Albanian media watchdog slams Albanian media for ‘media bias’

A newly created media watchdog has accused Albanian news outlets of “media bias” in an editorial published in Albanian newspaper “Prava” Wednesday, in a move that critics say is part of a trend of the government to censor and silence opposition voices.

The editorial, published in the Albanian-language newspaper, was penned by Adriana Baje, a veteran reporter for the country’s top news agency, the Albanias State News Agency, who served as the countrys chief information officer for several years before being promoted to a position with the state broadcaster, Albania Radio.

Baje said she was outraged that “a government department that is supposed to monitor the media” had published an editorial criticizing the country, calling the decision “unfortunate” and calling for the resignation of the editor of the newspaper, who she said had “not done a good job.”

She said the editorial was not about the role of the Albanians National Assembly, which oversees the country and which is largely made up of Albanian politicians.

Instead, it was a thinly veiled attack on the new media watchdog, called the Commission for the Protection of the Right to Information, that has been established by the Albania government to combat a wave of censorship that began in 2017.

Babak Pashos, a member of the commission, said the new watchdog, which has been working since October, would “fight against any attempts by the state and the authorities to distort the truth in the media,” calling the editorial “unprecedented.”

“It’s an example of what the Albanese are capable of, of not being afraid of the media, which is a very important element in the country,” Pashot said.

Pashot is also an adviser to the Prime Minister’s Office, which recently launched a campaign to educate the country on its media laws and regulations.

He said that if the government wants to get the country back on track, it must focus on the media and not the other areas where it is not well-connected to the rest of society.

“The country needs a government that is responsive to the needs of the people, and not just the needs that are being dictated to it by its political elites,” he said.

“The media is one of the tools of democracy, not the state.”

Pashos said he would not be surprised if the commission is soon called upon to investigate a number of cases of alleged media bias.

“I am very certain that it will come up with a number and I am sure it will be a very difficult investigation,” he told Al Jazeera.

Baja, which translates to “city of news,” is located on the border with Turkey, and is about 100 kilometers (60 miles) northwest of Tirana, the capital of Albania.

The capital, Tirana is also home to the countryís most important airport.

Baba is a city of about 1 million people in a region where ethnic Albanians make up around 15 percent of the population.

The majority of Albanians live in the north of the country where Pashots ethnic Albanian minority has been living since the 1980s.

The country has a rich history and tradition of ethnic Albanias culture, but has experienced the decline of their population in recent decades.

In 2016, about 1.2 million Albanians, or 10 percent of its population, left the country.

Pashottos is a vocal critic of the Balkan countries’ policies on migration and refugees, who have caused tensions between Albanian and Balkan Albanians in the past.

How the NYT’s editorial board helped kill a startup

By Simon JenkinsPublished October 07, 2018 11:55:59I’ve never heard of the NYT, but the editors of its flagship newspaper have. 

This week, the NYT made news by firing a journalist, who is a senior writer on the newspaper’s digital news platform. 

The decision, which is being investigated by the NYT board of directors, was seen as a signal that the paper is ready to take on the digital publishing world.

But for its editors, who have been running an office in Manhattan since 2013, the move to oust the paper’s editor and chief digital officer comes at a time when they’re grappling with a global economic crisis, the US government’s trade war, and the fallout from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico. 

“We had a lot of good stories at the beginning of this year, and it’s really been about being good in a lot [of] ways,” one of the editors, Ben Jealous, told me. 

Jealous is a former senior editor of the Los Angeles Times and now heads the digital news site The Atlantic, which launched in the early days of the Trump administration.

Jealous’s departure was the result of a disagreement over editorial standards, Jealous said, and not an effort to shut down the newspaper. 

A former executive of the paper, the paper has since laid off at least 50 journalists, including two who had worked on digital platforms like Buzzfeed and Vox. 

But the decision to fire the editor came after several months of growing tension. 

It was Jealous’s first major editorial decision in his time at the NYT. 

Last fall, he said, the company decided that the NYT would no longer publish content from news outlets like Vox, Buzzfeed, and Breitbart, as well as several others. 

In an internal memo, the editor-in-chief called the decisions “unconscionable,” and said the decision was driven by a fear that the editorial process was not sufficiently open to all viewpoints.

“I’m concerned about our editorial process being open to those of us who believe strongly that news outlets have a responsibility to be more transparent about the sources of news,” Jealous wrote in the memo.

“This has to be done, and this has to change.” 

The NYT is the most prestigious newspaper in the world, and its newsrooms are famous for their transparency.

But it has struggled to maintain its reputation, particularly since it became the first mainstream newspaper in America to publish a fake article by an anti-Trump conspiracy theorist, which led to the resignation of its editor, Mark Lilla.

The NYT did not respond to requests for comment.

But some of the editor’s allies believe the NYT has been too open, too cozy with the media industry, and too reliant on the tech companies that produce its content. 

There’s a tension between what the editors want and what is politically expedient for the NYT to achieve, said Peter Schweizer, a former congressional staffer who worked on the Clinton White House staff. 

Schweizer, now a professor at American University’s Heller School of Journalism, has been critical of the Times’ approach to digital journalism. 

He wrote about this in a recent blog post. 

I don’t believe that the NYTimes is a newspaper that will ever be able to be neutral, but that’s what they do. 

For decades, the NY Times has been the dominant news source, and they are in a position to make decisions that are politically expedients. 

However, I think the NYT is in a unique position to be a champion of democracy and free speech, and I don’t think they have a choice. 

What they do have is a huge problem, and that is they’re the last bastion of liberal journalism in the United States. 

 But if you think about it, the only way to change things is to get rid of the politicians, and you can’t do that without a revolution, said Schweizer.

The Times has made a number of decisions to get ahead in the digital world. 

Its newsrooms have become the largest in the country. 

They have expanded into many areas of the world.

Its journalists have become a key component of a diverse community of media that has an important role in shaping and informing the future of our country.

But the NYT editorial board has been a consistent opponent of the digital revolution, and has consistently tried to stop it, said one of its members, a reporter at the New York Times. 

That includes the hiring of some of its journalists to work at tech companies like Facebook and Twitter, where the Times’s reporters have been targeted for their work on fake news stories. 

As part of its efforts to push back on the rise of the internet, the Times has published an open letter from its editorial board that called for a more transparent and open journalism.

The letter argues that the Times should not be the only place where stories are produced, and instead

When Georgia, South Carolina and Missouri voted for the first time, we knew we’d need a special election

New York Times headline ‘No one is a winner’: Georgia, S.C. and Missouri vote first in 2016 article Georgia is the latest state to flip a state that voted for President Donald Trump.

It’s the first state to go to the polls this year in which a Democrat won a statewide election since the 1960s, when the last Republican to win a statewide race was Gov.

Albert “Bud” Bryant.

Democrats have won nine of the past 10 statewide elections.

And the election is expected to be close in a battleground state where Republicans are trying to pick up seats that Democrats won in the midterms and midterm congressional elections last year.

The Georgia House has already voted on the election.

But the state Senate has not yet taken up the bill.

In the Senate, Republican Rep. Mark McDaniel is sponsoring the legislation and said it will provide a boost for the state’s economy.

“The state’s economic recovery is a priority for us and we’re going to work hard to get this passed,” he said.

McDaniel is also the chairman of the Georgia Republican Party.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Harrold, R-Ga., also introduced a bill this week that would require every registered voter to provide a photo ID to vote, a move that some Democrats said was aimed at disenfranchising minorities.

That bill passed the Senate.

Republicans have also passed several bills aimed at expanding voting rights in Georgia.

Georgia’s first law requiring voters to present a photo identification card was signed by Gov.

Nathan Deal last year, and the legislature has since passed a law requiring Georgia to extend the voter ID requirement to include the state library, state parks and the Department of Corrections.

But Democrats are pushing the bill to require all voters to have photo ID at the polls.

The bill also would create a statewide photo ID program and require voters to provide one if they are trying for a job that requires a photo.

The new law will likely be challenged by Republicans in the state Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the case on Dec. 6.

A ruling is expected by the end of this year.