Posts Tagged ‘Censorship’

Why Internet Censorship Should Worry Media

Friday, May 21st, 2010

CensorshipThe judiciary’s move to unilaterally block access to certain websites is a concern for Pakistan’s freedom of the press. While I do not condone blasphemy or intentionally provocative messages, the ability of a court to issue a blanket order of censorship to an entire media outlet is cause for worry.

This blog has been from its start dedicated to correcting misinformation in the media. Some of this misinformation is the result of laziness on the part of journalists who are too comfortable in their own lives to do the hard work of research that goes into proper reporting. Other misinformation appears to be more likely the work of political operatives who are trying to use the media for their own ends.

I and my fellow bloggers on Pakistan Media Watch will continue to write posts that point out the mistakes of journalists and news organizations because we believe in the old saying that “the best antidote is sunshine.” Information and education are the building blocks of a free democracy. Exposing misinformation and political propaganda is the best way to counter its effectiveness.

While we are regular critics of journalists like Shireen Mazari, Ansar Abbasi, Shaheen Sehbai, etc. etc. we do not call for them to be censored. Actually, we believe that poor reporting only serves to undermine those responsible when it is corrected publicly. Of course, they are free to say what they want, even if it is nonsense.

The ongoing Internet censorship by the courts is worrisome because it is a good example of a ’slippery slope’ of censorship. First, the court ordered that Facebook be blocked until the end of the month because of a stupid page on the website. Then, YouTube was blocked for having offensive content. Next, Wikipedia was blocked for the same reason. Today, Dawn reports that access to these websites may not be temporary after all.

Pakistan acknowledged the ‘’suffering” caused by its bans on Facebook and YouTube, but said it would only consider restoring the websites if they take down pages considered offensive to Islam, the information technology ministry said Friday.

So, who will be next? And who will be the judge of what is ‘offensive to Islam’?

From the moment that it is decided to be okay to block access to one website for being offensive, where do you draw the line? Certainly there are some Jamaatis who will say that Nadeem Paracha is offensive to them. There are plenty of liberals who find Ahmed Quraishi quite offensive as well.

The truth is, such an unchecked power of censorship is too easily open to abuse. Today we may be blocking access to some cartoons under the justification of anti-blasphemy laws. But tomorrow it might be a newspaper or TV station that is banned for the same justification.

Freedom of the media is a vital part of our democracy. That means even allowing the media the freedom to be wrong. The alternative may sound good at first, but it always ends up the same – and that is no freedom at all.

Is Jang Group Reporting Facts…Or Erasing Them?

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

Is Jang Group Reporting Facts...Or Erasing Them?The past few weeks have been filled with enough political news to keep any reporter busy. This creates a prime opportunity to view what different media groups are reporting and how they are reporting it. For our first examination, we looked at how The News (Jang Group) is reporting the constitutional reforms. The results of our first test has been disappointing.

In The News today, the top stories include one article about the historic constitutional reforms – the same number as about Shoaib’s marriage. No fewer than four stories are about the Swiss case. The constitutional reforms are a historic event, regardless of what political party anyone belongs to, and yet they are receiving less reporting than a legal debate.

And it’s not just the number of articles that is troubling. Consider the language that is being used in what are supposed to be news reports (not opinion columns). Take a look at the language used in the News article about the historic constitutional reforms.

Nowhere in the article is President Zardari mentioned by name, despite the fact that he was integral to the proposition and passage of this historic package. Instead, the article is reported as if Raza Rabbani had invented and passed the package of reforms all by himself. Actually, the reforms required the leadership of the PPP, the political party Zardari co-chairs, and could not have been enacted with his support.

Consider how this same package is being reported in the international media. The Christian Science Monitor wrote:

“It’s a massive political boost to [Zardari],” says Cyril Almeida, a political columnist for Dawn, Pakistan’s leading English-language daily. “It’s not the standard practice in Pakistan to give away powers. It’s more the reverse, where people consolidate or accumulate powers.”

Mr. Almeida points out, however, that Mr. Zardari will retain leverage over Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani in his capacity as co-chair of their ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP).

“The President is honoring our party’s commitment to restore the 1973 constitution and undo the usurpation of the authority of the people’s house by military dictators,” says Farahnaz Ispahani, Mr. Zardari’s spokeswoman, referring to former Pakistani ruler Gen. Zia ul-Haq.

The 27-member parliamentary committee, which included all parties and was led by the PPP, announced late Wednesday that it had reached a consensus, almost 10 months after convening. They approved the draft of the constitutional amendment, which is set to be presented for a vote in the lower and upper houses of parliament.

With the draft bill alone, however, the reforms are essentially a “sealed deal,” says Rasul Baksh Rais, a professor of political science at the Lahore University of Management Sciences.

It is a “gain for democracy and democratic forces in the country,” he says.

Consider also the reporting from The Telegraph:

The deal was last night hailed by President Asif Zardari who told The Daily Telegraph it was a “historic moment” for the country’s democratic forces, and the fulfilment of his late wife Benazir Bhutto’s dream.

“The pledges made with the people to restore the 1973 Constitution have been honored. It is a victory for the democratic forces, a culmination of decades old struggle and a fulfilment of the dream of my wife Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto,” he said.

“All political parties and democratic forces deserve credit for it. The Pakistan Peoples Party is specially pleased as it marks the end of distortions introduced into the Constitution,” he added.

The agreement was also welcomed by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, the leader of the main opposition Pakistan Muslim League (N) who said it was a welcome example of consensus. “This proves that political leadership in Pakistan, once it joins hands, rising above petty differences, can resolve the most difficult of issues,” he said.

These are fair an un-biased reports that do not favor any particular political party or agenda. They are simply providing the information to their readers who can then make up their own minds. Why can’t our press report like this? Instead, we have national media groups putting out articles about constitutional reforms that do not even mention the name of the President!

Pakistan’s media has sacrificed too much to free itself from censorship. Why would it now decide to censor itself. Please, do not sacrifice the facts for some political agenda. Instead, report the facts without any bias and let the people make up their own minds.

Is Media Being Bought By Hotelier?

Friday, March 5th, 2010

An interesting post by Riaz Ahmed originally posted on the blog “Let Us Build Pakistan” suggests that perhaps big money is censoring media coverage of the Pearl Continental Hotel strike in Karachi. I did a Google News search for any articles in the last week with the keywords Pearl Continental Hotel Strike and found there were zero hits. This is a shameful episode for Pakistani media.

It has been 9 days that over 150 workers at Pearl Continental Hotel Karachi are protesting against the sacking of 4 union and over 98 other workers. In protest they have occupied the basement of the 5-star hotel for the last 9 days and despite police raids and bullying and threats by security guards they have not left the site of occupation. This is a historic protest by workers in Karachi, the largest industrial city, where workers movement is generally luke-warm in manners. Occupation by a large number of workers at a prime site means that they have been pushed against the wall.

Pearl Continental Hotel Strike

However the media in Karachi are pretty quiet about the situation. The PC management, chaired by the 5th richest person in Pakistan Mr Hashwani, has managed to keep the media silent, the police raids and arrests of male and female workers and their manhandling all have been hushed-up.

The only media which is reporting about the strike is the stinking right-wing press named Daily Ummat. The entire liberal, pro-democracy, pro-human rights English and otherwise ‘fighting for freedom of media and democracy’ press have managed not to report the protests, arrests and the occupation of PC workers in Karachi.

Today, March 04, 2010, Express TV crew came to cover the protest at the 2nd site of the protest ie the camp in front of PC and interviewed and filmed many agitators. Reportedly their entire story was killed by one Director named Fahd Hussain for no obvious reason. The only reason is ‘its is not allowed’.

Pearl Continental Hotel Strike 2

PC hotel workers share a very tiny fraction of the billions earned by the Hashwani group. Since 2001 about 250 sacked workers have been protesting but their is no response. Now a new layer of sacked workers and those showing solidarity with them have been targeted by the rich management. It is time media wakes-up and express its neutrality about the protest.

A commenter on the original post, Mr. Aamir Mughal sheds more light on the situation:

Mr Kamran Khan [Senior Correspondent of Daily Jang/GEO/The News] is a very close friend of Sadruddin Hashwani [Owner of PC] hence the news in censored. I wonder how does Kamran Khan maintain/afford houses in Defence Society Phase 6 and another house in PECHS [RAZI ROAD] Karachi and both the localities are considered Posh and “Costly” residential quarters of Karachi. How many Senior Journalist can afford a sport car like Mr. Kamran Khan do? By the way Kamran Khan was also very “closed” to Brigadier Imtiaz [since the days Imtiaz was only a Colonel in Karachi].

This looks very bad, indeed.

Why did Pakistani media boycott Brigadier Hussain Abbas’ funeral?

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

Omar Khattab, blogging at Let Us Build Pakistan, asks a good question: Why did Pakistani media boycott Brigadier Hussain Abbas’ funeral? This is an interesting observation and one that makes a point that is often overlooked when we consider bias in our media. There is so much poor reporting, obvious propaganda, and fantastic conspiracy theories in the media that we might overlook the fact that what isn’t reported is as important as what is.

Last week Brigadier Hussain Abbas was killed by the Taliban in the Waziristan area. The newspapers wrote as usual about the “martyrdom” of an army officer at the hands of the “militants” and not the Taliban. But the electronic media was even more curt. The news anchors vaguely spoke about the martyrdom of Brigadier Hussain Abbas, which was very unusual given that death of a high-level officer is discussed ad nauseum in the media as a part of the ideological-nationalist myth about the role of the Army in Pakistan’s “nation building”.

Last Saturday Brigadier Hussain Abbas’ dead body was brought to his native village near Gujranwala for burial. The media as usual descended on the area interviewing people and relatives of the brigadier. Some journalists even forced his little kids to speak about their father and made them cry by asking sensitive qurestions (“Will you miss your father?”) which was an extremely heartless thing to do. But then this is common in Pakistan.

What was interesting to know that not a single channel showed the actual burial and/or the funeral prayer of the brigadier, which was unprecedented because the media always shows these two events only to prove the Islamic side of martyrdom. But Brigadier Hussain Abbas was not given this honor. And the reason is not hard to find: He was a Shia Muslim.

Since the Talibanic journalists, backed by Saudi and Al-Qaeda money and facilitated by the ISI, took over Pakistan post 9/11 (though they were in the field before 9/11, but not in command), the Shia suffering in Pakistan has been ignored. Everyone knows that the Taliban consider Shias kafir/inidel and routinely carry out acts of Shia carnage. But the media has never condemned the Taliban. This carnage is backed by the Deobandi-Wahabi fatwas that those who kill the Shias will go to paradise straightaway. Corrupted by petrodollars of the Wahabi Saudis and the drug money of the Al-Qaeda, the Pakistani Urdu media has turned complicit in the Shia persecution. Although the Saudi royal family and the Al-Qaeda are enemies, they are one when it comes to the hatred of the Shias. Both are Wahabi.

The Urdu media’s boycott of the funeral of Brigadier Hussain Abbas was not an isolated incident. In 2008-9 the Taliban captured hundreds of Pakistan army soldiers in Swat. They separated Shia soldiers from Sunni soldiers. They gave every Sunni soldiers one thousand rupees each and asked them to go home. But they lined up every Shia soldier and slaughtered him. This is why, even today the place where the beheadings of the Shias were carried out is knows as “Khooni Chawk” or Bloody Square. At that time the media completely blacked out the beheadings. It was only a few Sunni soldiers who narrated this to people and it became known, but later they were asked to shut up by their superiors.

In complicity with Saudi Wahabis and the Al Qaeda-Taliban axis of Islamofascism, the Urdu media does not want the people of Pakistan, the majority of whom want to live in peace, that the Shias have anything “Islamic” in them. The Shias are portrayed as a deviant sect of Islam which should be wiped out of existence. (This is what has been happening in Saudi Arabia for decades.) You will never read in any newspaper or find out on a TV channel that the creator of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a Shia Muslim.