Posts Tagged ‘Daily Times’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Noam Chomsky's Description of Pakistan's Media Raises Questions

Wednesday, December 8th, 2010

Noam ChomskyAmerican intellectual Noam Chomsky has been writing about media and influence for decades. His book with co-author Edward S. Herman is a foundational work on the subtle ways media shapes the way we think and see the world, and the powers that influence media from behind the scenes.

Last Month, Professor Chomsky spoke to India’s Outlook magazine about the differences between Pakistan’s and India’s news media, and what he said raises not only important points of consideration, but new questions also.

Answering the question, “What is the mechanism through which the media becomes the voice of the government and elite?”, Chomsky talks about the analysis of British author George Orwell.

He says the reasons are that the press is owned by wealthy men who have every reason not to want certain ideas to be expressed. In the more modern period, generally, the media are either big corporations or parts of mega corporations or closely linked to the government.

Looking at Pakistan’s media through with this in mind, we can see that our own media is primarily owned by a few families. Consider two examples: Daily Times is owned by Governor Punjab Salmaan Taseer. You would be hard-pressed to convince me that Salmaan Taseer has no influence over the editorial perspective in Daily Times, but at least he allows professionals to edit the newspaper.

Consider as an alternative Jang Group. Their daily newspaper The News International is founded by Mir Khalil-ur-Rahman, Group Chairman is Mir Javed Rahman, and Editor-in-Chief is Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman. Is it not better to name the newspaper The News Rahman?

Chomsky does give some credit to our domestic media, which I agree is warranted – Pakistani journalists show no fear of criticising government officials.

In Pakistan, I read the English language media which go to a tiny part of the population. Apparently, the government, no matter how repressive it is, is willing to say to them that you have your fun, we are not going to bother you. So they don’t interfere with it.

The media in India is free, the government doesn’t have the power to control it. But what I saw was that it was pretty restricted, very narrow and provincial and not very informative, leaving out lots of things. What I saw was a small sample. There are very good things in the Indian media, specially the Hindu and a couple of others. But this picture (in India) doesn’t surprise me. In fact, the media situation is not very different in many other countries.

Professor Chomsky is correct that our media is free. But one thing Chomsky doesn’t mention is that our own media is so quick to criticise the government that it makes the opposite mistake. Just as it does nobody any good to have a media that is a lap dog for the government, it is not any good to have a media that is a rabid anti-government dog also. Rather than always assuming (or inventing) the worst about the government or any official, the news should be reporting the facts. If those facts expose the government for corruption or other misdeeds, the population is better off. But we do not need to invent corruption or misquote officials in order to create some drama. Citizens need the media to give them facts about their country so that they can form their own opinions. If they do not have the facts, their opinions will be misguided. If the so-called ‘facts’ are simply the wishes or inventions of someone in the media, their opinions will also be misguided.

This has been the driving belief behind the very beginning of Pakistan Media Watch. Pakistan’s media is finally free…but is it fair and factual? Just as proper journalists have accepted the responsibility to keep watch on the government to keep it honest, we have accepted the responsibility to keep watch on the media to keep it honest also. We hope you, our dear reader, will keep a watch over us also and let us know if we make some mistake. Together we will help make certain that Pakistan’s media is not only freer than India’s, but more reliable also.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Daily Times, Jang, The News | No Comments »

Missing the Point

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

By now you have probably heard the story of Asia Bibi who was handed down the death sentence in Nankana district for violation of blasphemy laws. This has created quite a debate in parts of the media – but not the debate you might expect. Actually, most of the discussion has been about whether or not the government should overturn the sentence for Asia, with little discussion of the underlying issues. Saroop Ijaz makes an important observation in today’s Daily Times about the way that media reports often miss the bigger picture of a story.

(more…)

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Media's Moment of Shame – Farrukh Khan Pitafi

Thursday, October 21st, 2010

Farrukh Khan PitafiFarrukh Khan Pitafi takes the media to task in his column for Daily Times today over the recent rumour mongering by certain newspapers and TV stations which fueled an unnecessary tension between the executive and judiciary. He also makes the point that has been noted here previously that there is a severe crisis in the media due to a lack of professionalism among editors who should be held responsible for ensuring that articles are reliably sourced and factually accurate before allowing them to be published.

Never throughout my career have I felt as ashamed as I feel now about the media’s misconduct. Last week a few news channels flashed an item that was later proved to be nothing more than a rumour. The item claimed that the government was about to withdraw the notification that had reinstated the judges sacked by Musharraf. The apex court’s judges met in emergency and issued a press release. I am not to discuss the court’s reaction or the government’s attitude when it was asked to clarify. However, I feel heartbroken by the callous attitude of our mainstream media, which brought the country to a standstill with reports that it has failed to substantiate. Could it be an elaborate deception by a section of the press or a government ploy to expose the media’s lack of responsibility? We may never know. However, there is no doubt that the reports were aired without regard to the best practices known to journalists. And had there been any evidence present to back the claims up, it would have already surfaced by now.

(more…)

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Daily Times | 2 Comments »

Daily Times Condemns Media Rumour Mongering

Saturday, October 16th, 2010

The following editorial appeared in today’s Daily Times and echoes our analysis of yesterday on the issue of media’s role in the executive-judiciary tensions. Of particular interest is the statement by the Daily Times editorial staff:

Even the prime minister’s statement that this was a conspiracy to pitch the two institutions against each other was not considered enough.

It is worth taking a moment to consider what it means to our country if unsubstantiated rumours are considered more authoritative than the word of the Prime Minister. Let me tell you, that is not a good situation.

EDITORIAL: Media’s rumour mongering

The Supreme Court’s “restraining order” to stop government functionaries from any moves to undermine the judiciary have brought to the fore the unsavoury role being played by a section of the electronic media in the political arena. On Thursday, the chief justice of Pakistan felt compelled to call an extraordinary session of the Supreme Court past midnight, acting on rumours spread by a TV anchor in his programme that the government plans to de-notify the restored judges who had been sent home after General Musharraf’s imposition of emergency on November 3, 2007. During yesterday’s hearing, the attorney general tried his best to convince the apex court that no such move was being contemplated by the government. Even the prime minister’s statement that this was a conspiracy to pitch the two institutions against each other was not considered enough. The surprising factor was that the honourable court took the rumours, not backed by any evidence, seriously and acted promptly.

Unfortunately, the media group from where these rumours originated, through its opinion pieces presented as news items and highly partisan anchors, has time and again attempted to provoke the judiciary to declare the president illegal and dismiss the government. One might recall the September 27 hearing of the NRO verdict implementation, when this channel stopped its routine transmission and this same anchor started painting a doomsday scenario only to eat his words later when the Supreme Court partially accepted the government’s plea and postponed the NRO verdict implementation hearing for two weeks. The media generally, and this media group in particular, has crossed all limits and ridden roughshod on any and every thing we knew as ‘media ethics’.

There has been tension between the government and the judiciary since the judges’ restoration. If this kind of yellow journalism and rumour mongering is allowed to provoke the august court and create confusion and chaos in society, how can we expect sanity to prevail? Intellectuals and saner elements of society, who care for the future of the country, consider a clash of institutions to be extremely destabilising. Seeing a section of the media working on an agenda to somehow incite this clash in order to throw out an elected government is disturbing. When already there is so much strain between the government and the judiciary owing to several cases before the court involving the government, this kind of scare mongering is intolerable. Disseminating unsubstantiated claims and calling opinions upon them on the powerful medium of television and manipulating public opinion to accept a certain view is a coup of sorts via the media. If state institutions start reacting to each ‘breaking news’, it might lead to more confusion and chaos than there already is. It is neither in the interests of such media groups, nor in the interests of the institution of journalism nor the country. Whether one likes a particular party or regime or not, weakening the system by inciting a clash of institutions is not in the country’s interest. We are engaged in a belated effort after many years, under a democratic dispensation, to strengthen the institutions of the state and get them to work within the parameters prescribed for them in the constitution. To establish their limits and define their relationships is a work-in-progress. This kind of journalism is definitely not helping that cause.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Daily Times, Geo TV, Jang | 11 Comments »

Talha Jalal: Media Ethics In Pakistan

Friday, October 8th, 2010

The following column by Talha Jalal is one of the best analysis of media ethics that we have read. The author does an excellent job of explaining not only the problems but the consequences of these practices also. His article was originally published in Daily Times newspaper on 8 October 2010.

Until 2002, the only television channels that operated in Pakistan were the state-run PTV and a couple of its specialised news and entertainment subsidiaries. Eight years later, there is a plethora of channels, mostly operated by already established private news syndicates. Unlike Pakistan’s political landscape, the media in Pakistan has grown to become diverse and free over the years. News channels range from those that are immensely popular to less prominent, and regional channels that broadcast in regional languages.

But now, all the happy talk about the media has started seeming a bit apathetic. This unchecked public service has made it too easy to manipulate the illiterate masses. Today, prominent news channels have rather dangerously attained the ability to sway public opinion (with their sometimes heavily opinionated broadcasting). From airing uncensored violence, showing political ‘cat fights’ to calling government functionaries the ‘Zardari mafia’, media ethics have often been kept at bay with the excuse of freedom of expression.

While media freedom is still much celebrated in Pakistan and acts as the self-proclaimed saviour of the Pakistani people, a combination of unprofessional news channels, political debates-cum-public-bashing-of-politicians and public brainwashing through airing loaded caricatures that call for moral righteousness, all point to the fact that the media industry in Pakistan is still very juvenile. Perhaps eight years is not long enough to attain maturity and professionalism. The media in Pakistan is fast turning into a self-serving (rather than public-serving) industry — an industry that glorifies itself, is self-righteous and, most discomforting of all, has a huge persecution complex.

On the other hand, in the absence of a reasonable film industry and as a result of a media-induced obsession with politics, news anchors and political commentators have become celebrities for the young and old alike. With startled faces, populaces stick to their TV sets every evening to watch political talk shows that have become the only entertainment for the recreation-starved masses.

When General Musharraf opened up the media sector for private syndicates in 2002, issues that would arise as a result of this privatisation were not taken into account. With the advent of the private media in Pakistan came an unprecedented freedom of expression and an ever-increasing awareness among the public. But along with this amassing of news channels also came corporate interests and increasingly compromised media ethics. While the largely illiterate masses were astounded at the liberal and freethinking programmes on the freshly inaugurated television channels, the government and the media stake holders both ignored the need for a self-imposed check on the media and its long-term role in Pakistani society. This ignorance, which was earlier caused by the excitement of the newfound freedom of expression and then became an excuse for revenue generation, is now causing many problems, the effects of which will be harmful in the long run.

As a result of the commodification of news and a disregard for ethical reporting, news content of both the electronic and print media has suffered gravely. Studies have concluded that the content of Pakistani newspapers, both in Urdu and English, is extremely skewed towards politics, terrorism and government/judiciary-related news. This comes at the cost of ignoring other pressing social issues.

This content disparity in the print media is replicated in the electronic media as well. It is perhaps quite pertinent to ask the following question: why is the national media only filled with flashy stories about terrorism, politics, crime and inflation? Social problems, problems of education and health, whose solutions are much less remote than that of terrorism and political debacles, hardly ever make headlines.

A fundamental problem with Pakistani media remains the treatment of news as a commodity rather than a public good. This rather overly capitalist attitude leads journalists to use fancy language, metaphors, proverbs and emotionally charged arguments that unnecessarily distort facts. This practice of treating media content as a commodity seems to have led journalists into losing their objectivity. Moreover, this attitude has pushed journalists to report heavily on stories containing shock value or stories that are reaction-oriented.

There should, however, be no doubt that deciding what to report on should only be the prerogative of journalists and media stakeholders. These choices cannot be imposed upon the media by a regulatory authority or the government in general. These, clearly, are questions of media ethics and they can only be addressed by a professional uplifting of reporting standards and a collective adoption of ethical and socially productive policies by media stakeholders in Pakistan.

While commenting on established media practices, noted author Arundhati Roy wrote that contemporary media is a “crisis-driven media” whose cash turnover is dependent on crisis turnover. Keeping this in view, it is easy to understand the current scenario in Pakistan and also, to a large extent, elsewhere in the world. Professionally committed journalists and advocates of media ethics stress that media corporations should resort to a turnover that is driven by ethical reporting. This is in striking contrast to the business strategy that is presently running the media industry. It is a reality that both the electronic and print media in Pakistan have inadvertently turned into crisis mongers. A crisis-driven media is unethical.

Media stakeholders in Pakistan collectively need to reassess the overarching role of the media in Pakistani society and come up with a collective ethics and compliance code for journalists and the print and electronic media. Such measures will not only bring a positive change to Pakistani society but also strengthen the media itself and bring more institutional credibility.

Issues that are more important for society and have to deal with the masses such as water shortages, load shedding, public health, infrastructure, wages, poverty, etc, should be pursued by the media to a point where a solution is eventually reached. Flashing stories that are not pursued to the end tend to produce no outcome in the long run. In a country where a plane crash covers up the fake degrees issue, a shoe-throwing incident puts coverage of country-wide flooding on the back burner and a bomb blast covers up everything else, there is a dire need to set our priorities and realise how crucial the media’s social responsibility is.

The writer is a research assistant at the Development Policy Research Centre, Pakistan and is also associated with the Centre for International Media Ethics.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Daily Times | 3 Comments »

Are Some Journalists Providing PR For Banned Groups?

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

Are some journalists, either unwittingly or for pay, providing PR for banned militant groups? That is a question raised by Gulmina Bilal Ahmad in today’s Daily Times, and one that bears close examination.

Gulmina takes to task reporter Yousaf Ali from The News for an article he wrote last week claiming that “Islamic charities most effective in relief activities”.

If I were associated with an ‘Islamic’ charity, I would file a suit against the reporter because he goes on to mention organisations that are old wines in new bottles. In other words, banned militant organisations operating under new names. There are a number of Islamic charities that are doing excellent work and do not use militant ways and means. They are funded not by mafias, crime and drug money as the militant organisations are, and have transparent, audited accounts.

The reporter is supposed to report, not give an opinion. Opinions are reserved for the op-ed pages. However, in the said news story, in the very title, the reporter has given his considered opinion. Throughout the four-column story, he fails to establish what is the basis of his sweeping conclusion displayed prominently in the heading.

Clearly, there is a problem raised by the fact that the author makes a bold claim that is not supported by the facts presented in his reporting. The reporter may believe that his claim is true – in fact, the claim could be true – but without providing evidence to support the claim, the reporter is wrong in making it.

But even the reporters claims are questionable. Yousaf Ali writes that,

Cooked food has been distributed among 0.25 million so far, while 23,046 packages were distributed among 161,322 families, the handout stated.

But according to Daily Mail News, the US has sent over 77,000 food packets for flood victims.

Talking to a privet television channel, the NDMA chairman said that they had demanded 380,000 food packets from the US for the flood stricken people in the country. He said the US sent a first batch of 77,000 food packets through C-130 plane which had been dispatched to affected areas.

Nadeem Ahmad said that another 43,000 boxes were expected to reach soon. “The US has assured of more cooperation to ease the miseries of people,” he said. Meanwhile, US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson announced that the US government is continuing to send assistance for flood relief efforts in Pakistan. “The United States supports Pakistan’s emergency relief efforts on behalf of people affected by recent monsoon floods,” she said.

Surely Mr Ali knows that 77,000 is more than 23,046. So why does he ignore such facts in his article?

Gulima suspects a bit of spot-fixing going on at Jang Group’s English newspaper:

The news story further goes on to declare that the “most effective among the Islamic charities” is “the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation which is linked with the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD)”. The reporter clearly is aware of the way the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation is linked with the JuD. Is the reporter not aware then that the JuD is a banned organisation? As if the heading of the news story was not enough, the reporter, to really imprint it in the reader’s mind, further states, “much discussed in the international media, the Falah-e-Insaniat is another major contributor in the relief activities”.

Since, in this space, I am clearly asked to give my opinion, I will venture to state that it seems to be a paid, placed piece to do some damage control and spin some ‘feel good’ stories about the Falah-e-Insaniat, given the fact that “much has been written in the international media” about it.

Banned organizations are well known to change their names in order to avoid being closed down. Despite this, they are well known. They are also being praised by some in the media – as evidenced by Yousaf Ali’s column as well as articles in The Nation, and Dawn.

And this is not an issue that appears only in English media, of course.

Leading English newspapers do not have the monopoly over promoting irresponsible reporting nor is the militant media confined only to English. Just this week, an Urdu paper prominently displayed a statement of Hafiz Saeed, head of JuD, claiming that “there is no al Qaeda”. If there is no al Qaeda, then how is it that there is a group that has, to date, claimed responsibility for global terrorism attacks? Another question that begs to be answered is what is the basis for this claim of Mr Hafiz Saeed?

Just yesterday, Urdu newspaper Daily Khabrian included an article claiming that “foreign hands” were involved in the Lahore attacks. The evidence for this conspiracy? A statement from Rana Munir of Pakistan Muslim Rajput Federation.

The reporter for Daily Khabrian did not feel it necessary to ask how Rana Munir knew of such a conspiracy, and the newspaper’s editors did not (as evidenced by the publication of the article) feel it necessary to ask why such a statement by Rana Munir was significant enough to be a priority for publication. All of this despite the fact that banned group Lashker-e-Jhangvi claiming responsibility for the attacks.

These articles raise important questions: How is it that banned groups are getting a disproportionate amount of positive press coverage for the relief work that they are doing? Why do media outlets continue to publish conspiracy theories absolving banned groups from responsibility for attacks – even after the groups admit responsibility? And why do major news outlets like The News (Jang), The Nation, and Dawn consider it a priority to publish articles praising the work of banned groups over others?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Daily Khabrian, Daily Times, Dawn, Jang, The News | 4 Comments »

Good Advice

Saturday, August 21st, 2010

Naeem TahirNaeem Tahir offers some excellent advice for TV anchors in his column for Daily Times today.

I think what needs to be done is a careful presentation of the facts in a balanced way. Stop being so aggressive and interrupting everyone on the show. When you shout and speak more than the guest, you are projecting your prejudices and blocking the other point of view. If you believe that someone is hiding or misrepresenting the facts, then your calm and pointed questions will indeed expose him or her and the viewers will understand. Your aggression puts the viewer off. An anchor’s calm creates the benchmark for the tone of discussion. Please realise that viewers have already been educated, thanks to your efforts. Now they expect more. They look for an analysis of the situation. They want a dispassionate, thought provoking appraisal and a way forward. They expect public opinion to be motivated for short-term and long-term solutions. One anchor interviewed a Sindh ‘nationalist’ leader and probed his reservations about the present scheme of water management. Some positive thinking emerged. This was an example. While the nation has experienced this colossal natural tragedy and is prepared to avoid a recurrence, we need to focus on acceptable planning. If the civil government fails to rehabilitate, reconstruct and plan for the future, the media must take it to task.

Anchors have the power of communication beyond the reach of anyone else. It is the nature of your job that it is burdened with social responsibility. If you appreciate the good work of the armed forces, highlighting it is the right thing to do, but also encourage those who are sincerely mobilising. Build role models. Look at the causes and hold responsible those who have neglected the proper need for water management. Focus on developing a consensus on future strategy. Of course, expose corruption, mismanagement, apathy and incompetence. But be a role model yourself — of character, knowledge, investigation and decency.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Dean Nelson Responds

Wednesday, August 18th, 2010
New Delhi based British reporter Dean Nelson

British reporter Dean Nelson

Mr Dean Nelson whose column in the British newspaper Telegraph we recently criticised, has responded to our post. His comment appears on the original post, and is published again in full at the end of this post.

It has also been brought to our attention that Mr Dean Nelson has been falsely accusing this blog of deleting his comment, of censorship, and of hiding his comment. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Regular readers, and most people familiar with how blogs work, know that comments are automatically placed in moderation queue for review. This is a standard practice to prevent obscene, threatening, or spam comments from being published. All honest comments, even those critical of our posts, are published in full, as regular readers can attest. Mr Dean Nelson is welcome to review previous posts and comments to verify this fact.

Regarding Mr Nelson’s complaints, though, we feel we must point out the following:

Dean Nelson’s article carried the sensational headline, “£300m earthquake aid ‘misused by Zardari’”. Nothing in his article, however, supports this accusation. Nowhere does he suggest how Zardari is responsible for misusing funds. Nowhere does he suggest how Zardari is responsible even for diverting funds. Nowhere is there even an allegation from his anonymous source that Zardari is responsible for any budgetary matters related to ERRA or New Balakot.

Actually, with claims of budgetary matters it would be more realistic to hold the Prime Minister responsible who, as Chief Executive, could be held responsible for funding cuts. But even then, where is the evidence that the PM had anything to do with this? Actually, we will demonstrate that the opposite is supported by the facts.

The fact is, Mr Dean Nelson accuses Asif Ali Zardari of personally misusing 300 million in foreign aid for victims of the 2005 earthquake. He provides no evidence to support this claim, making the headline itself defaming and potentially libelous.

As for his claim that “the most important evidence of all” is the absence of New Balakot, I invite the respected journalist to do more than simply visit the site and then make wild assumptions. A quick review of recent news provides the following information that suggests much more plausible alternatives to Mr Dean Nelson’s theory of Zardari misusing the funds:

1. Dawn: New Balakot project: Bakrial residents refuse to surrender land

“It is injustice on the part of the provincial government to displace us by acquiring our residential and agriculture land to settle the earthquake affected people of Balakot,” Zahoor Ahmad, head of the committee constituted by the people of Bakrial to defend their lands, told Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Hazara Division, Mohammad Suleiman on Thursday.

“We will not vacate our land and houses until our agriculture and residential lands were not excluded of the New Balakot project,” he warned.

…

Work on the project was suspended some eight months ago after the death of a man during a violent clash between police and the residents over evacuation of their houses causing huge financial loss to the government.

2. Dawn: Work on New Balakot City resumes after 8-moth break

Relocation of old Balakot was agreed in consultation with the then provincial government and local politicians, who decided to provide land for rebuilding the new town free of cost at Bakrial, while the land in old Balakot remained property of the owners. The idea was to shift the people to new location for their safety.

Things, however, turned complex after the provincial government sought money for land acquisition from the federal government.

Erra fought for the case and in addition to Rs61.25 million paid to people of old Balakot under rural housing subsidy and a prefabricated house worth Rs400,00 to affected families, it got Rs1.5 billion approved to be paid as compensation for 11,463 kanals where a new city was to built, hosting nearly 5,000 families.

The amount of Rs1.5 billion was paid for land acquisition in November 2006 and Erra had been negotiating resumption of work and demanding land free of encumbrances from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government for the past nine months.

Even now Erra has received partially cleared land, where the reconstruction has commenced.

3. Daily Times: ERRA starts rebuilding Balakot City

The relocation of the old Balakot City was decided in consultation with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government while local politicians had agreed to provide land for the new town, free of cost at Bakriyal, while the ownership of land in old Balakot City would remain with the property owners. But the reconstruction came to a halt due to the unwillingness of the provincial government to provide land free of cost. ERRA had planned to shift the residences of the people to a new location. But the reconstruction had to be halted when the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa demanded money for land acquisition. ERRA Deputy Chairman Lieutenant General Haroon Aslam recently held a meeting with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ameer Haider Khan Hoti and discussed the issue in detail and highlighted the decisions taken in the council meeting chaired by Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani.

As is clear, there have been multiple obstacles to the completion of the project – something not unusual for such expensive and expansive projects in any country, especially when such a project involves the reallocation of land. In this instance, landowners and residents of Bakryal have been protesting since 2007.Does Mr Dean Nelson believe that Asif Ali Zardari has been orchestrating some conspiracy since before he was even elected?

Despite these setbacks, it is clear from these reports that the provincial and national governments were working together to resolve difficult issues to everyone’s satisfaction. Nowhere is there any suggestion that Asif Ali Zardari had anything to do with the delays, much less the misuse of funds.

As for claims that funds were inappropriately diverted to some other project, again there is not evidence to support this accusation.

According to a Daily Times report of 6 April by Ijaz Kakakhel, budget allocations were reduced across all sectors.

Keeping in view an emergent financial situation, the sources said the government has informed all federal ministries / departments and organisation to prepare priority lists for their respective developmental schemes under total PSDP Rs 290 billion for 2010-11.

With total Rs 290 billion federal component of PSDP, Rs 10 billion is likely to be allocated for Earthquake Reconstruction & Rehabilitation Authority (ERRA), which makes total value of PSDP Rs 300 billion. Last year’s (2009-10) allocation for federal component of PSDP was Rs 421 billion and Rs 25 billion for ERRA. The proposed PSDP allocation of Rs 290 billion is 31 percent lower than the last year PSDP 2009-10 allocation Rs 421 billion. The proposed PSDP 2010-11 allocation for ERRA Rs10 billion is 60 percent lower than last year allocation of Rs 25 billion.

The article goes on to report that the government by way of the Prime Minister had requested that the PSDP budget be enhanced, but that such a move would threaten the International Monetary Fund program.

Mr Dean Nelson claims in his response that his evidence consists of,

“…minutes of meetings, correspondence, ERRA schedules, and the most important evidence of all: The absence of New Balakot as a promised new settlement.”

The delays in completion of the project are well explained above. Without having access to the documents provided to Mr Dean Nelson, it is hard to know what exactly is in them. But it sounds like Mr Dean Nelson spoke with someone at ERRA who is disappointed that they did not receive the full amount of funding that was requested. But what agency receives the full amount of funding that is requested every year in any country, especially during a financial crisis?

In Mr Dean Nelson’s own country, Finance Minister George Osborne announced £6.2bn budget cuts this year. Does Mr Dean Nelson believe it proper to infer from this policy announcement that the Queen Elizabeth has misused these funds? Such a claim would be absurd. So it is with Mr Dean Nelson’s claim that Asif Ali Zardari has misused £300 millions.

In the face of overwhelming and documented evidence to the contrary, one cannot help but wonder why Mr Dean Nelson chose to publicly accuse Asif Ali Zardari of personally misusing £300m in earthquake aid. Is it a manifestation of personal or political ill-feelings towards the president? Or is it a result of sloppy and improper reporting?

Furthermore, as Mr Dean Nelson himself admits in his response, Pakistan is currently suffering from a ‘trust deficit’ that threatens our ability to raise the funds necessary to address the current flood crisis which has been called the worst disaster in recent history. Does Mr Dean Nelson deny that publishing sensational and misleading accusations of government misuse of relief funds contributes to this image problem? Publicly accusing President Zardari of misusing £300m in disaster relief funds exacerbates a problem that is believed to be preventing Pakistan from receiving vital international aid. If it was true, it would be the fault of Asif Ali Zardari. If it is easily demonstrated to be not true, who is responsible then? That Mr Dean Nelson did not intend such is beside the point. Actions have consequences, and it is not unrealistic to contend that Mr Dean Nelson’s column may be a contributing factor to Pakistan’s difficulties in raising relief funds.

Mr Dean Nelson is correct in one respect, and we will admit as much. Our original post made too much of the fact of his station in Delhi. This is an irrelevant distraction and we regret our error in suggesting that his station in Delhi has any bearing whatsoever on the accuracy of the reporting in his article. We politely ask our readers to judge Mr Dean Nelson’s article and our subsequent review only on the merits of the facts presented.

We stand by our complaint that Mr Dean Nelson fails to provide any evidence whatsoever supporting his scandalous claim that Asif Ali Zardari misused £300m in earthquake relief funds. Mr Dean Nelson also fails to provide any substantive evidence to support a claim of malfeasance related to ERRA or New Balakot project. We believe that the evidence presented above more than handily refutes Mr Dean Nelson’s article, and we look forward to his correcting the record.

Mr. Dean Nelson had the following response to our original post:

Dean Nelson says: August 16, 2010 at 11:00 pm

I object to this ‘analysis’ of my piece on earthquake aid being redirected by the Pakistan govt to other projects.

I don’t know who supports your group, but if it has any understanding of journalism, especially in a country like Pakistan, then it will understand that sometimes sources need to be protected.

In these circumstances the journalist must make a judgement: Is the source reliable and authoritative? Do I believe the source? What supporting evidence is there for the claim?

My original source in this case had minutes of meetings, correspondence, ERRA schedules, and the most important evidence of all: The absence of New Balakot as a promised new settlement. I visited it and it wasn’t there despite it being scheduled for completion last month.

I’m satisfied my story is true, which is why it was published.

Beyond this story you make claims that I have some kind of bias against Pakistan or an agenda to dissuade donors to its flood funds. Why would anyone want people to withhold donations for people so clearly suffering? You don’t provide any evidence but a commentary piece on why Britain is courting India for trading gains.

In India I am as severely criticised as I am by you and other government supporters for my commentaries on Kashmir or for suggesting that Pakistan deserves better friends for allies.

Here are the links to them:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/deannelson/100032154/indias-achievements-put-pakistan-in-the-shade-now-it-is-time-for-western-manipulation-to-cease/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7923727/Pakistans-burning-sense-of-injustice.html

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/deannelson/100050312/the-world-wants-to-think-the-best-about-india-so-we-turn-our-back-on-kashmir/

It is a sad reflection on the psychological relationship between Indians and Pakistanis that objective reporting on one is seen as siding with the other.

I love India and Pakistan equally, and I’ve been traveling in both for twenty years and reporting both for five.

They each have great strengths and serious problems, and I report on and comment on both.

There are many in Pakistan who have criticised the government’s handling of the flood crisis, and many governments around the world who have held back or given to the UN fund rather than the PM’s flood relief fund because of concerns about trust and transparency. Nawaz Sharif raised this point with the PM on Saturday when they agreed to create an independent fund to address these concerns and allow people to give with confidence.

I can’t see how reporting on these concerns or exposing redirection of aid funds is an attempt to dissuade people from giving.

For the record, I wish Pakistan nothing but peace and prosperity, and I hope the millions affected by the floods right now get ALL the aid sent to them as soon as possible.

I hope this addresses the points you’ve raised. What I don’t understand is why you didn’t contact me first before writing this ‘analysis’ to ask me why the source wasn’t named.

All I can tell you is that the source could not have been better placed or informed. Right now the source is very afraid. Pakistan doesn’t really have a whistleblower culture.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Foreign Media | 4 Comments »

'Trust Deficit' a Self Fulfilling Prophecy?

Tuesday, August 17th, 2010

Pakistan is suffering from the worst disaster in recent history, said UN General Secretary Ban Ki Moon as he witnessed the devastation himself. Still, many commentators have noticed that except for the US and UK, most nations have not offered much in the way of humanitarian relief. A popular notion in the media has blamed this on a ‘trust deficit’ where donor nations do not ‘trust’ the government to use the money wisely. The question should be asked, though, how much of this ‘trust deficit’ is based on reality, and how much is a media creation.

Yesterday’s edition of Tonight with Najam Sethi perpetuated this narrative that there is a ‘trust deficit’ that is keeping people from donating to help flood victims as the donors believe the government is corrupt.

Another example is found in yesterday’s Daily Times article by Muhammad Akram which claims that aid money from Tehran is not appearing because of suspicions that the 2005 earthquake relief funds were misused.

But as we previously demonstrated, the story which has been repeated that the government has ‘misused’ some funds from the 2005 earthquakes is problematic and unreliable. The fact is, there is no evidence for the author’s claims.

First, Mr Nelson’s claim is based on statements by “senior Pakistani officials”. As if taking a cue from our own media, Mr Nelson does not reveal who these supposed officials are – not even what office they allegedly hold.

Second, nowhere in Mr Nelson’s article is there any evidence presented for misuse of funds. What the reporter writes is that some anonymous “officials” (and we’ve seen how reliable anonymous officials can be) have told him that their office suffered budget cuts.

But even Mr Nelson’s own article contradicts this fact when the only named official, Finance Secretary Salman Siddique explained that the issue is not foreign aid money being diverted, but that ERRA had requested extra funds that were not available due to the country’s fiscal deficit. As for foreign aid funds, “No cuts were imposed last year,” the Finance Secretary stated.

That there may be a ‘trust deficit’ it is entirely possible, it must be admitted. According to a report in the Express Tribune today, Elizabeth Byrs, spokeswoman of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said that “we note often an image deficit with regards to Pakistan”.

One must ask where this ‘trust deficit’ comes from, though – especially as it pertains to the present government, which is in power only since the 2008 elections.

Actually, one must put some responsibility on the media, which publishes all manner of rumours and political talking points without recognizing that this is picked up by the foreign media and spread across the world. Take for example the British newspaper quoted above, Telegraph, which published a story earlier this month with the sensational title: “Asif Ali Zardari: life and style of Pakistan’s Mr 10 Per Cent”.

This article is filled with sentences carefully qualified with phrases like “He has been accused of” and “He is also alleged to” and “He is said to”. What the article fails to include is any evidence of any actual crimes. The only thing known for certain by the article is the Asif Ali Zardari was imprisoned for over eight years, yet convicted of nothing.

So who is accusing, alleging, and saying things that create a situation in which, despite the lack of any convictions, a UN spokesperson felt the need to say that there is a ‘trust deficit’? Again, too much of these rumours and political attacks are being perpetuated by our own media.

Perhaps a reporter genuinely believes a rumour, even if he has no evidence to back it up. Perhaps he or his boss have a personal hatred for someone. Perhaps they are supporting another political party. Perhaps they are only trying to publish sensational stories that increase advertising revenue. Whatever the reason, it is still irresponsible and unethical to publish rumours and political attacks. What is worse is that the effects of such practices are longer reaching than the reporter may know.

That Pakistan is suffering cannot be denied. It is no mere rumour that we are experiencing the worst disaster in recent history. No nation – no matter how wealthy, no matter how powerful – would be able to provide all of the essential resources for humanitarian relief and reconstruction if a fifth of their country were under water. Our very survival depends on the trust between nations, and we cannot afford for irresponsibility in the government – or the media – to threaten that trust.

Trustworthy government matters. So also trustworthy media matters.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Foreign Media | No Comments »

Media Double Game Against Bilawal?

Friday, August 6th, 2010

Last night Bilawal Bhutto Zardari released a statement about his immediate future. In short, he says, “I am currently looking into the possibility of studying law” and will not be jumping into politics as widely reported. According to his statement, Bilawal felt compelled to act out, “to counter some inaccurate information that has recently been reported”. While there was certainly much media attention to the alleged speech planned for Saturday, what is more telling is the way Bilawal’s future and his more immediate decision to open a donation center for flood victims has been treated in the news media.

On Thursday, Dawn reported that “Speech by Bilawal fuels talk of political career”.

But now he has finished his history degree at Christ Church, seen as one of the most aristocratic of Oxford’s colleges, speculation is growing about what steps he will now take towards his political destiny.

Bhutto, who is already chairman of the PPP, is expected to speak before several thousand of its supporters at an event in Birmingham, central England, alongside his father who is visiting Britain.

It was not so far fetched for media to report that Bilawal would be at the rally scheduled for Saturday since Waheed Rasab, the PPP’s coordinator in Britain, told reporters as much. But the truth is, this was mostly speculation.

As a result, Dawn reported today about Bilawal’s statment.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Thursday spoke for the first time in many months, only to categorically deny the prevalent impression created by a section of the media that he was to launch his political career over the weekend by attending a public meeting in Birmingham.

One has to wonder, with all the speculation about whether Bilawal will make a speech and enter politics, all the party coordinators and “anonymous sources” who were telling what was going to happen – why did no journalist actually bother to ask Bilawal what he thinks?

More disturbing, though, is that even Bilawal’s statement has not stopped certain media companies from continuing political attacks in their reporting.

The Nation‘s report on the statement includes the following conclusion:

The sources said that PPP took decision not to launch political career of Bilawal Bhutto Zaradri due to severe criticism launched by the media and politicians that in tough circumstance, President Zardari has left for UK to launch political career of his son.

Nowhere in the article does it reveal who these “sources” are, or what their evidence is for this claim, of course. This seems like a pretty transparent attempt for the media to take the credit for something that Bilawal is doing. So, when Bilawal does something they don’t like, it is his fault. When he does something they do like, The Nation claims credit.

The News, however, is even worse. On 1 August, the newspaper wrote that Bilawal “would do well by stepping in to cancel the ceremony and instead setting about to prove himself a worthy leader through more solid action rather than flamboyant gestures.”

Upon the release of Bilawal’s statement, however, The News quickly changed its tune. This morning’s newspaper is actually critical of Bilawal’s move.

Chairman of the PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari dramatically declared last night that he would not address the Birmingham rally on Saturday, August 07, putting cold water on the plans that he would be launched as the party chief and adding a new sense of drama to the countrywide campaign against President Zardari.

In a dramatic climbdown, the 21-year-old son of Benazir said that he would continue with his studies and wanted to stay away from the media. The move comes as a humiliation to the party mandarins who were preparing for weeks for his grand entry into politics.

It is worth noting here that The News may have slipped in admitting that there is a “campaign against President Zardari”. Of course, this should not be a surprise to readers of The News, which has a sordid history recently of publishing unsubstantiated political attacks.

But it is especially important to note that the political bias of The News is clearly evident in their inability to give proper recognition to Bilawal even when he does something that the very newspaper says it hopes for! Rather than praising Bilawal for canceling his appearance and setting up a donation point for flood victims, The News calls the move “a humiliation”. This is a double game against Bilawal – damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

To their credit, Dawn, Daily Times and Express Tribune reported the development without infusing an opinion into their reporting. This shows that there are some journalists content to simply report the facts, and this should be encouraged.

Still, we must look at this episode as a part of the ongoing problem with media speculation, wishful journalism, substituting opinions for facts, and playing political double games. Bilawal aside, we all deserve better.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Daily Times, Dawn, Express Tribune, Jang, The Nation, The News | 15 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »