Hundreds protest Czech Television for featuring "expert" who defended violent racists

On Saturday, 24 August, the public broadcaster Czech Television included a populist-tinged report about that day’s anti-Roma march in Ostrava as part of its "News in the Regions" program (Události v regionech). The program invited a Mr Jiří Siostrzonek to comment, incorrectly identifying him as a sociologist studying the Romani issue.

Through the arguments he made on the program, Siostrzonek de facto defended the racists who had attempted to attack Romani residents in the town. "You know, whenever you hear that politically correct talk – like [former Human Rights and Minorities Minister] Kocáb and company, that it’s unfair, etc. – and then you ask them whether they would live in a prefab building occupied by Romani tenants, I’d like to see whom among them would actually do that. That’s the untruth, that’s the false note we are playing here, and unfortunately it is coming back to bite us," Siostrzonek said, among other things.   

A group of people associated with documentary filmmaker Apolena Rychlíková have decided to draw attention to the reporting by signing an open letter to the Board of Czech Television. During one day the complaint was signed by more than 400 people and the number of signatures continues to rise.

News server ROMEA.cz presents the full translation of that open letter here:

Dear Board of Czech Television, Dear Mr Milan Uhde, chair,

We are writing to you in order to complain about a report broadcast on 24 August 2013 on the "News from the Regions" program, which was supposed to discuss the course of the anti-Romani marches in several Czech towns. As you are certainly aware, frustrations have been growing among a large part of our society recently, under the influence of several factors, such as the protracted economic recession, rising unemployment, general inflation, and increasing social inequality.

One of the worst manifestations of this frustration is the effort to find scapegoats to point the finger at and even to attempt to punish. It is well-known which people are most frequently labeled as the culprits here.

Romani people have become the scapegoat for all of the society-wide deprivation in this country. During the past few weeks we have witnessed repeated marches against Roma in various towns across our republic.

On 24 August 2013, such long-planned marches went forward in several towns simultaneously. One aim of these marches, among other matters, was to disorient and paralyze both civil society activists and the police to such an extent that an actual clash with the Romani minority might occur in one or more towns.

The worst situation was in Ostrava, where this aggression and desire to lynch their Romani fellow-citizens accelerated when some of the marchers deviated from the originally planned route. The right-wing radicals, with the loud support of some other residents of Ostrava, attacked a municipal department primarily inhabited by Romani children, women, pensioners – in short, entire families. 

In part thanks to the activity of the Czech Police, in part thanks to chance (or rather, good luck) – this incident did not result in anything more serious than windows broken by rocks, overturned garbage cans, unhinged doors, etc. At 18:00, Czech Television broadcast a report about the march. 

The very start of that report was undertaken in an unacceptably misleading spirit, as if what had occurred was a clash between two streams of opinion, namely, the Romani people and their supporters versus the radicals and "ordinary people". That is not at all what actually happened, as in this incident there were clear assailants (the conveners of the anti-Roma marches) and those under attack (the Romani people and their advocates).  

Of course, the performance of guest speaker Mgr. Jiří Siostrzonek, Ph.D, who was introduced on the program as a sociologist focusing on the Romani issue, was absolutely unacceptable. He opened his remarks by saying he would not be "too politically correct". 

Mr Siostrzonek kept that promise. In his remarks, he turned political correctness into the cause of these current problems and, instead of analyzing the situation, offered populism pure and simple, as well as a de facto defense of the all-but-successful lynch mob.

Mr Siostrzonek literally said: "You know, whenever you hear that politically correct talk – like [former Human Rights and Minorities Minister] Kocáb and company, that it’s unfair, etc. – and then you ask them whether they would live in a prefab building occupied by Romani tenants, I’d like to see whom among them would actually do that. That’s the untruth, that’s the false note we are playing here, and unfortunately it is coming back to bite us."

This is the bald-faced reproduction of uncivilized prejudices and stereotypes, being stamped as "expertise" through the indefensible characterization of this speaker as a "sociologist". First and foremost, it is necessary to question the selection of Mr Siostrzonek as a sociologist expressing his opinion of these manifestations of racial hatred, as he has absolutely never worked on any such topics.

Mr Siostrzonek currently works at the Institute of Creative Photography of the Silesian University in Opava, where he lectures on the sociology of images and basic psychology and sociology of art. He is not, however, qualified to give an expert opinion on the issue of coexistence with minorities, on extremism, or on social inequality, and our research shows that he has not professionally published on any of those topics. 

What is even worse, however, is that the content of his statements, which was presented by the report as an expert, well-founded evaluation, was never contradicted (for example, by a victim of the march), which means his remarks were presented as absolutely valid. The main message of the reporting, therefore, was this seemingly expertly-conducted defense of the attacking racists, using precisely the type of argument that has been pushing people into the streets, week after week, shouting "Black swine" or "Bohemia for the Czechs", an argument in the style of "It’s their own fault, after all, they are to blame for this all themselves."  

The main problem, therefore, is that Czech Television has, with respect to analyzing today’s situation, sided with the radicals instead of reporting on what these anti-Roma marches are really aiming at, namely, attempts at lynching that were prevented only at the last possible moment. That is what is truly horrible, irrespective of whether that last-minute prevention was a result of error or intention.

The statutes of Czech Television state that it should completely, unequivocally stand against any efforts to make intolerant remarks against minorities and stand on the side of those who are defenseless and vulnerable. Given the current situation, it is absolutely out of place to toy with some sort of imaginary "balance" or "objectivity" – we might end up having would-be "balanced" discussions with Holocaust deniers if we head in that direction.  

It is not possible to legitimize the rise of people who are clearly disrupting the democratic order of our country and who are openly attempting to liquidate a certain group in the population. That is why the selection of experts must correspond to the democratic nature of this media outlet and its values.

Dear Board of Czech Television, dear Mr Chair, we hope you will provide us with an explanation for this reporting. However, what we hope even more is that you will take measures to guarantee similar situations will not recur.  

Sincerely and with thanks,

For correctness: Apolena Rychlíková, documentary filmmaker, Prague

The authors of the letter appended an article by sociologist Pavel Pospěch to it, which was published shortly after the program in question aired (available in Czech only at http://www.romea.cz/cz/zpravodajstvi/domaci/pavel-pospech-extremiste-a-odbornici-v-ct)