THE attack on Geo TV is a significant event in the history of the media in Pakistan. Not only was it shown in full detail repeatedly by the channel itself, it was also covered by every other respectable private channel in the country.The print media also came out with editorials, columns and letters to the editor in support of the freedom of the media.
In Dickens’s memorable phrase “it was the best of times; it was the worst of times”. “Best” because the media of this country made it clear that it would not be browbeaten; “worst” because the state, or at least some of its functionaries, could descend to such levels of hooliganism against such a big TV channel in full public view.
Perhaps it was the media protest that led the state to make amends but the larger question is whether the media is coming of age, or whether only a section of the media will enjoy relative protection in exchange for not rocking the boat too much. This remains to be seen, but the past can show what trends have prevailed.
That the press has always been gagged by functionaries of the state is nothing new. A brave man, the late Zamir Niazi recorded this phenomenon in three major publications: Press in Chains, Press Under Siege and the Web of Censorship. Some of his essays on the same theme were published posthumously under the title of Fettered Freedom. These books narrate the sorry saga of harassment of journalists in Pakistan, the locking up of independent media personalities, the closing down of dissenting publications and the denial of print paper and advertisements to independent publications.Considering that the press functioned under very draconian laws during Ayub Khan’s dictatorship, the much touted freedom of the press at present is to be celebrated. However, it is not wholly true that this freedom has come since General Musharraf’s rule. It has been on the rise since Muhammad Khan Junejo became the prime minister in 1985 while Ziaul Haq was still ruling behind the scenes. It was necessary for the new face of the Zia regime to give some space to journalism. As it happened, there were many courageous and competent journalists who took advantage of the new space to create a new kind of journalism that was brave and critical of the authorities.
Such brave people had always been there but had been denied space. Still, if one looks at the editorials of I.H. Burney, Mazhar Ali Khan and Razia Bhatti, one cannot help but be impressed by their candour and courage. I have mentioned only those giant trailblazers who are no more but there are many who are alive and still going strong.
The only reason for not mentioning them is that the list is long and leaving out some of these living heroes, which is inevitable, in a column, is invidious. The freedom was taken; it was not given free of cost.
There were also some other factors which made the press strong. One was the globalisation of the means of communication and the near impossibility of maintaining the kind of secrecy and state control which the Soviet Union could do in the fifties.
Secondly, the business potential of the media was so huge as to have made owners pour in millions of rupees into new ventures. As media outlets competed with each other and hired intelligent young people they also broke free of state control.
Both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif tried to muzzle the media — Nawaz Sharif making the greater blunder in the Najam Sethi case — but the media rose to the occasion and the government of the day had to retreat. Meanwhile, as many media reports made clear, individual journalists were intimidated, beaten up in public and privately and the old tactics of denying advertisements and paper were never stopped.
In short, when General Musharraf arrived on the scene in October 1999 the media had been enjoying relative freedom for 10 years at least if not more. It had reached a certain level of independence and it had created a culture of defiance where the government was concerned, while also subjecting itself to self-censorship in matters of religion and the military.
General Musharraf continued this state of affairs. This was very wise of him because if he had chosen to coerce the press he would have alienated even that part of it which either supported him genuinely or was happy to be co-opted by him. As more TV channels came up, the internal dynamics of the media made it stronger. However, all sections of the media have not enjoyed the same degree of freedom.
Let us take two of the most recent reports concerning this lack of freedom. The first is called Watching the Watchdog. It has been researched and edited by Matiullah Jan and Zafarullah Khan. It points out that the way news is presented is such as to privilege the official structure of power. Certain protocol personalities (president, prime minister etc) are given much coverage and the time taken for this by itself favours the official version of the news.
These, however, are subtle methods of introducing bias which is well established even in real democracies. What is less subtle is the bribing of journalists. Zamir Niazi has brought this up again and again. If the state indulges in bribing journalists it is killing the freedom of the press just as it is doing that when it intimidates them. Both cases create sycophants and opportunists or cowards who cannot protect democratic freedoms or those who are oppressed by the executive.
The more disturbing report, however, is called the South Asia Media Monitor (2006) covering excesses against journalists in South Asia. Among many reports there is one which says that in May 2005 Pemra proposed a bill in parliament to curtail the freedom of the electronic media. The report has also touched upon brutality of the kind which creates great doubts about the freedom of the press. It names journalists who have been arrested, held incommunicado, abducted, intimidated, roughed up, tortured, implicated in false cases, even murdered.
For instance, Hayatullah, a journalist, was abducted in December 2005 and found dead in June 2006. Muneer Ahmad Sangi, a photographer of the Sindhi daily Kawish, was shot dead in May 2006. Maqbool Hussain Siyal, a correspondent of a news agency, was gunned down in D.I.Khan. Malik Muhammad Ismail, editor of PPI, was killed in Islamabad. Some have been abducted and traumatised. Still others have been subjected to harsh and cruel treatment not authorised by any court of law. Some are reported to have been implicated in false cases. In short, the profession of journalism remains as dangerous in General Musharrraf’s time as it had been previously.
While the better-known English and Urdu publications and major TV channels enjoy relative freedom, working journalists, especially from the Sindhi, Pashto or Balochi press, fight for their lives and freedom in obscure corners of the country. They too want to publish what they see as the truth but they are more vulnerable to rough treatment because a part of the media is not free and they belong to the poor and marginalised sections of it.
The media’s role as the protector of the rule of law, supporter of the independence of the judiciary, major strength of the right to dissent and as the voice of civil society has been strengthened in the present judicial crisis.
By giving the protesting lawyers their right to be heard the media has built up much respect for itself. It is now up to the media not to give in to either the stick or the carrot. If any section of the media now stops reporting the whole truth without fear or favour it will always be mistrusted by the public. But, despite all this, the media has not come of age yet though it is on its way there. It still does not protect its own members nor is it run by syndicates of journalists.
The media will come of age when marginalised journalists and small publications are protected, and also when unions of journalists rather than owners, control the press. If the media gains real freedom, a free democratic culture is a strong possibility. The present crisis has strengthened the media which is the only silver lining in a sky of black, ominous clouds.
Source: Daily Dawn
Date: 27.03.2007
No comments:
Post a Comment