Tweet
Yerevan Press Club of Armenia presents `MediaDialogue" Web Site as a
Regional Information Hub project.
As a part of the project www.mediadialogue.org web site is maintained,
featuring the most interesting publications from the press of Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest
updates on the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.
************************************************** *********************
================================================== =========================
CONFLICTS
================================================== =========================
AZERBAIJAN AGAIN RAISES THE ISSUE TO UN
----------------------------------------------- -----------------------------
Source: "Echo" newspaper (Azerbaijan) [September 17, 2005]
Author: R. Orujev
It is all about the situation on the occupied territories
Yesterday evening Azerbaijani Foreign Minister, Elmar Mamediarov was
expected to make a speech at the 60th session of UN General
Assembly. The main issue to be raised by the Foreign Minister was
Mountainous Karabagh conflict and the role of UN in its settlement.
As reported by Associated Press, E. Mamediarov stated back on Thursday
in New York that our state took actions for holding free elections
despite the threats of the opposition that if the results of elections
of November 6 are rigged, anti-government protest actions will start
in the country. Mamediarov also declared that he thinks there is low
chance in an oil-rich country for people's uprising similarly to those
in the former Soviet republics of Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgistan. `The
government and President himself have an aim for holding free and fair
elections', Mamediarov stated. `We strictly follow international
standards. This voting will be much more fair than the previous ones',
he stated.
During his speech in New York, Mamediarov stated that for settlement
of the Karabagh conflict leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan `should act
as state figures and not politicians pursuing national interests'. The
Minister noted that the recent meeting of the two countries leaders
laid ground for negotiation process. `I would like to inform you that
we are close to a breakthrough, but in reality the problems are still
in place', Azerbaijani Foreign Minister stated.
At the session, Azerbaijan joined a number of international
agreements. In UN headquarters, an event named `Focus-2005: Response
to Global Changes' was held related to signing of a series of
international documents on human rights, refugees, terrorism,
organized crime, struggle against corruption, environment, maritime
law and other spheres. Within the framework of the event, Elmar
Mamediarov held a ceremony of signing multilateral agreements:
`International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear
Terrorism' (the text of the Convention is adopted by UN General
Assembly resolution # 59/290); "Optional Protocol to the Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment' of 2002.
"The information about the issue on the situation in the districts,
controlled by the Karabagh forces, entering the agenda of the current
60th session of UN General Assembly in New York is confirmed',
Panarmenian writes. `On Tuesday, Armenian MFA Press Secretary Hamlet
Gasparian stated that if Azerbaijan insists on considering it at the
plenary sitting of the session, official Yerevan will have to withdraw
from negotiation process, and Baku will have to continue negotiations
with the Karabagh side".
The response to these harsh statements came immediately. Yesterday
special representative of AR President at the negotiations on
settlement of Mountainous Karabagh conflict, Deputy Foreign Minister
Araz Azimov informed media that Armenia's statements about withdrawal
from the negotiation process should not be taken seriously. `Putting
the issue about the situation in the occupied territories of
Azerbaijan on the agenda of UN 60th session was quite expected', he
stated. `The problem is still open, this issue should be central for
the international community, since Azerbaijan holds that these efforts
are useless as long as the negative processes on its occupied lands
are underway'.
The decision about including our issue on the agenda of the session
opened on Monday was adopted unanimously, Рanarmenian
reports. "Armenia seems to have exerted zero effort for preventing
it. However, in compliance with General Assembly regulations, the
issues included in the agenda of the current session and not discussed
till its end are automatically transferred to the agenda of the next
session. Only Azerbaijan had the right to take off the issue'.
================================================== =========================
REGION
================================================== =========================
ARMENIAN TIME, TURKISH TIME
--------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
Source: "Turkish Daily News" newspaper (Turkey) [September 18, 2005]
Author: Elif Safak
Armenians and Turks live in different eras. If we want to build a true
dialogue between the two sides it is this time-related fact that we
first need to recognize. What happens when an Armenian girl speaks
about her past with average Turkish women? Below is an excerpt from an
upcoming novel.
`Ask her what their family name is?' Grandmother Gülsüm asked Asya.
`Tchakhmakhchian,' Armanoush replied when the question was translated,
adding, `My full name is Armanoush Tchakhmakhchian.'
Auntie Zeliha's face brightened as she exclaimed in recognition: `I've
always found that interesting. The Turks add the suffix 'ci' to every
possible word to describe professions. Look at our family name; it is
Kazan-cı . We are the cauldron makers. Now I see Armenians do the
same thing. Çakmak, Çakmakçı, Çakmakçı-yan.'
`That's interesting. Look, I have an address,' said Armanoush, who
fished out a piece of paper from her pocket, adding: `My grandmother
Shushan was born in this house. If you could help me with the
directions, I'd like to go and visit it sometime.'
`So you came here to see your grandmother's house. Why did she leave?'
enquired Aunt Zeliha.
Armanoush was both eager to be asked this question and reluctant to
answer. Was it too early to let them know? How much of her story
should she reveal? If not now, then when? Why should she have to wait
anyway? In a listless, almost sapped voice she said, `They were forced
to leave.'
As soon as she said this her weariness disappeared and she lifted her
chin up as she continued: `It's a long story. I won't take your time
with all the details. When her father died my grandmother Shushan was
three years old. There were four siblings, she being the youngest and
the only girl. The family had been left without its patriarch. My
great grandmother was a widow now. Finding it difficult to stay in
Istanbul with the children she sought refuge in her father's house in
Sivas. But as soon as they arrived the deportations began. The entire
family was ordered to leave their house and belongings behind and
march with thousands of others to an unknown destination. They marched
and they marched. My great grandmother died on the way and before long
the elderly died as well. Having no parents to look after them the
younger children lost each other amidst the confusion and chaos. But
after months apart, the brothers were miraculously united in Lebanon
with the help of a Ca!
tholic missionary. The only missing sibling among those still alive
was my grandmother Shushan. Nobody had heard of the fate of the
infant. Nobody knew that she had been taken back to Istanbul to be
placed in an orphanage.'
Asya looked at Armanoush somewhat puzzled. Never before had she met
someone so young with a memory so old.
Auntie Feride was the first to raise doubts and said: `But I don't
understand. What happened to them? They died because they walked?'
`They were denied water and food and rest. They were made to march a
long distance on foot. Women, some of them pregnant, and children, the
elderly, the sick and the debilitated...' Armanoush's voice now
trailed off.
`Who did this atrocity?' Auntie Cevriye asked as if addressing a
classroom of ill-disciplined students.
`The Turks did it,' Armanoush replied without paying any attention to
the implications.
`What a shame, what a sin. Are they not human?' Auntie Feride
volleyed.
`Of course not, some people are monsters!' Auntie Cevriye declared
without comprehending that the repercussions could be far more complex
than she would like to handle. In twenty years in her career as a
Turkish history teacher she was so accustomed to drawing an
impermeable boundary between the past and the present, distinguishing
the Ottoman Empire from the modern Turkish Republic, that she had
actually heard the whole story as grim news from a `distant country.'
The new state in Turkey had been established in 1923 and that was as
far as the genesis of this regime could extend. Whatever might or
might not have happened preceding this date was the issue of another
era, and another people.
Armanoush looked at them one by one, puzzled. She was relieved to see
that the family had not taken the story as badly as she had feared,
but then she couldn't be sure that they had really taken it in at
all. True, they neither refused to believe her nor did they retort
with any counter argument. If anything, they listened attentively and
they all seemed sorry. But was that the limit of their commiseration?
And what exactly had she expected? Armanoush felt slightly
disconcerted as she wondered whether it would be different if she were
talking to a group of intellectuals.
Slowly it dawned on Armanoush that perhaps she was waiting for an
admission of guilt, if not an apology. And yet that apology had not
come, not because they had not felt for her, for it looked like they
had, but because they had seen no connection between themselves and
the perpetrators of the crimes. She, as an Armenian, embodied the
spirit of her people from generations before whereas the average Turk
had no such notion of continuity with his or her ancestors. The
Armenians and the Turks lived in different eras. For the Armenians,
time was a cycle in which the past incarnated itself in the present
and the present begat the future, whereas for Turks time was a
multi-hyphenated line where the past ended at some precise point and
the present started anew with a fresh page with nothing but a huge
rupture in between.
================================================== =========================
NEIGHBOURS
================================================== =========================
TURKEY SHOWS DISCRETION
--------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Source: "Azg" newspaper (Armenia) [September 17, 2005]
Author: Hakob Chakrian
As previously reported, the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
House of Representatives of US Congress discussed and adopted two
resolutions recognizing the Armenian Genocide. In compliance with the
first resolution, initiated by Democrat Adam Schiff, the congressmen
adopted a decision on `recognition of Armenian Genocide executed in
1915-23'. The second resolution whose author is Republican George
Radanovic, called on the `Turkish Republic to admit of the crime
committed by it predecessor - Ottoman Empire, in compliance with the
decision'.
The first resolution was adopted by 35 pro votes, 11 cons, the second
one - 40 pros, 7 cons. It is notable that both resolutions do not
refer to 1915 as the year of committing the Genocide, they mention the
period from 1915 to 1923. Thus, the responsibility for this crime of
the Kemalists against humanity is emphasized. It is an important
circumstance. No less important is the fact that the two resolutions
recognizing the Armenian Genocide are simultaneously submitted to the
Committee of the House of Representatives, which is a common
initiative of Democrats and Republicans.
All this points to the unprecedented nature of the mentioned
initiative, directed at recognition of the Armenian Genocide, which
implies strong resistance of Turkey.
The restraint of the Turkish political circles and Turkish media
surpassed all expectations. Still, `Zaman' newspaper in its issue of
September 16 conditioned adoption of the two resolutions on
recognition of Armenian Genocide in the Committee of the House of
Representatives by the decision of March 1, 2003. In compliance with
the decision, Mili Mejlis of Turkey declined the request of US to
allow using the territory of this state for the anti-Iraq war,
refusing deployment of American troops and military equipment on the
territory of this country.
In this respect, `Zaman' writes about adoption of the resolution, `By
the Armenian resolutions, US House of Representatives took its revenge
for March 1'. As a proof, it quoted member of the Committee Tom
Lantos, `The decision of the Mejlis resulted more losses of American
troops in Iraq. Turkey did not reckon with our interests. Turkey
refused to help us in opening a front against Syria and Iraq from the
north. So, I definitely support both Armenian resolutions'.
As reported by `Milliyet' newspaper, Adam Schiff also referred to the
decision of March 1. However, in contrast to Lantos he did not
substantiate adoption of the resolution on the Armenian Genocide but
answered the message addressed to the Chairman of the Committee of US
State Secretariat Henry Hyde by US Department of State, which runs,
`the resolution may harm Turkish-American relations'. According to
`Milliyet', Schiff stressed the importance of Turkey to USA, noting,
`The March 1 decision of Mili Mejlis of Turkey did not result in
deterioration of Turkish-American relations. Thus, the resolution in
its turn is not supposed to harm these relations'.
In this aspect, Schiff was supported by Hyde, stating he does not
believe that adoption of the resolution will harm the relations of the
two countries. Therefore, the rejection of the fact of Genocide can in
no way be justified. At the same time, Hyde emphasized that Turkey
does not bear responsibility for the crime committed.
Based on the mentioned newspaper, the members of the Committee often
referred to the criminal proceedings initiated in Turkey against Orham
Pamuk for recognizing the fact of the Armenian Genocide and the
responsibility of Germany for the Holocaust, stating that it will have
bad consequences.
The absence of the supposed resistance by Turkey to the adoption of
the two resolutions on the Armenian Genocide by the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the House of Representatives of US Congress means
that Turkey shows discretion and not weakness. Simply, Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is still in US and will return to Ankara
on September 17. Doubtlessly, Erdogan will take relevant steps. They
are important for the press. These steps will allow adequately
responding to the adoption of the resolution. As for the nature of
resistance, it may also hinge on the efficiency of Erdogan's
steps. Consequently, we should wait for the return of Prime Minister
Erdogan to Ankara.
************************************************** *************************
You can subscribe or unsubscribe to this newsletter either at
www.mediadialogue.org or by sending a message to the Editor:
[email protected].
For comments or questions please contact the Editor: [email protected].
Regional Information Hub project.
As a part of the project www.mediadialogue.org web site is maintained,
featuring the most interesting publications from the press of Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey on issues of mutual concern. The latest
updates on the site are weekly delivered to the subscribers.
************************************************** *********************
================================================== =========================
CONFLICTS
================================================== =========================
AZERBAIJAN AGAIN RAISES THE ISSUE TO UN
----------------------------------------------- -----------------------------
Source: "Echo" newspaper (Azerbaijan) [September 17, 2005]
Author: R. Orujev
It is all about the situation on the occupied territories
Yesterday evening Azerbaijani Foreign Minister, Elmar Mamediarov was
expected to make a speech at the 60th session of UN General
Assembly. The main issue to be raised by the Foreign Minister was
Mountainous Karabagh conflict and the role of UN in its settlement.
As reported by Associated Press, E. Mamediarov stated back on Thursday
in New York that our state took actions for holding free elections
despite the threats of the opposition that if the results of elections
of November 6 are rigged, anti-government protest actions will start
in the country. Mamediarov also declared that he thinks there is low
chance in an oil-rich country for people's uprising similarly to those
in the former Soviet republics of Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgistan. `The
government and President himself have an aim for holding free and fair
elections', Mamediarov stated. `We strictly follow international
standards. This voting will be much more fair than the previous ones',
he stated.
During his speech in New York, Mamediarov stated that for settlement
of the Karabagh conflict leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan `should act
as state figures and not politicians pursuing national interests'. The
Minister noted that the recent meeting of the two countries leaders
laid ground for negotiation process. `I would like to inform you that
we are close to a breakthrough, but in reality the problems are still
in place', Azerbaijani Foreign Minister stated.
At the session, Azerbaijan joined a number of international
agreements. In UN headquarters, an event named `Focus-2005: Response
to Global Changes' was held related to signing of a series of
international documents on human rights, refugees, terrorism,
organized crime, struggle against corruption, environment, maritime
law and other spheres. Within the framework of the event, Elmar
Mamediarov held a ceremony of signing multilateral agreements:
`International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear
Terrorism' (the text of the Convention is adopted by UN General
Assembly resolution # 59/290); "Optional Protocol to the Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment' of 2002.
"The information about the issue on the situation in the districts,
controlled by the Karabagh forces, entering the agenda of the current
60th session of UN General Assembly in New York is confirmed',
Panarmenian writes. `On Tuesday, Armenian MFA Press Secretary Hamlet
Gasparian stated that if Azerbaijan insists on considering it at the
plenary sitting of the session, official Yerevan will have to withdraw
from negotiation process, and Baku will have to continue negotiations
with the Karabagh side".
The response to these harsh statements came immediately. Yesterday
special representative of AR President at the negotiations on
settlement of Mountainous Karabagh conflict, Deputy Foreign Minister
Araz Azimov informed media that Armenia's statements about withdrawal
from the negotiation process should not be taken seriously. `Putting
the issue about the situation in the occupied territories of
Azerbaijan on the agenda of UN 60th session was quite expected', he
stated. `The problem is still open, this issue should be central for
the international community, since Azerbaijan holds that these efforts
are useless as long as the negative processes on its occupied lands
are underway'.
The decision about including our issue on the agenda of the session
opened on Monday was adopted unanimously, Рanarmenian
reports. "Armenia seems to have exerted zero effort for preventing
it. However, in compliance with General Assembly regulations, the
issues included in the agenda of the current session and not discussed
till its end are automatically transferred to the agenda of the next
session. Only Azerbaijan had the right to take off the issue'.
================================================== =========================
REGION
================================================== =========================
ARMENIAN TIME, TURKISH TIME
--------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
Source: "Turkish Daily News" newspaper (Turkey) [September 18, 2005]
Author: Elif Safak
Armenians and Turks live in different eras. If we want to build a true
dialogue between the two sides it is this time-related fact that we
first need to recognize. What happens when an Armenian girl speaks
about her past with average Turkish women? Below is an excerpt from an
upcoming novel.
`Ask her what their family name is?' Grandmother Gülsüm asked Asya.
`Tchakhmakhchian,' Armanoush replied when the question was translated,
adding, `My full name is Armanoush Tchakhmakhchian.'
Auntie Zeliha's face brightened as she exclaimed in recognition: `I've
always found that interesting. The Turks add the suffix 'ci' to every
possible word to describe professions. Look at our family name; it is
Kazan-cı . We are the cauldron makers. Now I see Armenians do the
same thing. Çakmak, Çakmakçı, Çakmakçı-yan.'
`That's interesting. Look, I have an address,' said Armanoush, who
fished out a piece of paper from her pocket, adding: `My grandmother
Shushan was born in this house. If you could help me with the
directions, I'd like to go and visit it sometime.'
`So you came here to see your grandmother's house. Why did she leave?'
enquired Aunt Zeliha.
Armanoush was both eager to be asked this question and reluctant to
answer. Was it too early to let them know? How much of her story
should she reveal? If not now, then when? Why should she have to wait
anyway? In a listless, almost sapped voice she said, `They were forced
to leave.'
As soon as she said this her weariness disappeared and she lifted her
chin up as she continued: `It's a long story. I won't take your time
with all the details. When her father died my grandmother Shushan was
three years old. There were four siblings, she being the youngest and
the only girl. The family had been left without its patriarch. My
great grandmother was a widow now. Finding it difficult to stay in
Istanbul with the children she sought refuge in her father's house in
Sivas. But as soon as they arrived the deportations began. The entire
family was ordered to leave their house and belongings behind and
march with thousands of others to an unknown destination. They marched
and they marched. My great grandmother died on the way and before long
the elderly died as well. Having no parents to look after them the
younger children lost each other amidst the confusion and chaos. But
after months apart, the brothers were miraculously united in Lebanon
with the help of a Ca!
tholic missionary. The only missing sibling among those still alive
was my grandmother Shushan. Nobody had heard of the fate of the
infant. Nobody knew that she had been taken back to Istanbul to be
placed in an orphanage.'
Asya looked at Armanoush somewhat puzzled. Never before had she met
someone so young with a memory so old.
Auntie Feride was the first to raise doubts and said: `But I don't
understand. What happened to them? They died because they walked?'
`They were denied water and food and rest. They were made to march a
long distance on foot. Women, some of them pregnant, and children, the
elderly, the sick and the debilitated...' Armanoush's voice now
trailed off.
`Who did this atrocity?' Auntie Cevriye asked as if addressing a
classroom of ill-disciplined students.
`The Turks did it,' Armanoush replied without paying any attention to
the implications.
`What a shame, what a sin. Are they not human?' Auntie Feride
volleyed.
`Of course not, some people are monsters!' Auntie Cevriye declared
without comprehending that the repercussions could be far more complex
than she would like to handle. In twenty years in her career as a
Turkish history teacher she was so accustomed to drawing an
impermeable boundary between the past and the present, distinguishing
the Ottoman Empire from the modern Turkish Republic, that she had
actually heard the whole story as grim news from a `distant country.'
The new state in Turkey had been established in 1923 and that was as
far as the genesis of this regime could extend. Whatever might or
might not have happened preceding this date was the issue of another
era, and another people.
Armanoush looked at them one by one, puzzled. She was relieved to see
that the family had not taken the story as badly as she had feared,
but then she couldn't be sure that they had really taken it in at
all. True, they neither refused to believe her nor did they retort
with any counter argument. If anything, they listened attentively and
they all seemed sorry. But was that the limit of their commiseration?
And what exactly had she expected? Armanoush felt slightly
disconcerted as she wondered whether it would be different if she were
talking to a group of intellectuals.
Slowly it dawned on Armanoush that perhaps she was waiting for an
admission of guilt, if not an apology. And yet that apology had not
come, not because they had not felt for her, for it looked like they
had, but because they had seen no connection between themselves and
the perpetrators of the crimes. She, as an Armenian, embodied the
spirit of her people from generations before whereas the average Turk
had no such notion of continuity with his or her ancestors. The
Armenians and the Turks lived in different eras. For the Armenians,
time was a cycle in which the past incarnated itself in the present
and the present begat the future, whereas for Turks time was a
multi-hyphenated line where the past ended at some precise point and
the present started anew with a fresh page with nothing but a huge
rupture in between.
================================================== =========================
NEIGHBOURS
================================================== =========================
TURKEY SHOWS DISCRETION
--------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Source: "Azg" newspaper (Armenia) [September 17, 2005]
Author: Hakob Chakrian
As previously reported, the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
House of Representatives of US Congress discussed and adopted two
resolutions recognizing the Armenian Genocide. In compliance with the
first resolution, initiated by Democrat Adam Schiff, the congressmen
adopted a decision on `recognition of Armenian Genocide executed in
1915-23'. The second resolution whose author is Republican George
Radanovic, called on the `Turkish Republic to admit of the crime
committed by it predecessor - Ottoman Empire, in compliance with the
decision'.
The first resolution was adopted by 35 pro votes, 11 cons, the second
one - 40 pros, 7 cons. It is notable that both resolutions do not
refer to 1915 as the year of committing the Genocide, they mention the
period from 1915 to 1923. Thus, the responsibility for this crime of
the Kemalists against humanity is emphasized. It is an important
circumstance. No less important is the fact that the two resolutions
recognizing the Armenian Genocide are simultaneously submitted to the
Committee of the House of Representatives, which is a common
initiative of Democrats and Republicans.
All this points to the unprecedented nature of the mentioned
initiative, directed at recognition of the Armenian Genocide, which
implies strong resistance of Turkey.
The restraint of the Turkish political circles and Turkish media
surpassed all expectations. Still, `Zaman' newspaper in its issue of
September 16 conditioned adoption of the two resolutions on
recognition of Armenian Genocide in the Committee of the House of
Representatives by the decision of March 1, 2003. In compliance with
the decision, Mili Mejlis of Turkey declined the request of US to
allow using the territory of this state for the anti-Iraq war,
refusing deployment of American troops and military equipment on the
territory of this country.
In this respect, `Zaman' writes about adoption of the resolution, `By
the Armenian resolutions, US House of Representatives took its revenge
for March 1'. As a proof, it quoted member of the Committee Tom
Lantos, `The decision of the Mejlis resulted more losses of American
troops in Iraq. Turkey did not reckon with our interests. Turkey
refused to help us in opening a front against Syria and Iraq from the
north. So, I definitely support both Armenian resolutions'.
As reported by `Milliyet' newspaper, Adam Schiff also referred to the
decision of March 1. However, in contrast to Lantos he did not
substantiate adoption of the resolution on the Armenian Genocide but
answered the message addressed to the Chairman of the Committee of US
State Secretariat Henry Hyde by US Department of State, which runs,
`the resolution may harm Turkish-American relations'. According to
`Milliyet', Schiff stressed the importance of Turkey to USA, noting,
`The March 1 decision of Mili Mejlis of Turkey did not result in
deterioration of Turkish-American relations. Thus, the resolution in
its turn is not supposed to harm these relations'.
In this aspect, Schiff was supported by Hyde, stating he does not
believe that adoption of the resolution will harm the relations of the
two countries. Therefore, the rejection of the fact of Genocide can in
no way be justified. At the same time, Hyde emphasized that Turkey
does not bear responsibility for the crime committed.
Based on the mentioned newspaper, the members of the Committee often
referred to the criminal proceedings initiated in Turkey against Orham
Pamuk for recognizing the fact of the Armenian Genocide and the
responsibility of Germany for the Holocaust, stating that it will have
bad consequences.
The absence of the supposed resistance by Turkey to the adoption of
the two resolutions on the Armenian Genocide by the Committee on
Foreign Relations of the House of Representatives of US Congress means
that Turkey shows discretion and not weakness. Simply, Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is still in US and will return to Ankara
on September 17. Doubtlessly, Erdogan will take relevant steps. They
are important for the press. These steps will allow adequately
responding to the adoption of the resolution. As for the nature of
resistance, it may also hinge on the efficiency of Erdogan's
steps. Consequently, we should wait for the return of Prime Minister
Erdogan to Ankara.
************************************************** *************************
You can subscribe or unsubscribe to this newsletter either at
www.mediadialogue.org or by sending a message to the Editor:
[email protected].
For comments or questions please contact the Editor: [email protected].