All
over the East Side of Manhattan on Tuesday people
were heaving sighs of relief. The World Economic
Forum had ended its five-day talkfest at the Waldorf,
the anti-Forum demonstrators had also left town,
the police barricades had been removed and the
traffic was flowing again. For most New Yorkers,
the event was little more than an annoyance. It
was hardly a novelty for them to see rich and powerful
people driven through the streets of the city in
limousines or even in police-escorted convoys;
that happens every day in New York. Even the inconvenience
of the security measures was nothing new; New Yorkers
put up with that every time the UN plays host to
heads of state.
Indeed,
most New Yorkers are surely wondering now what all
the fuss was about. What did the Forum accomplish here?
Why did it draw so many demonstrators who seem so dead-set
against everything it stands for? Is the Forum really "committed
to improving the state of the world," as its slogan
proclaims, or is it nothing more than an excuse for
its participants to spend five days and nights "meeting,
greeting and eating." But if that's all it was,
then why did UN Secretary General Kofi A. Annan take
the trouble to come to it to urge its participants
to use their investments to alleviate poverty and disease
in the world?
If the Forum remains an enigma to most outsiders,
one reason has got to be the love-hate relationship
that its organizers have with the press. The
Forum's annual meetings in Davos began in obscurity
and developed a global reputation--and, yes,
a mystique--only after a handful of top-notch
journalists were invited to take part in them
and help spread the word. As its fame grew,
the Forum had to provide coverage access to
more and more reporters.
Last
year in Davos--this reporter's first time
there--scores
of journalists from all
over the world covered the meeting, working
from two large press rooms in the conference
center's basement or from temporary offices
just outside. These "working press" people
were barred from attending most of the sessions,
but they were free to chat with participants
(including fellow journalists with fuller access)
and conference organizers in the corridors.
Many of the reporters chafed at the unfairness
of what some of them called this "caste
system" for the press--I know I did--but
at least we were able to gather information
and write our stories.
This
year, when the Forum announced it was holding
its
annual meeting in New York instead
of Davos, officials announced that, because
of space constraints, the "covering press" would
not be able to mingle with participants but
would be confined to a "press center" in
a hotel across the street.
That
was the bad news. The good news, for me,
was that
the Forum's organizers had decided
to give me a "white badge"--that
is, a participant's badge--that would enable
me not only to get into the Waldorf but also
to take part in Forum workshops and other sessions.
At least I thought it was good news--although
I was just a little concerned when they told
me I could not actually get my hands on the
badge until the meeting's opening day. Just
show up at the Waldorf, I was told, and somebody
there would find my name on a list, give me
my badge and admit me.
But when the day came, last Thursday, and
I showed up at the Waldorf, I was told that
my name could not be found on the list. I was
instructed to go to the press center in the
Intercontinental, but when I got there--after
spending 75 minutes waiting on line outside
in the cold--my name was still nowhere to be
found on any list.
It
wasn't until late in the afternoon, after
significant
lobbying by the newspaper's editor
and others, that I finally got word there was "a
pass waiting" for me. Even so, it took
a couple of hours of walking back and forth
between the two hotels, and getting two more
rejections from official list scrutinizers,
before somebody on the Forum staff made up
a badge for me. By then I was too exhausted,
too drained, to start looking for a story to
cover. I didn't know it then, but I was to
spend the next four days "playing catch-up."
The
next day, Friday, I ran into more difficulties
with
the Forum officialdom, who let me know
they objected to a piece I had written detailing
the difficulties I had encountered in registering
for the meeting. A young woman working for
the Forum's press department assured me that
I had the facts all wrong and that, furthermore,
I wasn't even supposed to have a white badge
in the first place. I left my meeting with
her convinced not only that as a reporter I
was unwelcome at the Forum, but that I might
have a hard time retaining my objectivity about
it. "If there really is a global divide," I
wrote for Saturday's paper, "between the
'haves' (such as the sort of people who run
and participate in the Forum) and the 'have-nots,'
then my place is certainly with the latter
group."
Still,
I was able to cover a panel discussion about "global anger" and to write
a compilation of vignettes that I dubbed "scenes
from a gathering," including examples
of participants networking with one another.
Indeed, I could not help but be impressed by
the bonhomie that I saw all around me. On Saturday
I covered a news conference given by former
US Senator Sam Nunn and took part in a workshop
on international trade negotiations after Doha.
There were only about 120 people taking part
in the workshop, but what a star-studded cast
it was: the head of the WTO and his designated
successor; the US Trade Representative who
was so largely responsible for the success
of the Doha meeting; trade ministers from other
countries; professors of economics from the
world's leading universities; representatives
of organized labor and other NGOs. It was,
I wrote, the sort of workshop "that one
can find only at the WEF."
On
Sunday, though, things really got interesting.
Upon
arriving at the Waldorf in the morning
I was struck by the fact that there were no
copies of our newspaper on display in the main
lobby, where they had been on all the other
days (along with other newspapers). I found
out later that all the copies had been confiscated
by Forum officials, apparently because they
were upset about a page-one story documenting
the press-room anger at the Forum's "caste
system" of media access.
I covered a workshop on the meaning of citizenship
in the age of migration- again with a roomful
of national and international officials, academics
and business leaders. But when I returned to
the office to write my story, I learned that
the situation had darkened. Our photographer
had been physically ejected from a news conference
he was covering, and Forum officials were threatening
to bar all of the paper's reporters as well.
On
Monday, the final day of the Forum, I went
straight
to the office, hoping to learn what
my assignment would be if I could not get back
into the Waldorf. I found out that the Forum
had relented and was continuing to honor our
press badges, so back I went to the Waldorf,
where, once again, I could find no copies of
our paper--the page-one headline read "Forum
bans Earth Times distribution at the Waldorf"--in
the main lobby.
I
covered a workshop on agriculture and trade,
moderated
by an executive of the World Bank
and bringing together ministers of agriculture,
the heads of the FAO and the Rockefeller Foundation,
NGOs, business leaders and top-rank academics.
Then I was summoned to a news conference being
given by the newspaper's publisher, Theodore
W. (Ted) Kheel. He announced that Forum officials
had relented and were permitting distribution
of the paper in the hotel, which he called "a
triumph for the First Amendment."
A few hours later, Klaus Schwab, President
of the Forum, also held a news conference.
He declined to answer any questions about the
treatment accorded to The Earth Times, to me
or my colleagues, but he did announce that
the Forum would not be returning to New York
next year--although he didn't say why.
From what I have seen of the Forum, it is
clear to me that its work could be of enormous
value to our planet, but that value could be
compromised if it fails to stay on the right
side of the fine line between exclusiveness
and arrogance. But that's just one man's opinion.
In any case, the event is over. The circus
has left town. And I too can afford the luxury
of a sigh of relief. These people do some fine
work, but it sure is hell to have to spend
time with them.
|
