Smear Campaigns and dirty tactics: But who’s funding Koim’s litigation?

By PNG Echo

Smear campaigns always smack of desperation.   But a smear campaign against a journalist…? That must be the epitome of desperation.   But that’s what’s happened in PNG in the past week.

Certain anti-government forces have a near social media monopoly where they attempt to control and manipulate their followers with practises such as saturation, social engineering, audience packing and censorship of opposing opinions. The use of fake identities and the courting of the loony fringe are some of their other questionable tactics.

But to attack another journalist…? It’s a ham-fisted attempt at censorship of the media (other than themselves, that is). Their hypocrisy is palpable.

They cry foul at the thought that the medium they use should be regulated, they speak highly of ‘freedom of speech’ and their ‘rights’ not once acknowledging that anyone with an opinion contrary to theirs has any.

The catalyst for their smear campaign against me has been Sam Koim. My article has sent them into dirty-tactics overdrive.

Sam Koim 

Many people have asked, and would sincerely like to know, from where Koim gets the funding to conduct his very expensive litigation – defending his own ‘right to be’.

I’m not saying that Koim does not have the right to defend his position, all I’m wanting to know is on whose behalf is he acting? And it really isn’t good enough to proffer that ‘God is providing.’

In order for the people of Papua New Guinea to make a decision about the merits of an argument you need to be in receipt of the facts, in this case you aren’t. You don’t know who you’re really advocating for – and it may just be the devil himself.

Unfortunately, the mainstream media in Papua New Guinea also seem to have a vested interest in not publishing anything that criticises Koim – now that’s bias!

A lazy journalist in Australia who wanted to attend Melbourne Cup Day celebrations rather than attend and report on a court case once remarked: “If we don’t report it, it hasn’t happened.” Cynical – but it’s one way to operate – not terribly ethical, but there you have it.

Journalism

There are many types of journalism – Me, I’m not a reporter who goes to the scene of the accident/crime/court case and reports the facts. My job is analysis – I take the facts, give them a good shake and come out with a conclusion based on those facts. If the available facts are inadequate, I look for more.

I am not swayed by public opinion. I am more than prepared to put to you, the public, an unpopular opinion. It is NOT my job to court popularity – that’s the job of politicians.

What is happening in Papua New Guinea’s social media is not unbiased, corruption fighting – it’s politics, plain and simple. Many of the owners and administrators of these sites are political ‘wannabes’ with ambitions for 2017.

It’s the sheer hypocrisy of their position that’s breathtaking, their willingness to occupy the gutter, their propensity for deception and manipulation.

Yet still, I am not interested in concerning myself with another media outlet and I hope I never have to do it again. I have no interested in shooting the messenger, notwithstanding that the messenger is delivering lies for undisclosed vested interests.

I am more interested in the vested interests. And so my question remains – it cries out to be answered even amongst the lies, innuendos and gossip widely published about me –  who are the vested interests?

So sorry, but you have failed to bury the message: – WHO IS FUNDING SAM KOIM’S EXPENSIVE LITIGATION?  The question has a life of its own.