Dispute over glossary for journalists in Cyprus
In Cyprus journalists and politicians have criticised a glossary published by the OSCE which makes 56 proposals regarding how to deal with words and phrases deemed problematic in the context of the Cyprus conflict. Critics describe the glossary as an attempt to curtail freedom of expression and introduce a vocabulary that distorts historical facts. Cypriot journalists are at odds over the issue.
A pathetic attempt at falsifying history
The glossary is a document of shame, Phileleftheros rails:
“Terms like invasion, occupation, leader of occupation forces and so on are basically banned. That is a violation of journalistic ethics - and even of democracy - but also a falsification of Cyprus's recent history. It's a pathetic attempt at sugar-coating the Turkish invasion and occupation. ... The Union of Cyprus Journalists and the sinful ethics commission bear the brunt of the responsibility because they gave the OSCE the green light to publish this glossary which distorts history and only serves the interests of Erdoğan's government. ... We have to tell them that we will continue to call the 'Cyprus Peace Operation' [carried out by the Turkish army since 1974] an invasion.”
Say no to nationalist hysteria!
The wave of hysteria that the glossary has unleashed is completely uncalled for, the Cyprus Mail stresses:
“Our politicians and journalists must be thanking the Almighty for the publication of the notorious Glossary for Journalism in Cyprus, as it offered them a wonderful excuse to fly into a self-righteous rage and display their bravery in word warfare, in which they always triumph. ... The attacks on the Glossary, which was organised by the OSCE, funded by Germany and the Netherlands and drafted by members of the journalist unions of the two sides with the help of a British hack, were a return to the good old days of nationalist hysteria and patriotic preaching spiced up with a healthy helping of xenophobia.”