Hungárián October newsletters in totál or in detail as long as the source is acknowledged.
