The British Economist newspaper published on 6/16/2023, on its website, a negative report on some of conditions in Egypt, including many inaccuracies and lies, in an approach that lacks most professional standards recognized globally and are in forc...
The British Economist newspaper published on 6/16/2023, on its website, a negative report on some of conditions in Egypt, including many inaccuracies and lies, in an approach that lacks most professional standards recognized globally and are in force in the field of media.
In response to this report and the inaccuracies it contains, the State Information Service decided to summon the correspondence of "The Economist" in Egypt to hand him a letter of protest against what was stated in the report, demanding the newspaper to be objective and impartial, to conform to journalism ethics when dealing with Egypt's affairs, and to consider opinion of concerned authorities to covering all opinions and points of views, in compliance with rules and ethics of journalism and the media profession.
Oops! This image does not follow our content guidelines. To continue publishing, please remove it or upload a different image.
The State Information Service issued a statement refuting the fallacies and allegations contained in the report of the British newspaper. The SIS statement said: The Economist report violated all rules and ethics of journalistic profession and included repeated uncorroborated sayings and slinging accusations, relying on a number of sources that are all unknown, in addition to publishing erroneous figures and incorrect data without citing any credible source, in addition to other allegations and misinformation that indicate a lack of knowledge about what is happening in Egypt on the political, economic, social and cultural levels".
The SIS statement said: One of the most important rules of journalism profession is the necessity of mentioning the sources from which the reporter or the writer draws information, especially when reporting facts, data or opinions, as well as being keen to consider the opinion and position of all parties to the issue to impartially cover all points of view.
In flagrant violation of the aforementioned rules, The Economist report is considered partial, biased, offensive and a deliberate distortion. It does not consider any Egyptian party to seek precision of data and information the report contained before publishing. In addition, the report cites (13) sources for information and opinions it contained, including one well-known source, which is a Lebanese researcher, and quoted an uncorroborated opinion, while the (12) other sources are completely unknown.
Regarding figures included in the report, the SIS statement said: In an economic newspaper, like The Economist, figures and proportions are of great importance, and shall be subject to strict controls to investigate accuracy. This was contradicted in the report, which elaborated on listing economic figures and data without controls and without citing any source, including the claim that rates of food inflation in Egypt is 60%, without citing any source to back up his allegation, although official data of monthly and yearly core and general inflation in Egypt is always announced.
Adopting the exact approach, the report claimed, without citing any source, that more than half of Egyptians are deemed to be poor - and added that aid of gulf countries to Egypt is $ 100 bn, and that the cost of the administrative capital is $ 58 bn, and the cost of railways is $ 23 bn, and other economic figures and data, without referring to a single Egyptian or international source who agrees or supports these figures, and without explaining the breakdown of the amount, areas of expenditure, and the importance in the field of rebuilding the infrastructure of the economy and society, which the report itself praised for its achievement in the past ten years. Rather, it claimed a reduction in education and health allocations, contradicting the reality that the budget has been doubled in the past ten years.
