The farcical ‘freedom’
“The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure” — Thomas Jefferson.
President General Pervez Musharraf has on numerous occasions claimed that he firmly believes in the freedom of the press and that the media in Pakistan is completely free. With due respect, I would beg to differ with Mr. President as the situation on the ground says otherwise. In recent years, the opening of many new private FM radio stations and numerous independent television channels has been a good change for an information-starved country and the credit must be given where it is due — the media is relatively freer than it was during the past regimes, but even then the reality of press freedom is far from being ideal. The days of the ‘midnight knock’, open intimidation and complete censorship are over, yet some hangovers of the past regimes still continue to haunt the press. This is the age of media management, therefore, instead of direct censorship, the government adopts ‘indirect’ methods.
The electronic and print media rely heavily on advertisements in order to survive. Although the private sector gives out many ads, the government sector ads make up a large chunk of media sponsors. Therefore, these government ads are an important part of the bread and butter of any channel or newspaper. If any news report or comment does not appeal to the government’s taste-buds, the ads may be withdrawn. In order to appease the government, some reports/comments that are bound to displease the government are either censored or completely dropped.
The other tactic adopted by the establishment is ‘press advice’. The government is sharp enough not to resort to a written form, but the occasional telephone call clearly spells out the message: ‘Do as we say or face the music.’
Then there is the method of ‘spin’. The establishment has an entire stable of paid writers, who keep inserting government propaganda in their columns. These columnists have a similar style of writing, in which the content and the tone reeks of government backing. For example, when the government claimed that India was involved in Balochistan’s insurgency, there was constant repetition by these columnists with regard to such accusations in their articles, making them sound plausible. Even though the government has still not provided any kind of proof to the media, the excuse of ‘sensitive information’ has grown too old and unacceptable in this day and age. The media does not have access to information and, thus, cannot verify if there is any truth to these accusations or not. In the absence of any evidence, the government is taking full advantage of the situation, making it a perfect case of ‘give a dog a bad name and hang it’. These columns are then sent to every print media outlet, and those who refuse to give space to these write-ups will suffer the fate of being ‘ad-less’. When these one-sided views appear in every mainstream newspaper, it somehow gets stuck in the subconscious of the reader, until it comes to be believed as truth. The constant repetition of the government stance in the form of such columns takes its toll and sometimes boggles even the most intelligent of readers. This is one of the most dishonest forms of media manipulation.
Last week, at the 18th awards ceremony of the All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS), the president declared that the government would facilitate access to information. If the president is serious about fulfilling his promise of a free press, then no information should be withheld from the media. Why has the government not allowed the media personnel to visit Balochistan and Waziristan? Accepted that these areas are volatile, but if ample security is provided to journalists, they would not shy away from venturing there. Even if proper security is not provided, the journalists are not cowards when such an important national issue is involved. The ‘facilitation’ by the government is conspicuous by its absence. It makes one believe that something underhanded is going on in these places, which the government wants to hide. If there is nothing to hide, the government must let the media report freely.
Asia Media reports that the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) has disputed the government’s claim of “complete freedom of the press” in the country and said that the situation, on the contrary, is quite gloomy. In its “Report on Media -- 2005-06”, the PFUJ cites the “suspicious circumstances around the kidnapping of Hayatullah Khan (a North Waziristan-based journalist), over one dozen court cases under draconian laws, arrests of two editors and the baton-charging of journalists’ demonstrations in Lahore and Islamabad” as examples of “repression, intimidation and harassment of the Pakistani media”.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.” Respecting the media’s independence and recognising the fundamental right of press freedom enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are the pre-requisites for transparency and the rule of law.
If Pakistan claims to be a democratic country, the government must understand that a free media cannot flourish in societies where parliament is subservient and the judiciary submissive to the rulers. It is imperative to eliminate the philosophy that infringes upon the freedom of the press. A press that is free to be objective and open about the government is absolutely essential for a democratic nation. Although there is a chance that the press might take advantage of its freedom and publish slanderous gossip in order to deceive the people, yet the government must leave it to the intelligent readership to decipher between right and wrong. A genuine democracy cannot be so described without complete freedom of the press. In a democratic country, the rights of its citizens would not be encroached upon, and freedom of the press is a major right of every human being. “The free communication of thought and opinion is one of the most precious rights of man; every citizen may therefore speak, write and print freely,” the statement by the French National Assembly in 1789 says it all.
Although no press is completely free, because certain situations require governmental measures to restrain the media, such as national security or international relations, etc., but these restraints should not be used unnecessarily. The government does need to monitor the press, but the restraint should only come when it is absolutely necessary. It must be understood that a free press is the most vital ingredient for the democratic functioning of any country. It is the right of an individual that requires him to attain the truth and if the way to that information is blocked by anyone (especially the state), his inherent democratic right is violated. Freedom of media is important for all countries, but especially for countries like Pakistan whose journey towards development and economic and political stability is still in progress.
President General Pervez Musharraf has on numerous occasions claimed that he firmly believes in the freedom of the press and that the media in Pakistan is completely free. With due respect, I would beg to differ with Mr. President as the situation on the ground says otherwise. In recent years, the opening of many new private FM radio stations and numerous independent television channels has been a good change for an information-starved country and the credit must be given where it is due — the media is relatively freer than it was during the past regimes, but even then the reality of press freedom is far from being ideal. The days of the ‘midnight knock’, open intimidation and complete censorship are over, yet some hangovers of the past regimes still continue to haunt the press. This is the age of media management, therefore, instead of direct censorship, the government adopts ‘indirect’ methods.
The electronic and print media rely heavily on advertisements in order to survive. Although the private sector gives out many ads, the government sector ads make up a large chunk of media sponsors. Therefore, these government ads are an important part of the bread and butter of any channel or newspaper. If any news report or comment does not appeal to the government’s taste-buds, the ads may be withdrawn. In order to appease the government, some reports/comments that are bound to displease the government are either censored or completely dropped.
The other tactic adopted by the establishment is ‘press advice’. The government is sharp enough not to resort to a written form, but the occasional telephone call clearly spells out the message: ‘Do as we say or face the music.’
Then there is the method of ‘spin’. The establishment has an entire stable of paid writers, who keep inserting government propaganda in their columns. These columnists have a similar style of writing, in which the content and the tone reeks of government backing. For example, when the government claimed that India was involved in Balochistan’s insurgency, there was constant repetition by these columnists with regard to such accusations in their articles, making them sound plausible. Even though the government has still not provided any kind of proof to the media, the excuse of ‘sensitive information’ has grown too old and unacceptable in this day and age. The media does not have access to information and, thus, cannot verify if there is any truth to these accusations or not. In the absence of any evidence, the government is taking full advantage of the situation, making it a perfect case of ‘give a dog a bad name and hang it’. These columns are then sent to every print media outlet, and those who refuse to give space to these write-ups will suffer the fate of being ‘ad-less’. When these one-sided views appear in every mainstream newspaper, it somehow gets stuck in the subconscious of the reader, until it comes to be believed as truth. The constant repetition of the government stance in the form of such columns takes its toll and sometimes boggles even the most intelligent of readers. This is one of the most dishonest forms of media manipulation.
Last week, at the 18th awards ceremony of the All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS), the president declared that the government would facilitate access to information. If the president is serious about fulfilling his promise of a free press, then no information should be withheld from the media. Why has the government not allowed the media personnel to visit Balochistan and Waziristan? Accepted that these areas are volatile, but if ample security is provided to journalists, they would not shy away from venturing there. Even if proper security is not provided, the journalists are not cowards when such an important national issue is involved. The ‘facilitation’ by the government is conspicuous by its absence. It makes one believe that something underhanded is going on in these places, which the government wants to hide. If there is nothing to hide, the government must let the media report freely.
Asia Media reports that the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) has disputed the government’s claim of “complete freedom of the press” in the country and said that the situation, on the contrary, is quite gloomy. In its “Report on Media -- 2005-06”, the PFUJ cites the “suspicious circumstances around the kidnapping of Hayatullah Khan (a North Waziristan-based journalist), over one dozen court cases under draconian laws, arrests of two editors and the baton-charging of journalists’ demonstrations in Lahore and Islamabad” as examples of “repression, intimidation and harassment of the Pakistani media”.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.” Respecting the media’s independence and recognising the fundamental right of press freedom enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are the pre-requisites for transparency and the rule of law.
If Pakistan claims to be a democratic country, the government must understand that a free media cannot flourish in societies where parliament is subservient and the judiciary submissive to the rulers. It is imperative to eliminate the philosophy that infringes upon the freedom of the press. A press that is free to be objective and open about the government is absolutely essential for a democratic nation. Although there is a chance that the press might take advantage of its freedom and publish slanderous gossip in order to deceive the people, yet the government must leave it to the intelligent readership to decipher between right and wrong. A genuine democracy cannot be so described without complete freedom of the press. In a democratic country, the rights of its citizens would not be encroached upon, and freedom of the press is a major right of every human being. “The free communication of thought and opinion is one of the most precious rights of man; every citizen may therefore speak, write and print freely,” the statement by the French National Assembly in 1789 says it all.
Although no press is completely free, because certain situations require governmental measures to restrain the media, such as national security or international relations, etc., but these restraints should not be used unnecessarily. The government does need to monitor the press, but the restraint should only come when it is absolutely necessary. It must be understood that a free press is the most vital ingredient for the democratic functioning of any country. It is the right of an individual that requires him to attain the truth and if the way to that information is blocked by anyone (especially the state), his inherent democratic right is violated. Freedom of media is important for all countries, but especially for countries like Pakistan whose journey towards development and economic and political stability is still in progress.
Comments