Pakistan’s politics repeats itself first as tragedy, then as farce. So, while you may initially be inclined to shed tears over it, a better reaction, I humbly suggest, might be to enjoy the absurdities for what they are. It is the greatest comic show, better than anything you could find on Netflix. And it certainly will take your mind off the weepfests that pass for drama on our entertainment channels.

Don’t believe me? Look up what any government ever in Pakistan has said about the state of the economy it has inherited from their predecessors. Put another way, nobody ever came into power extolling the virtues and financial brilliance of the people they replaced. Sometimes I feel we only have coups, summary dismissals of elected governments and engineered elections in order for an age-old tradition to be fulfilled, almost as if too long a period of stability would upset the space-time continuum in which Pakistan’s economic position can be periodically categoriSed as ‘fragile’. And we are nothing without our traditions.

This is, of course, not to say that we’ve had any geniuses running our economy in the past. I mean, if there’s one thing nobody has ever accused Ishaq Dar of, it’s genius.

This year, in order to fulfil the demands of tradition and to illustrate just how precarious a position we were in, we auctioned off some cars and buffaloes. This may not have made a dent in the economy but it did speed up the elevation of Minister of State Murad Saeed into a full minister. Mr Saeed has a reputation for speed anyway, first acquired in the examination hall where he managed to take three (or was it five?) exams at the same time, but he reinforced it this year by attempting to osmose through a glass door. Nobody begrudges him his nose for speedy shortcuts.

As if that were not enough, to reinforce that we are passing through uncertain economic times, we managed to destroy thousands of markets and livelihoods across Pakistan in the name of anti-encroachment drives. Because nothing helps revive the economy better than lots of people out of work and pocket. As long as it’s not well-heeled encroachers setting up housing societies for the well-heeled.

On the flip side, the government announced cheap helicopter rides and the premier told us about chickens and eggs, phantom gas which could power Pakistan for 50 years or not at all, and Chinese trains running at the speed of light. The latter, if the principles of physics are anything to go by, would result in time flowing backwards — which might not be the best of things for Naya Pakistan but would certainly help in putting us on the path to greatness, since the road to greatness is apparently paved with U-turns. Ask Hitler or Napoleon if you have any doubts.

But if the government’s material is ever lagging, we always have the opposition to take up the slack. Is there anything funnier than Maulana Fazlur Rehman and Jamaat-i-Islami’s Siraj ul Haq struggling to remain relevant? One keeps trying to organise ‘All-Party’ Conferences that nobody attends, the other rains fire and brimstone about a previous government he was part of, hoping nobody notices. Then we have Leader of the Opposition Shahbaz Sharif whose biggest concern seems to be how to adopt his famous one-finger-on-his-cheek pose while shuttling between prison and parliament. His apparent hope is that if he were to keep not saying anything remotely critical of the establishment, that he will be allowed to adopt his favourite pose in the future.

Meanwhile, brother Nawaz Sharif seems to be on a Monopoly board, where he owns Mayfair thanks to some rather generous Qataris but keeps drawing the ‘Go to Jail – Do Not Pass Go’ card. If nothing else, this year offered Pakistanis a geography lesson about the significance of little old Panama. Asif Zardari on the other hand, has maintained his reputation for saying things that only make it worse. This year the former president of the Islamic Republic wondered what the problem was in creating fake bank accounts. He called it “normal business practice.” And he also called an alleged killer of more than 400 people in fake police encounters “a brave kid.” While others tell each other to ‘get real’, Zardari opts for ‘get surreal.’

If you still want more, I can point you in the direction of Canadians and Egyptians who’ve had their Twitter accounts threatened for allegedly contravening Pakistani narratives while Pakistani sleuths rise to the challenge of mythical 5th Generation Warfare with hammer and tongs in hand.

But in terms of ratings, no show this year has beat The Dam Show. We may never reach the longed-for funding target through crowdfunding and random enforced contributions by land-grabbers hoping to have their cases quashed, but at least we got good memes out of it.

This year has been great for celebrities who got married. We are way more excited to see their wedding pictures releasing than their movies. And celebrities definitely know how to cash in on even their weddings. Who would know that better than DeepVeer who had their wedding in Italy — which seemed more like a top secret mission where guests were not allowed to take any pictures because the couple was going to make the official release themselves. And boy, how we waited for those pictures! Good thing that their family didn’t ruin it for them. If it was my khandan, they would be the first ones to leak the pictures kyun ke kisi ki khushi bardasht nahi hoti.

This year, three fellow comedians got married too, probably just so they have more material for their stand-up. I mean I’d do that too in case I think I’m running out of jokes.

Actor/comedian Faiza Saleem got married — you heard it right, Danger Dadi is off the market. She was seen making a grand entrance with her Dhinchak moves on her mehndi. But I guess people wanted to talk more about Jibran Nasir for his killer moves to a Govinda song. You really don’t get to see that every day. After watching that, we definitely need Jibran for president!

Then came the Wedding of Endless Events: #Aineeb’s wedding, which sounded like a third person named Aineeb was getting married. I think someone might want to check if there are any more events left, like ‘The First Time He Took Me To Dinner’ event.

Then, Amir Liaquat jumped on the bandwagon but he didn’t have too many events because the Second Time Round a person doesn’t make the mistake of spending too much on their wedding. But Liaquat definitely made the most of post-wedding public appearances on TV morning shows. And who better to cash in on that than morning shows. The highlight of his marriage has been his wife calling him (pyar se) ‘Panther’ … after which the jungle kingdom started a protest. Yeah, you might want to take consent from the animal before you start calling your significant other after it.

How can we not include the Bollywood–Hollywood milan courtesy Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas, where people made beautiful memes of Priyanka’s dress looking like pencil shavings. I haven’t watched Game of Thrones so I don’t know any Sophie Turner jokes. Sorry if I’m missing out on that.

Then came the Grand Ambani wedding where we saw what ‘Paisa phaink tamasha dekh’ literally means. Beyonce was flown down to India to perform at the wedding. I guess that was the best present for all the bride’s single friends; they could shake to ‘Single Ladies’ and not feel like they’re missing out on getting hitched this year. It was a celebrity-packed wedding, where we saw Salman Khan and Ranbir Kapoor not in the limelight but just down to background dancers, and where Aishwariya Rai and Aamir Khan served food. Seeing all this, I guess they booked Imran Hashmi for the wedding night just to fill up the background.

But the year is about to end and, with it, so is the wedding season. Can’t wait for the next wedding season — because who doesn’t love dressing up, dancing to Bollywood songs and eating free food! And, oh, stalking celebrities’ wedding photos.

FREE AT LAST

For the first time in our history, we are witnessing the blessed and festive days of December bring this year to a close. With the last vestiges of 2018 becoming vapour as a result of the warmth generated by the unprecedented levels of goodwill, bonhomie and camaraderie permeating our entire nation, we bow in gratitude to those whose sagacity and wisdom have brought us to this magnificent pass (once again).

This national euphoria is making its presence felt in a myriad ways, chief among them being the total, utter and complete freedom to express one’s opinion. Citizens, especially those belonging to the print, electronic and social media, can’t believe their luck. Journalists have never felt this free and liberated. In fact, many have felt so free that they have gone and involuntarily liberated themselves from their jobs, columns, television shows and Twitter accounts. Chants of “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!” have been ringing ceaselessly from press clubs across our glorious republic.

I, for one, can’t breathe with excitement. Gone are the days when one would think twice — or even three or four times — before running a potential story idea by one’s editor to gauge their feedback and approval. Fortunately, we now live in a different world. The strength and confidence true freedom gives one is indescribable. There is no stopping me now when I consider story ideas that have a profound and lasting impact on the political and social fabric of our society… ideas which demand answers to deep, important, even searing questions, such as:

• What do state-owned buffaloes think of being auctioned?

• How does owning a green Samsung phone cover impact the social lives of women named Zubaida Bano?

• How many Anjums does it take to change a light bulb?

• Do some people from South Waziristan shun mainstream media because they are Amish? Or does the mainstream media shun them because it is Amish?

• Is the light of speed brighter than the sound of silence?

• When will braided beards become a trend among Generation Xers?

• Do the wealthy and powerful have a conscience? And if so, what planet do they keep it on?

• Why are red M&Ms better than all other M&Ms?

• Why must we look both ways before going to bed?

• Who do you think stole your lunch money in grade 4?

• Does the establishment know you are rebelling against it when you wear loud, multi-coloured socks?

• How much sohan halwa does your expatriate khala buy when the rupee is unexpectedly devalued?

• What would it take to get Supreme Court advocates to wear red pants in court?

• How many cups of water does it take to fill up a dam?

• Can auctioned, second-hand cars be turned into universities?

• Is it true that 75 percent of female penguins in Antartica are addicted to ice?

• How many calories does positive reporting burn in a day?

The significance of these (and other such) stories will become clear in the coming new year. One’s free, completely unencumbered, liberty-laden shall dance with glee and speak with abandon of everything one’s mortal heart desires. From braided beards and light of speed to Amish Waziristanis and cups of dam, 2019 appears a year that is destined to set our media free and rid it of the unnecessary accoutrements of credibility, import and veracity. Inshallah!

To quote from hazrat George Michael’s 1990 hit single Freedom:

“All we have to do now, us take these lies and make them true somehow.”

Farid Alvie was born. He currently lives.
He tweets @faridalvie

Journalists have never felt this free and liberated. In fact, many have felt so free that they have gone and involuntarily liberated themselves from their jobs, columns, television shows and Twitter accounts. Chants of “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!” have been ringing ceaselessly from press clubs across our glorious republic.

Positive Reporting

Anti-establishment journalism isn’t what it used to be. You would have noticed the whining of the anti-establishment journalists/activists about censorship and jobs, etc. The whole revolutionary glamour associated with going against establishment is rapidly diminishing. Also, many have stopped drinking to slow ageing. Now even the anti-establishment types want to live longer, look younger, make more money and have a secure life. I have started to suspect that it’s so much easier to just become pro-establishment instead of treading this thin line. This, then, is my first attempt at positive reporting: a round-up of 2018 news.

We got to know this year that 75 percent of female students of schools in Islamabad are addicted to ice. This is such great news because ever since Breaking Bad, the Lyari-maarka adulterated crystal meth called sheesha was selling for 3000 rupees a gram. So, many students affording that or more means our per capita income isn’t as bad as some would make us believe. Also, the fact put paid to the gender discrimination nonsense because in comparison a paltry 45 percent of boys are using the drug.

This year also brought the anti-establishment and pro-establishment forces to the same page over anything. While, the two groups have traditionally struggled to agree on what kind of a state we want to be, with what sort of relations with which country, there’s finally agreement over the need to be united against the Higher Education Commission, since it took so long to attest young Mazari’s degrees, upsetting mother and daughter alike.

While ICC is well within its right to go after users of performance enhancing drugs, it always puzzled the more sensitive souls what its beef was with recreational drugs. At most it should concern a country’s board if a player is underperforming because of drugs. I too was of this view, but 2018 proved how wrong I was when Ahmed Shehzad got caught in a random dope test and remained banned throughout the year.

This year was a godsend for op-ed editors of the country. The censorship and positive reporting thing worked for them like a charm. All the boring op-ed pieces which they couldn’t refuse, because either they were by ‘senior’ journalists or sons thereof, now are respectfuly told their piece can’t be published because of its explosive content. Later, when it gets published on some website with a note that this couldn’t make it to the newspaper because of draconian censorship, it works beautifully for all parties: the writer, by massaging his ego, and the reader who gets to know in advance that the piece is a dud.

The WWE wrestlers not only visited Pakistan twice this year but also went to the Wagah border once and chanted ‘Pakistan zindabad’ along with the passionate crowd. Some of them allegedly also hurled abuses at the Indian soldiers. This was a resounding slap on the face of people who thought we were facing isolation in the world.

After the acrimonious general elections, and the bad taste in the mouth of many when the party head of the (now) opposition party was incarcerated, the ruling party and opposition displayed great sportsmanship by supporting each other when a minority member of parliament attempted to table a bill to ban liquor across-the-board since no religion (including his own) permitted consumption of alcohol. The ruling and the opposition parties, in a beautiful and bipartisan display of tolerance for minority religions, voted the bill down without debate.

Earlier this year, when the dollar price hiked in the previous government’s term, Miftah Ismil, the then finance minister, had said that it would help our export. It’s heartening to see that the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, after coming into power, is continuing with the better policies of the last government.

This was a particularly good year in many other respects too. Sadly, the word limit doesn’t allow me to go any further. Can’t wait for 2019.

The writer is a singer/songwriter, journalist and a documentary-maker.
He runs the vlog ‘Ali Uncensored‘ on YouTube

#Men Too

Hi, how are you? I’m doing well too. Should we start, or would you like some water? Okay then.

So I’m sure you heard that earlier this year a very famous musician was accused of sexual harassment. It was very damaging to his career, the poor guy is doing Mobilink ads now, I feel so bad for him.

Then a teacher was accused. Then an artist. Then another teacher. Then a women’s hockey team coach. Last year it was a cricket selector. You get the idea. Women are calling out every man they meet for harassment.

Now I’m not a misogynist but, if this goes on unchecked, there will be no men left to work with. All men cannot possibly be sexual harassers. Certainly not me. I’ve never harassed a woman. I don’t even know how to spell the word.

I have so many female friends. They’ve never said anything.

Who said that? On what group? Well that’s not right. I am very cordial with them. And I don’t know about everyone else, but my mother is a woman too. As is my sister. As are my colleagues.

So? I have a crush on a colleague, yes. No, I just follow her on Twitter. And Instagram. And Facebook. Wait, not Facebook. She never accepted my friend request. I wonder why. She probably doesn’t log in very often.

Er, the what the who now? It’s because I make her uncomfortable? What are you talking about. Did she tell you this? What else?

I sit too close to her in meetings? I’m always right behind her waiting for the coffee machine? But it’s because there’s a very small area at the office. Often you have to squeeze past someone.

This personal space idea is such a hipster obsession. When I was growing up, anyone could sit wherever they wanted. Well no, they couldn’t sit ON someone. How is that relevant? Look if you’re there to make money you should be professional about these things. It’s like they say, naukeri ki tou nakhra kya.

Haha, what! I’m always asking to share her lipstick-laden cigrattes? Well, sometimes, but I always forget my pack at home. Is that a crime now?

You should read some of the other opinions too not just feminists’. Many of our public intellectuals have noted how confusing sexual harassment can be. Like Hamza Ali Abbasi. He tweeted to ask isn’t this the same thing as flirting? After all where does one draw the line? What was that, on the woman in question? So very funny. Not.

Don’t you see how it’s confusing. You have a few drinks, are relaxing on the sofa and suddenly find yourself in the neighbour’s house grabbing someone’s something or the other. It happens.

It’s all harmless, isn’t it? A friendly caress, a few whispered words of appreciation. Other than subjecting someone to bad breath, where’s the harm in that?

If I see someone who’s dressed a certain way I know she’s out to have fun and flirt a little. It’s just casual. That’s why I always end up asking her if she sees us having kids together.

And who’s to say she doesn’t enjoy the attention? Certainly not the woman herself. What would she know, she’s not a man. I think. I hope.

Next thing you know, you’ll be telling me it’s not okay to comment on her dress at the work place. Or ask her to wear black nailpolish, because it suits her. To tell her to dress more feminine. Make her stay at work late to chit chat. Insist she sit next to me in the car, discussing how feminists are ruining society these days.

These women who want to be equal with men but can’t take the stress that comes with it. Sitting behind a desk all day ordering tea, then complaining about how bad it’s made then send a man to go get some biscuits. The worst days are when I have to sign things without reading them.

Also … oh, sorry, was that my hand on your knee. The chair is just so deceptively close to me. I’ll sit back down instead of hovering over it. By the way, you should come to my dinner next week. You won’t need to bring anyone along, you know most of the people there.

Flirting is healthy, isn’t it? Well, no, not that kind of healthy. You can’t lose weight by flirting.

You know what I mean, you meet a lady and she’s super attractive and she comes close to greet you and you let your hand linger on her back for a few minutes. Even when she walks into another room. Any room. Other than the restroom. I’m not a pervert.

Basically, women should have thicker skins. No, not like a labourer’s hands. Then you lose your feminity…femininty … am I saying this right? Anyway, smooth and supple skin but thick on the inside. I know there’s no skin on the inside. I’m trying to make a point here.

Would I be okay with my sister flirting with someone? Well, no, but that’s different. I would worry that she meets the wrong kind of guy. Like me? Oh, come on, I’m a perfect gentleman. Oh, sorry, there’s the hand again.

Do you think men should start a #MeToo as well? Like the ones who are unjustly accused?

You do??? Oh, you mean for the men who HAVE harassed a woman. Like: I did it. Me too.

I don’t think I’ve gotten through to you at all. Say why don’t you drop by the house later tonight and we can discuss it over some wine? Sound good? Hello, why are you walking away? Does this mean a no?

Okay, we’ll forget the wine and just watch some movies. I wonder what’s gotten into her. She’s the best therapist I’ve had. It’s her own office she’s walking out of.

Dawn

When Pakistan’s last military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, assumed power on October 12, 1999, he was hailed—both by the local and international media—as a liberal hero. He imposed no restrictions on the media, and within three years of coming to power, he allowed private news channels to become operational in the country.

Pakistani media was free like never before. It was making fun of everybody under the sun—military rulers, religious scholars and popular political leaders—in comedy shows that private news channels started to air within months of them becoming operational. It was considered the dawn of a new era of freedom of expression. Before General Musharraf was ousted from power, more than 40 news channels had begun airing news bulletins and current affairs programmes on their screens.

Former officials associated with his government point out that it was a well-thought-out move by the military government to enact new and liberal laws to create operating space for private news channels. It’s possible that it didn’t occur to the military establishment that the new forces of media freedom they had unleashed would eventually turn against them.

A retired official associated with Musharraf’s presidency says the military thought that Pakistani news channels would “pull the Pakistani public away from watching Indian news channels—a habit which was harming the country’s national interests badly”.

But for many, this media revolution was nothing more than an illusion. In their opinion, Musharraf’s regime had started using high-handed tactics against journalists much before the first political crisis his government faced in March 2007, when the legal community began a political campaign against his government. Musharraf had sacked the then sitting Chief Justice of Pakistan, which was followed by a countrywide protest by the legal fraternity. Many senior media personalities came out in the open against the government and in support of the lawyers.

Mazhar Abbas, the former secretary general of the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, says, “Many people thought that General Musharraf banned the media on November 3, 2007, but the process had started much earlier. Early that year, channels received a show-cause notice stating: ‘No programme shall be aired which contains (a) aspersions against the judiciary and the armed forces, (b) any material amounting to contempt of court, (c) contain any abusive comments that when taken in context, tend to or are likely to expose any individual or group or a class of individuals to hatred or contempt’.”

Kargil and the introduction of private channels

The government’s move to liberalise media laws in Pakistan was sparked by a military campaign in 1999 when General Musharraf was serving as Chief of the Army Staff and had not yet staged a coup.

In May 1999, Musharraf launched an incursion into Kargil, a mountainous region of Indian Kashmir. Here the Pakistani and Indian armies faced each other at 18,000 feet. In the spring of 1999, Musharraf sneaked his troops in early, taking the empty Indian positions without a fight. The subsequent war had Pakistan beaten back, withdrawing under US pressure.

At that time, Pakistan Television (PTV) was the only source for television news. Ironically PTV’s credibility among the Pakistani public was so low that the latter turned to Indian news channels for the latest information on the Kargil military crisis. In those days, the prices of illegal satellite dishes soared, since it was the only source to receive transmissions of Indian news channels.

“While the Pakistan military was fighting the Indians in the mountains of Kashmir, the Pakistani public was more eager to listen to Indian reality created by Indian news channels,” says a senior official of the Musharraf government. The retired government official says this was when Musharraf made his plans to introduce private news channels in Pakistan—and his opportunity came when he became President after an October 1999 coup.

The Pakistani media turned out to be highly nationalistic. But at the same time, some sections of it transformed into highly pro-democracy force. This was worrying for the Musharraf government. M Zia-uddin, a veteran journalist and the former editor of Dawn, says the media, as a public sector industry, emerged as “the only pro-democracy force in the country”, something corroborated by senior journalist and political analyst Fasih-ur-Rehman.

The Musharraf government was ousted from power before it could do anything to force any change in the media. But the media’s later “excesses” compelled Musharraf’s successors in the military to contemplate a shift in policy towards the press.

Geo TV and the attack on Hamid Mir

Five days after the attack on the life of renowned Pakistani journalist and television anchorperson, Hamid Mir—he received six bullet injuries—his brother Amir Mir read out Hamid’s statement outside the hospital ICU where Hamid was undergoing treatment. Hamid had been severely injured in a gun attack on April 19, 2014, outside Karachi airport. He had landed half an hour ago and was on his way to the head office of Geo TV to host a special talk show on the increasing violence in Karachi.

Amir Mir, also a senior journalist, told the small group of press people gathered outside the ICU: “My brother has appealed to the media community in Pakistan to be united in the face of growing threats to journalists and our right of freedom of expression from state and non-state actors.”

Hamid’s appeal made perfect sense in the face of growing tensions and war of words in Pakistan’s media industry in the wake of his attack. Within hours of the attack, the division in the Pakistani industry surfaced. Most news channels began accusing Geo TV of serving Indian interests by trying to malign national institutions like the Pakistan Army and intelligence services.

Hamid’s family directly accused the Director-General of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lt General Zaheer-ul-Islam, of masterminding the attack. Hamid endorsed this allegation as well, after regaining consciousness, in the statement his brother read out:

“A few weeks back, a senior ISI official visited my home and told me that my name has appeared on the hit-list. I asked him who made the hit-list, but he didn’t care to inform me about it … I had told the intelligence official who visited my home that in the present circumstances I feel that the threat to my life is coming from the ISI. ISI was not happy with my stance on Balochistan, my support for the trial of Pervez Musharraf and the issue of missing persons (thousands of people who have been allegedly kidnapped by Pakistani intelligence).”

Geo TV broadcast the family’s allegations as breaking news even before Hamid gave his statement. For six hours, the channel emphasised that Lt General Zaheer-ul-Islam was the man behind Hamid’s attack, showing his photo and video clips of his official meetings. Geo TV was utterly alone in this—the rest of the news channels almost entirely blacked out the news of the attack on Hamid apart from brief updates which stated that a senior journalist had been attacked in Karachi.

Almost every channel accused it of hurting national interests and acting as an “Indian agent”. A senior Pakistani journalist said, on condition of anonymity, “It soon became clear that Geo was isolated and rest of the channels were completely siding with the ISI.”

On behalf of the ISI, Pakistan’s Defense Ministry submitted a written complaint to Pakistan’s media regulatory authority (PEMRA), accusing Geo of going against the interest of Pakistan. The four-page complaint—which included the script of news bulletins, tickers and breaking news—stated that “the said reporting has violated the specific terms and conditions of [Geo TV’s] license”, and demanded the immediate cancellation of the license.

There was no dearth of Pakistani journalists and analysts appearing on other news channels supporting this demand. Meanwhile, the Army authorities passed orders to block Geo’s transmissions in cantonment areas.

This would have been an unexpected turn of events for authorities—private news channels which were allowed to operate in Pakistani society to counter the India media were turning their guns against their “creators”. This led the Pakistani state machinery to institute two kinds of countermeasures to prevent private channels from going astray:

a) Hard measures like the discontinuation of giving advertisements to private media.

b) Soft measures like creating a group of cheerleaders among journalists who praise state institutions (no matter what they do) and malign all those who criticise the high-handedness of state institutions.

The result is that Pakistani television channels are now much more pliant than they were four years ago.

Newslaundry

Pakistani media houses are facing a serious financial crunch, leading to downsizing and layoffs. The issue gained prominence after the induction of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI)-led federal government, which stopped releasing pending government advertisement to private media. It warned of a worse situation in the days to come, urging the media houses to rethink their business models and bring innovations rather than relying on revenue generated through government advisements. Around 20 to 40 per cent of the advertisement revenue of different private media houses comes from government advertisements, according to different reports.

Journalists are protesting against the ongoing downsizing in different private media houses. They are condemning these measures leading to layoffs, unnecessary delays in salaries and even non-payment of salaries for months in some media houses.

“There is no doubt we have a very vibrant media in Pakistan. However, there is need to reduce dependability of private media on government advertisements,” Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry tells The News on Sunday. The government used to spend some Rs10 billion on advertisements annually, which was increased up to Rs35 billion in the last years of the government.” According to the minister, this tax-payers’ money was used to bribe and have news run in its favour by the previous government.

He says the situation might have affected some media houses solely depending on government revenue. “There is need to change the business models of such media houses and also to end disparity in salaries of different categories.”

Following the financial crunch, a number of media houses have laid off many staff members and made cuts in salaries of journalists in senior positions. One television channel, Waqt Television, had to close down its operation, while another big media house fired its reporters from many cities. Many are also planning retrenchments and budgetary cuts to deal with this situation, according to some senior journalists.

“We are trying to compile exact figures of the affected media persons. So far, we can say that around 1,000-1,500 workers have lost their jobs or faced cuts in salaries in the past few weeks,” Muhammad Afzal Butt, president of one the main factions of Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) tells TNS.

When asked about the strategy the union is opting to counter this situation, he says, “We are protesting in groups outside press clubs in different cities and have also set up a protest camp in front of parliament urging the government to think about this matter.”

Butt blames the government and its censorship policy which is being used through blocking advertisements, to media houses forcing, them to layoff staffers. “However, we also consider media houses responsible because when they get licenses they assure the government in writing that they have full capacity to generate revenue, but later fail to get business and rely on government advisements.”

The federal government has, recently, constituted a ‘content committee’ to approve the issuance of government advertisements to the print and electronic media. Federal information minister heads the committee and the purpose of the committee is yet to be defined. APNS has expressed concern on this move, terming it a “surgical strike” against the media.

“Instead of imposing curbs on free flow of information and stopping government advertisements, the Information Ministry should hold the owners and managements of TV channels responsible for this situation because they are not paying salaries to their staff and even sacking workers,” says Butt.

“It is an issue that has multiple angles and media censorship is a major aspect of it. The government and unions need to sit together and evolve a better strategy,” he says. However, the federal information minister rules out any censorship behind this move.

“The basic issue of media is its own structure, which is not based on solid and viable grounds. With the fast growth and latest developments in information technology, the shape of media will be totally different 10 years later,” he says. “Media houses should try to bring innovation to generate revenue.”

Meanwhile, a Joint Action Committee of all three major factions of PFUJ has been formed and would start working in the coming days to take up this matter. The unions fear more layoffs and downsizing in the days to come.

The federal government has, recently, constituted a ‘content committee’ to approve the issuance of government advertisements to the print and electronic media. Federal information minister heads the committee and the purpose of the committee is yet to be defined.

All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) has expressed concern on this move, terming it a “surgical strike” against the media and a tool to curb the independence and viability of the media. In a statement, the APNS has condemned this step of the government to control the print and electronic media through “over-centralisation” of government advertisements that are the lifeline of the media’s economy.

The APNS maintains that since the formation of the PTI government, the quantum of federal and provincial governments’ advertisements has declined drastically, causing an acute financial crunch, particularly for the regional and smaller media outlets. The APNS worries that the federal government’s move will result in downsizing and unemployment in the media industry. It urges the federal government to immediately withdraw the policy and let the media play its essential role in the democratic system.

“When you launch an enterprise you have to get a market survey done, and consider its potential, and get estimates of possible clientelle. Unluckily, most of the media houses, especially, channels, do not do this,” says senior journalist M Ziauddin, pointing out the flaws in private media business model. “Many business groups have opened channels for entering power corridors and make a political clout. We know the government and private advertisement cake is very limited and it depends on circulation or rating. Through this formula, obviously, small media houses with less ratings get nothing and it becomes difficult for them to retain employees after a certain period.”

“The government should assure sustainability of these media houses through bank guarantees so that workers do not get affected,” he views.

“Monopoly of some media houses and divided unions with no influence can be a few reasons behind this situation,” says Ziauddin, urging the media houses to rethink, collectively and individually, their business models for better survival. “Otherwise, the government would continue to benefit through such situations and ultimately it would affect democracy where the media would be less independent.”

THE Pakistani media’s tragic flaw is that rather than cover the story, it is too often part of the story. So it is again with regards to media coverage of last week’s TLP protests. All stakeholders — the government, the protesters, the public — had strong opinions on how the media should cover the mayhem. And as often happens, all stakeholders were disappointed.

As the protests gained momentum, the de facto media blackout was observed. Those who value press freedom find blackouts discomfiting; they are after all a form of censorship. They invite the kind of outrage that rightfully followed the decision to ban TV broadcasts and block social media outlets during the Faizabad episode in 2017.

But absolutism falters when people incite murder, violence, civil disobedience. Even those who abhor censorship concede that broadcasting trouble spurs more trouble. Excessive media coverage of provocative statements and protests can lead to even more widespread unrest. In this case, media regulation would have also prevented coverage of some protest leaders’ incendiary statements.There is little sympathy for the media’s dilemmas.

But what about accountability to the public? Such a blackout means that citizens remain uninformed about the nature, scale and location of protests, impacting free movement and public safety. Moreover, there is now scant public record of a three-day period of nationwide vandalism. Citizens seeking compensation for loss of property will sadly find no evidence to back their claims in media reports.

In such sensitive situations, the media’s knee-jerk response is to follow the government’s lead. But what are outlets to do when the government’s communications on a tense situation are more inept than those of the agitators? Consider how the PTI’s federal and public representatives offered contradictory statements on negotiations, while the TLP spokespeople emerged as more accurate sources of information.

These conundrums left the media in the crosshairs of a conflicted public. Some wanted the media to block anti-state voices; others derided the media for failing to cover the protest leaders’ statements, deeming it part of a wider conspiracy. Still others took matters into their own hands, with Pakistani Twitter users rallying the social media platform to ban Khadim Hussain Rizvi’s handle.

Of course, there is little sympathy for the media’s dilemmas. The industry is still accused of irresponsible coverage and debate and, because of this, of being complicit in the targeting of some political personalities. Social media users were also quick to point out that channels that last week refused to air TLP statements were happy to echo the party’s rallying cry and glorify its leadership during the Faizabad sit-in and in the run-up to elections as part of a wider effort to undermine the PML-N.

The media’s about-turns on the party, Aasia Bibi and the blasphemy laws more broadly have several drivers. A main one is the fear factor — media personnel know that few other issues can spark death threats and mob violence as rapidly, and prefer to err on the side of caution.

Another driver is the fact that the industry, ultimately, also comprises several individuals whose reports reflect their ideological positions. The Supreme Court verdict in the Aasia Bibi case has been divisive, and emotions run high on both sides. The media is not isolated from the society on which it reports, and reflects the same schisms as the public.

These drivers explain why the debate has been around how the media covered the protests, and not the verdict itself. Few have asked why the media didn’t explain the verdict’s legal argumentation or defend its constitutionality. In today’s Pakistan, no one even expects this of the fourth estate. There is no place for such wishful, naive thinking.

It is worth noting that good ol’ fashioned responsible journalism — the type that strives towards objectivity and impartiality, that is fact-checked and proportionate to the news value of the development, that adheres to existing media regulation — would have saved the media from its dilemmas. It is possible to cover protests in a way that does not contribute to mayhem, and that holds all stakeholders accountable. But we already know that our media does not do responsible journalism.

And we also know that our media is beholden to higher powers. Its vagaries are those of the state institutions that dictate its coverage. The failings of reportage are ultimately a reflection of the failings of state policies.

And so it is that the major story emanating from last week’s protests was about protesters stealing bananas from a child’s cart. This is what media coverage looks like when the fourth estate cannot engage in the politics and ideology inherent to a story. With hints of civil unrest in the air, with extremists pitted against all state institutions, all we get is a bunch of bananas.

Dawn

According to a statement issued by the CPNE on Monday, a meeting of the council expressed solidarity with Mr Khawar and called upon the director general of Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, to investigate the matter so that measures could be initiated to keep the Rangers’ actions transparent.

Saeed Khawar told Dawn that around 20 Rangers personnel surrounded his rented house in North Karachi on Sunday for about one hour. He said after receiving information about the raid, he rushed to his house.

Rangers’ personnel told him later that they had conducted the raid at a “wrong place” over some “misunderstanding”, he said.

The CPNE pointed out that the Rangers conducted the raid on suspicion that Mr Khawar had obtained an illegal water connection. At the time of the raid, Mr Khawar was out of his house but his two children and ailing wife were there. “The raid terrified the ailing wife and children of Mr Khawar,” said the CPNE.

The CPNE meeting, presided by its Senior Vice President Ilyas Shakir, passed a resolution, saying the media had always supported Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, on its targeted operation against criminals and terrorists but random and blind actions, raids and besieging residential colonies by the paramilitary force would make the media reconsider its position.

The meeting decided that a CPNE delegation would shortly meet the director general of Pakistan Rangers, Sindh, and ask him to conduct an inquiry into the incident.

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the Rangers said he had talked to Mr Khawar and informed him that “we are looking into the matter”.

Daily Dawn

In Pakistan, where freedom of expression is largely perceived as a Western notion, the Snowden revelations have had a damaging effect. The deeply polarized narrative has become starker as the corridors of power push back on attempts to curb government surveillance. “If the citizens of the United States of America cannot have these rights, how can you? ..” is an argument that rights advocate hear way too often. The Snowden revelations quickly became a moment of recognition for those otherwise labeled as conspiracy theorists who believed that all digital transmissions become a tool that can be used by the U.S. government. Unlike, for example, Brazil, which has fought back, the government of Pakistan is working on ways it could replicate a NSA-like model in this country.

Just months after the revelations, some of which reported that Pakistan was one of the leading countries (second only to Iran) being surveilled by the U.S. National Security Agency, a draft of a Cybercrime Law surfaced. The draft, reportedly commissioned by the government, contained provisions for the constitution of an NSA-like cyber authority and Pakistan’s very own 5 Eyes program (a signals intelligence-sharing alliance). The draft bill was quickly shot down after pushback from civil society, but attempts at tabling new legislation have not stopped.

Recently, a report commissioned by the Supreme Court and produced by a retired judge and a renowned media personality suggested that the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) and the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) be merged, and effectively categorized social media as broadcast media, recommending that it be monitored in a similar manner. Given the ad hoc manner in which authorities in Pakistan crack down on Internet content, treating media on the Internet as broadcast media could have severe repercussions for freedom of expression. Take, for example, the case of YouTube, which the government says it blocks because of certain content deemed blasphemous. This stems from a misconception that all Internet content is broadcast rather than accessed voluntarily. The presence of specific content on a large platform should not legitimize the denial of access to the whole thing.

Furthermore, any merger of PTA and PEMRA would entail scrapping current laws related to the two regulators and the enacting of new legislation. Given the absence of laws protecting free speech and given that Article 19 under the 1973 Constitution is subject to vague restrictions such as the “glory of Islam,” new legislation would likely be problematic. In the past three years, more than three parties including a university professor, a Christian couple, and a student have been accused or charged with blasphemy on the basis of a Facebook post and text messages. Furthermore, The Protection of Pakistan Ordinance, which was recently passed despite severe opposition, makes “Internet offenses” a prosecutable offense without specifying what constitutes such a crime.

Meanwhile, as the YouTube ban persists, there is also a push for data localization as an attempt to make companies subject to Pakistani law. These attempts increased significantly in light of the Snowden revelations as people became paranoid about the treatment of their data. More recently PTCL, the country’s largest Internet provider, which is often accused of having a monopoly in the market, partnered with Daily Motion to bring a “localized video sharing platform.”

From the policy landscape to the public narrative regarding free speech and privacy, the Snowden revelations have strengthened the state’s argument for surveillance. With the recent shutdown of Geo TV and rival media channels seemingly busy with public infighting, freedom of expression has taken a big hit. Journalists, reporters, and rights advocates now live with the fear that it is not only their own Government monitoring their movements but foreign governments and agencies too. As anyone who follows Pakistani media knows, journalists often face the dilemma of self-censorship at certain boundaries. Now the walls have closed in even more.

Sana Saleem is a director of Bolo Bhi, an Internet rights group based in Pakistan, and an advisory board member for the Courage foundation, Snowden’s legal defense fund.

Committee to Protect Journalists

The decision was taken in response to a defence ministry complaint to PEMRA accusing Geo News of waging a “vicious campaign, libellous and scandalous in nature” after its star talk show presenter Hamid Mir was badly injured in a targeted shooting on 19 April.

PEMRA also ordered Geo News to pay a fine of 10 million rupees (75,000 euros) within 15 days, failing which the suspension would remain in effect, and warned that any further breach of regulations could result in its licence being permanently withdrawn.

“Suspending a TV station’s licence is a grave violation of freedom of information especially when it is the country’s leading news channel,” Reporters Without Borders said.

The suspension follows a major smear campaign against Geo News that began after it broadcast claims that the intelligence agencies were behind the attack on Mir. Both the defence ministry and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s leading intelligence agency, responded by accusing Geo New of being “anti-state.”

On 20 May, several PEMRA members ordered the closure of Geo News and two of its sister channels, Geo Tez and Geo Entertainment, and the withdrawal of their licences, but they were immediately overruled by other PEMRA members.

Geo News has meanwhile announced its intention of suing the ISI over the “anti-state” accusation and seeking 500 million dollars in damages. It is also calling on the defence ministry, the ISI and PEMRA to public apologize to the media group and its employees for the accusations.

The Pakistani media are operating in a steadily deteriorating environment, with threats, intimidation attempts, attacks and torching of newspaper distribution trucks becoming increasingly frequent.

Pakistan is ranked 158th out of 180 countries in the 2014 Reporters Without Borders press freedom index.

Reporters Without Borders

ISLAMABAD: Top professionals and journalists of the Geo and Jang Group have not only responded to the PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s allegations levelled against them and the group during the Sunday’s rally in Islamabad but also exposed the real objective behind the allegations at this specific time.

It should be noted that the Geo/Jang Group has already responded several times to the allegations levelled against it. Its response was available on the website, social media and also published many a time in the print media.

The allegations against the Geo/Jang Group were levelled by a particular channel and its anchor and afterwards another channel joined this vilification campaign. The Geo/Jang Group was termed traitor and agent of Indians and Jews. The Geo/Jang Group moved courts against the accusers who did not submit reply in the courts. Zaid Hamid aka Lal Topi Wala did not appear in the courts. The Geo/Jang Group’s stand would soon be vindicated in courts, Inshallah.

A few media people have designs against the Jang Group. They invite guests who give the impression that the Geo/Jang Group is being bribed by the US and the UK governments. The anchors did not question the guests. They should have carried out research and objected to this trend as the Geo/Jang Group’s point of view is available on websites, social media and newspapers. But because they have designs against the Geo/Jang Group, they do not raise any questions.

The fact of the matter is that there is no parallel to the Geo/Jang Group in the Pakistani media. This Group has, Mashallah, remarkably expanded. According to national and international surveys, the Geo/Jang Group has 60 pc to 72 pc hold on the market. It has been recognised on the national and international level as the oldest, most influential and credible media group of Pakistan. This is distinction of Geo/Jang Group that it challenged almost all governments, military or civilians, whenever they committed corruption, acted against rule of law or indulged in mis-governance. As a result it lost revenue of billions of rupees as its ads were stopped and channels banned.

Suleman Lalani, a senior executive of the group, said Imran’s allegations against Jang Group were now in a questioning tone.

“Imran pointed towards the “Voice of America” (VoA) programmes telecast by Geo News. These programmes never contained anything anti-Pakistan and Geo had full editorial control. Because of differences on some commercial arrangements and rates they could not continue with Geo and made arrangements with another channel “Express” which is still airing. Astonishingly and mysteriously, Imran hasn’t named Express which has been airing it since long. The VoA also has some projects with the PTV. All programmes of VoA were strictly in accordance with the Pakistani laws,” Lalani said.

Lalani said Express TV and some radios also had arrangements with the BBC but they were not traitors for Imran. “It proves he only wants to defame the Jang Group. We have written a letter to four US agencies inquiring about the money they have sent to Pakistani media organisations. These organisations include US Office of Management and Budget, US Great, Voice of America and US State Department. These organisations haven’t responded to our letter and thus we served a legal notice on them. We are hoping to get the details of money paid by these US organisations to different Pakistani media houses and we will make this detail public,” he said.

Lalani said it was strange that Imran Khan was attacking Geo’s campaign on education. “In Pakistan, more than 30 million children don’t go to school while only little above than 25 percent teachers come to teach. We have launched a campaign for educational reforms in Pakistan and for funds we gave a presentation to Duffett which though funded by the UK government is a completely independent body which takes decisions independently without accepting pressures. We developed a campaign with their help,” Lalani said, adding, “Not only this, we constituted a board of advisers for our guidance here which comprised Pakistan’s important and famous personalities and businessmen who advised us and we worked together for two years. These advisers also include Asad Umar who is vice president of Imran Khan’s party PTI. Arrival of funds for this tremendous educational campaign was aired on Pakistan Television, Radio Pakistan and other TV channels in addition to Geo and published in newspapers in addition to The News and Jang but Imran Khan did not name other channels and newspapers for obvious reasons.”

Whole of this activity is in accordance with the Pakistani laws. In all over the world foundations, trusts and NGOs receive funds on these grounds. These are funds, not donations, and the recipients have to work hard and do research. The donors ask many questions to get themselves satisfied about the transparency and honesty of the recipients.

In Pakistan different projects in different sectors as health, education, legal activity etc receive funds in this way. It is what happens in the whole world. Before elections Imran Khan claimed that he would not take funds from foreign countries. But after taking power in KPK by his party, he realised that there is no way to avoid these funds if the government wanted to serve the people. Pakistan is a poor developing country and no government can survive without such foreign support.

Lalani added: “KPMG and Price Waterhouse Cooper were auditors of this campaign. Both are world’s independent and credible institutions to check transparency, credibility and value for money. Such credible donors release money after complete scrutiny and knowing about the structure of the group and its transparent practices. We always paid taxes for all projects for which tax was applicable but still we face charges of not paying taxes. The accusers never presented any evidence. All such allegations are wrong and disturbing.”

Lalani maintained that Imran Khan himself collects huge amounts of money from the US, Canada and other European countries for his different projects and party by arranging big ceremonies for this purpose. In these ceremonies besides Jews, Christians, Muslims and Hindus also participate and donate for his projects. Besides collecting donations there he also continued to get donations through banks afterwards. Imran Khan starts good welfare projects with the help of these donations. This all is within the law, though some of his party members raised objections to it.

“Similarly, government institutions, army and many other organisations take funds from foreign donors for different projects.”

According to media reports, during some years one-third of CIA budget was given to Pakistan’s elite intelligence agency. Does it mean that these institutions are furthering anti-Pakistan agenda?

Lalani said that same allegations of taking money from foreign countries were also levelled by some Pemra officials and when we challenged the same in the Supreme Court all the accusers had to seek an unconditional apology but we haven’t granted the same and still demand provision of any evidence or those made accusations must be punished.

Lalani said details all accounts of MKRF (with which Imran Khan himself worked for flood relief for a long time) were available with the SECP and anybody could seek them. Pemra was provided with the record of all the money taken to air the programmes of VoA on Geo News. The point of view of Geo/Jang Group is present on the group’s websites and those hurling allegations should have moral courage to also air our point of view .

Regarding Imran Khan’s allegation of agenda setting, Lalani said it was terribly wrong, as journalists and other professionals work independently according to their will and understanding without any dictations.

Imran’s allegations that “owner set agenda after taking this money from abroad” is worst ever naked abuse to all journalists working with Geo and Jang Group. All the top journalists attached or remained attached with Geo and Jang Group need to come forward and respond to the allegation levelled by Imran.

Imran simply termed all journalists attached with Geo and Jang Group as “Bakaoo Maal” (saleable commodity) as according to him all these journalists and professionals work for money and blindly obey the orders of the top management of Geo and Jang Group and that they don’t have any self-respect, dignity or intellect.

All journalists and professionals attached or remained attached with Geo and Jang Group, according to PTI chief, only write as per American or UK agenda given to them by the owners of Geo and Jang Group. There could not be anything more shameful than this for a person like Imran Khan. He takes billions from the US and the UK and his own party members accuse the party of huge corruption and he is levelling allegations against the Pakistani citizens who have ego, dignity and love for their motherland, and, unlike Imran Khan, they never level allegations to please hidden hands and always write or say anything with evidence like Umar Cheema’s stories on Imran Khan properties which he can still challenge in a court of law.

Editor Investigations The News Ansar Abbasi said it was no secret to the entire Pakistani media that the kind of independence Geo and Jang Group journalists enjoyed had no parallel. Not once, there are numerous occasions where journalists working for the group have been expressing their reservations and at times even opposition to the policies of the media house.

Some experts believe Imran is on the mission to mislead the nation on the instructions of some hidden hands which want to stage a comeback but want to silence the Geo News voice knowing that Geo/Jang Group always become the biggest hurdle to any unconstitutional move.

Some experts even see attack on Hamid Mir as part of this whole nefarious scheme. Dictatorship not only resulted in the breakup of Pakistan, but also gave Pakistan and poor Pakistanis gifts of terrorism, extremism, bigotry, Kalashnikov, heroin, religious fanatics and pushed the Pakistan on the verge of collapse. Politicians like Imran Khan were always used by such hidden forces and played havoc with the country. Interestingly, these hidden forces and puppet politicians like Imran Khan which were used by these forces always raised the slogans of patriotism and termed Pakistani citizens traitors.

Experts still remember Imran’s outright support for dictator Musharraf. Now these hidden hands have realised that they will never get power again and will have to work/act professionally as the present federal government will overcome the major problem of load-shedding within next two years and the economic condition of the country would also become much better which will bring an end to the role of these hidden hands in country’s politics forever.

These hidden hands also realize that because of some interval or peace, foreign investment and aid is coming now. For them these months are crucially important as if these days are passed and a democratic government is strengthened all their dreams will die. After all these realizations, the hidden hands have now started pulling the strings of puppets like Imran Khan to attack the democratic setup and issue decrees that there is no democracy in the country.

Schedules of countrywide protests have been announced by different parties in an obvious attempt to stop the present influx of foreign investment. The hidden hands know that an independent media always becomes the biggest hurdle in the way of their nefarious designs so Imran’s target is the biggest media group of the country. Imran levels allegations against the Jang Group on a daily basis and when he is asked to provide evidence he loses temper, ignores his previous allegation and comes up with a new one again without any evidence.

After finding himself helpless to present any evidence now he stooped so low as to start hurling naked abuses at the top editorial management and working journalists of Geo/Jang Group.

The hidden hands are also using some big-business-groups-turned-blackmailer-media-houses to attack Geo/Jang Group. Almost the entire media, news channels and newspapers, are siding with the independence of media, the Constitution and democratic values except these few.

All these media houses standing with the independence of media in these hard times have association of decades with the media and journalism. Only three media groups, which were set up a few years back by some business tycoons for gaining more influence and blackmailing tax authorities, are being used by these hidden hands to attack democracy and the independent media to fulfil the desired objectives.

Any sane and rational analyst would agree that no government can overcome all the major problems within one year and launching an attack on a democratic government within one year simply means the fishy designs of the hidden forces. Experts also see no signs of Imran Khan becoming prime minister using such dirty tactics.

Senior anchorperson Kamran Khan said Imran Khan had the best chance to discuss all his demands with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif who had invited him on tea. Kamran said Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar had also offered him to constitute a parliamentary committee.

Najam Sethi said he was in a state of shock as Imran Khan had stooped to the level of street politician and was acting childishly because of so-called ego problem. Sethi said Imran had backtracked from everything he said in the past from praises of Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Fakhruddin G Ebrahim to allegation of rigging against the judiciary for which he had apologize to the Supreme Court. In categorical words, Najam Sethi said a third force that had panicked because of Geo News and democratic government of Nawaz Sharif had given the green signal to Imran Khan to attack.

Director programmes of Geo News Ansar Naqvi explained in detail the functioning of a TV channel, especially news channels which remain on air for 24 hours and tried its best to make PTI chief understand the process, techniques, procedures and routines followed during the continuous transmission. Ansar Naqvi spoke politely and explained to the PTI chief, who claims to be the leader of youngsters, that 24-hour channel transmission could not be controlled by one person, as it is not humanly possible.

Naqvi said he had been attached with the group for so many years and never got dictation from any person and even the owner of Jang Group. Naqvi said the staff, journalists and other professionals take their decisions on their own. He said majority of decisions regarding Geo News transmission were taken by him. He explained that at times when there’s a very important or sensitive thing or news it is discussed with other colleagues and seniors. Same practice is followed worldwide in professional and credible organisations.

Imran is completely unaware that he is being misused and believes that he will not have to give evidences to prove the allegations and naked abuses he is hurling at professional journalists. He will have to in any case.

Jang Group journalists are independent professionals and they round the clock by putting their lives at risk serve the country and poor Pakistanis. People like Imran playing in hands of hidden forces to get high offices unconstitutionally could never deter the courage and resolve of professional journalists.

The present educational programme of PTI government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province is funded by The Department for International Development (DFID) of the UK. However, during his baseless campaign against the Jang Group and its tremendous educational campaigns, Imran never mentioned that in addition to huge amounts of money he takes from Americans and other European states his government in the KP also accepts foreign funding from the British government. Not only this, many other projects of PTI government in the KP are funded by Americans.

The News

The Amnesty International report on attacks on journalists in Pakistan released last week offered a precise summing up of the national media’s tribulations. Recalling that at least 34 journalists had been killed during the post-Musharraf period and the culprits were at large except in one case, Amnesty concluded that “Pakistan’s media community is effectively under siege”.

The effect the killing of the journalists and the threats to many others had on the people’s right to be adequately informed of events and trends that affect them was thus described: “Journalists, in particular those covering national security issues or human rights, are targeted from all sides in a disturbing pattern of abuses carried out to silence their reporting. Covering almost any sensitive story leaves journalists at risk from one side or another — militants, intelligence agencies or political parties — putting them in an impossible position.”

The Amnesty report derived its title A bullet has been chosen for you, from a warning the head of one of the two Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists factions had received. It underlined one of the major causes of the journalists’ misfortune — a most regrettable split in their union that must be healed at the earliest.

A similar question was put to Pakistan by a US assistant secretary of state while releasing a press freedom report: “How can you be free when some of your best journalists are targeted and killed?” The US report put Pakistan at number 141 in a list of 197 countries, ahead of Afghanistan and Somalia but trailing the largest Saarc neighbours — India and Bangladesh.

At the same time, the International Federation of Journalists called upon the Pakistani government to end impunity for perpetrators of violence against journalists. EU missions in Islamabad also expressed concern over the “steadily deteriorating environment for the media in Pakistan”.

It is clear that attacks on the media are harming Pakistan as a whole. Lack of reliable information will create insurmountable problems for both the rulers and the ruled. The government, political parties and the security agencies must ensure an environment free from coercion and threats, not as a favour to journalists but to save themselves from the terrible consequences of ignorance.

Concern over security matters was not the only issue in reports about the media last week. During the ongoing confrontation between the security agencies and a section of the media, journalists were being targeted by some politicians, public figures, clerics, militants and ordinary citizens. While some of this criticism is apparently inspired by ulterior motives, media leaders would do themselves and the people wrong if they failed to analyse citizens’ complaints against them. They must ponder over the attacks on their right to freedom of expression.

The questions being asked now usually arise when people feel that the media is using its freedom to report half the truth and not the whole of it. Are the people unhappy about the degree of power to control their minds the monopoly houses enjoy or are trying to secure?

The people also get angry when they believe, rightly or wrongly, that the media is using its freedom and privileges to further its own interests and not paying due attention to the plight of ordinary citizens. The media is perhaps in need of redefining the parameters of its freedoms and responsibilities and removing any cause of the citizens’ alienation. The media needs public support and respect not only to win the battles its calling will always force it into but also to remain true to its ideals.

And finally, the pats on the back the media has received. While speaking on the occasion of Martyrs’ Day, army chief Gen Raheel Sharif lauded the media’s role in moulding public opinion on national security and added that the military “believes in freedom of the media, responsible journalism and appreciates its sacrifices”. The same day Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was quoted as saying that the government, politicians, the military and media would together solve the problems facing the country.

The only difference is that while the army chief was making a policy statement and drawing a line between responsible journalists and irresponsible ones (who have provoked the military), the prime minister was responding to questions the media persons under attack are asking almost every passer-by.

Whatever the prime minister may or may not have meant, journalists should be wary of playing the role of collaborators that political leaders now and then offer them. While they may continue to offer their advice to whoever can profit by it, their real function is to mediate between authority (of any hue or shade) and the people. They would compromise their independence if they moved too close to authority.

Indeed, some of their present trials appear to have been caused by quite a few journalists’ attempts to cuddle up to the establishment. The media persons should offer all institutions the regard due to them but their only honourable station is by the side of the people, especially those who have no voice of their own or are unable to articulate their aspirations. A genuine media thrives not by seeking favours from the government but by spurning them.

DAWN

They were furious about the negative portrayal of those in the agency held responsible but oblivious to the growing concerns over threats to journalists from the intelligence agencies. Their debate was centered on the coverage of allegations against the responsible. Not a single segment, let alone complete programme, was devoted to a discussion of why journalists consider elements in the agencies a threat.

In a majority of the cases, the anchors were found hand-in-glove with the choice panelists. A dissenting voice would form part of the panel but only for the purpose of ‘flogging’ which was inevitable if one belonged to the Jang Group.

My personal experience was no different. One ‘patriotic’ anchor wanted my presence in his show but didn’t want to hear me. In a desperate attempt to make an issue out of nothing, he dismissed the Saleem Shahzad Commission report (demanding legislation for the intelligence agencies) on the grounds that it had wrongly alleged this correspondent of not recording his statement. (As a matter of fact, the then-PFUJ President Pervez Shaukat had conveyed my unwillingness to the commission to record the statement without even contacting me). I told the anchor that it was not the commission’s fault; our journalist representative fed them the wrong information about me but he was unconvinced and handed his own verdict that could discredit the commission report demanding laws for the agencies.

Another channel that invited me for a discussion on the issue censored when I demanded laws for the agencies and said that holding them accountable was the only way forward. The said channel also muted the voice of Kamran Shafi, who was a co-panelist. Even the conclusion of the talk show host, Absar Alam, was censored.

Air Marshal (retd) Shahid Latif regularly featured in the programmes on this subject. He would repeat two questions: (1) Why was the Jang Group against the defence organisations? (2) Why was it that journalists belonging to this group alone who felt threatened by the agency? I tried to answer his questions but it was a cry in the wilderness.

To his first question, I gave a personal example. I have been meeting Shahid Latif several times. He would discuss the issues relating to nepotism and lack of accountability in the defence organisations. Wasn’t he anti-Pakistan by that standard? He was not. Traitors are only those giving voice to the concerns raised by the likes of Shahid Latif.

What about Lt. Gen. (retd) Shahid Aziz who authored a book “Ye Khamoshi Kab Tak.” Any civilian author of such a book could have been termed a traitor, if not killed. Was Lt. Gen. (retd) Shuja Pasha wrong when he told the Abbottabad Commission that his agency had roughed up some ‘decent gentlemen’? Was it the right decision of Musharraf to tell the US channel, ABC TV, about the rogue elements within the agency?

His second question is equally important. Incidentally, he has been found raising this question during TV shows hosted by the channel which lost several employees to terrorism and the TTP had claimed responsibility for the attacks. Does it look good putting this question to the channel inquiring the reason for becoming a specific target of the TTP? By the way, an anchor of that channel had also echoed the same line taken by Shahid Latif. For their education, journalists of the Jang Group and other organisations are also facing similar threats from the agencies.

Rauf Klasra, a senior journalist, is not affiliated with the Jang Group. His recent column would make instructive reading for the likes of Shahid Latif. He should also ask Kamran Shafi, who is also a retired soldier, who had also blamed the agencies for firing at his home in 2010. Absar Alam is also not affiliated with the Jang Group. Azaz Syed was not with Geo TV when his house was attacked twice. Imtiaz Alam is yet another example. Saleem Shahzad is not alive to tell him why he had sensed danger and accused an agency of an attempt on his life. He was silenced through violence. Abdul Salam Soomro, a cameraman of a Sindhi TV channel who made the video of Sarfraz Shah who was gunned down by Sindh Rangers in Karachi, could also explain his threat concerns.

Let’s believe for a moment that Hamid Mir’s suspicion that an agency is involved is baseless. His vocal position on a number of issues earned him many enemies. It is quite likely that somebody else might have attacked him. However, the question remains as to why he considered the agency the main threat to his life.

Let’s suppose that my allegations about the agency’s involvement in my kidnapping and torture were wrong. But it will also have to kept in mind that my belief in this regard was strengthened with the passage of time. The more I interacted with informed persons the more they endorsed my view.

This perception among journalists regarding threats from the agency must be taken up as a challenge by the agency. Equally important is for the ‘patriotic’ anchors to take up this issue in their programmes. Among them are those who were harassed in the past, something they had been sharing. A debate about this negative perception is not going to malign the agency. It will herald a new era of trust with each other.

American journalist Tim Weiner’s book on the CIA — ‘Legacy of the Ashes’ — could not weaken the most powerful agency of the world; it was a litany of failure though. The book rather generated a new debate and triggered reforms making the agency stronger and better.

Note: This reporter and some other people were not allowed to speak. As the Jang Group is being incriminated, to educate people and give the reporter a full opportunity to be heard, it is necessary to publish this story. – Editorial Board

The News