Posts Tagged ‘Ethics’

The Nation Responds, Sets Example

Friday, September 2nd, 2011

The Nation logoToday we received a response from The Nation regarding our post of 1st September, ‘The Nation Still Publishing Taliban Propaganda‘. We appreciate the quick response from The Nation which clarifies that these articles were a result of the website being hacked. We believe the response from The Nation deserves special mention here because following our post they took the time to review the copies of the print edition to ensure that this propaganda was not being published in the print editions of Karachi, Islamabad and Lahore each, and they are also taking measures to prevent hackers from accessing their website in the future which displays an excellent level of professionalism that is rare.

It should also be noted that this is not the first time that The Nation has corrected an error after it was brought to their attention. On 16th August we noticed an incorrect photo being attached to an article on the website, and it was quickly corrected after the mistake was brought to their attention. As we said at the time, “mistakes happen”. This is understandable. Unfortunately, we are also living in a time when some groups will use illegal methods such as hacking websites in order to spread propaganda. As is clarified in the response from The Nation, this was the case with the articles by Zabihullah Mehsud which were not approved by The Nation and they are taking action to correct this.

No media group is 100 per cent perfect or accurate all the time. The most trustworthy ones, though, are the ones that are willing to admit and learn from their mistakes. By not only correcting the issue, but honestly and transparently investigating and offering a public clarification, The Nation deserves to be commended for setting an excellent example to all media groups.

Dear Pak Media Watch

Thank you and Mr Rumi and Ms Isfahani [Editors Note: Raza Rumi and Farahnaz Ispahani are not members of the PMW team, but we thank them for helping bring this matter to attention.] for bringing this post to my attention. I have gone through this PMW comment, as well as the previous one mentioned in the introduction, which I was not aware of at the time that it was published, roughly a year ago. Having looked into the matter, I am in a position to reply and address the concerns raised.

To begin, there are most certainly items posted with the byline “Zabihullah Mehsud” on our website. The last one is dated 28 August, 2011. Having carefully gone through all three (KHI, ISB and LHE) editions of The Nation’s print edition on the 27th, 28th and 29th of August, 2011 neither that news nor that byline has been published on our pages, nor would we normally have carried it in the manner it was displayed on the website. After checking the source of the news uploaded, it is with regret that we confirm that our website has been hacked and due to the gaps in our security this post and others like it, carrying the “Zabihullah Mehsud” byline, have not been identified or caught by our anti-hacking software. We apologise for this unfortunate incident and for the matter displayed and the inconvenience caused to our readers. The process of upgrading our site has begun; an emergency session was called at the head office of The Nation with our website managers and an advanced security system for nation.com.pk is being put into development immediately. The news items linked in the PMW post along with all others archived with the same byline are being removed as I write this.

As you said in your post of September 2010, “…it would not be unusual for a reporter to quote a Taliban spokesman,…” as is the practice in The Nation, Reuters, Telegraph, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and AFP, among others – all of whom regularly reference the Taliban spokesman (Zabihullah Mehsud) in their reports. The parts added directly from the Taliban website, which do not appear in our print edition, are also extensions of the hacking problem, that this PMW post has helped identify.

In response to your question regarding The Nation’s thoughts on “…the suicide bombing outside a Quetta mosque that killed at least 11 people on Wednesday…” please refer to our editorial, to be published tomorrow (3 September, 2011), which I hope will satisfy your curiosity. It may interest you to know that regarding the hacking of our site, we will also be carrying an editorial in The Nation to be published on the 4th of September, 2011.

Sincerely,
Rameeza Majid Nizami

Possible Hacking Scandal

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011

Computer HackerI received several notices since the past few days about a possible media hacking scandal. No, I’m not referring to the recent hacking scandal that brought down the News of the World and found the chief of News Corp media group Rupert Murdoch summoned before Parliament for a public shaming. No, this is a pukka desi version all our own.

A few weeks ago, Google began posting a small alert in the inboxes of Gmail users letting them know if their emails were being automatically forwarded to another account. Google requested that users verify that the email forwarding was indeed authorised and not the result of hacking.

Apparently this alert showed up in the email accounts of several prominent Pakistani politicians, alerting them to the possibility that their emails had been hacked and their private messages forwarded to an unknown party.

It is currently unknown who is behind the alleged hacking, but there is some evidence that it may have been done by someone involved in the media to dig through the private emails of leading political figures.

Is Pakistan looking at its own News Corp scandal in the works? That remains to be seen. But it is worth taking a few steps to make sure your email account is safe. Google recommends the following steps:

  1. If you see unfamiliar account access, please change your password immediately. This may indicate that someone has unauthorized access to your account. It’s a good idea to pick a strong password for your Gmail account and never use it again on other websites.
  2. Sign back in to your Gmail account and click the gear icon in the top right corner of Gmail and choose Mail settings.
  3. Click the Forwarding and POP/IMAP tab.
  4. In the ‘Forwarding’ section, select the Disable forwarding radio button.
  5. Click the first drop-down menu in the ‘Forwarding’ section and remove any unfamiliar email addresses.

Does Pakistan have a News Corp scandal of its very own? Time will tell if this is the work of an overly ambitious reporter or something else. Whether you are a prominent politician or a private citizen, though, your personal messages should be your own and not for others to secretly read. Please take some time to check your own accounts and protect yourself from hackers.

More Plagiarism Allegations Hit Jang Group

Friday, July 29th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)Latest plagiarism allegations against Jang Group comes from blogger Abdullah Saad who posted on Twitter about an article by Ikram Sehgal that is strangely similar to a post by Saad earlier this year.

Ikram Sehgal: Without seeking to achieve parity with India, Pakistan has to maintain the status quo, by upgrading its non-conventional weapons capabilities i.e. better and more accurate delivery platforms, more plutonium (instead of uranium) based warheads for its ballistic and cruise missiles (because they ensure a better ratio of yield versus weight of the fissile material used per warhead) and ensures second nuclear strike capability by deploying plutonium based warheads on its subs. This does not achieve parity with India but maintains status quo. The delay will enable Pakistan to accumulate sufficient plutonium stocks before negotiating over it.

http://bit.ly/pApgAb

And [Abdullah Saad]:

Keeping in view of the above mentioned reality, it can be argued that Pakistan cannot afford to, nor will ever seek to achieve parity with India. So then, how does it maintain the status quo? Essentially by upgrading its non-conventional weapons capabilities.

When I refer to the word ‘upgrading’, it doesn’t necessarily mean an increase in the ‘number’ of nuclear weapons but instead better and more accurate delivery platforms, more plutonium (instead of uranium) based warheads for its ballistic and cruise missiles (because they ensure a better ratio of yield versus weight of the fissile material used per warhead) and an ensured second nuclear strike capability by deploying plutonium based warheads on its subs. The idea is not to achieve parity – but to maintain the status quo.

This is where Pakistan’s strong objections to FMCT come into play. The idea behind the delay and the sudden increase of plutonium reactors is to enable Pakistan to accumulate sufficient plutonium stocks before Pakistan can no longer postpone entry into the FMCT.

http://bit.ly/hWHRLc

Abdullah Saad notes on Twitter that he has written to The News Editor Talat Aslam about the allegation requesting a response. We hope that he shares the response publicly.

See also:

 

If only our own media was held to the same standard

Sunday, July 10th, 2011

Geo TV report quotes DG ISPR Major General Athar Abbas criticising The New York Times for unsubstantiated reports based on anonymous sources “without any concrete evidence”. According to the official ISPR press release, Gen Abbas gave the following statement:

‘In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in reexamining the claims as new evidence emerged-or failed to emerge’.
The Military Spokesman further said: “if the newspaper continues with its vilifying campaign without any concrete evidence, I am afraid at some point it may end up expressing its deep regret the way it did in the case of its Iraq coverage.

Pakistan Media Watch agrees with DG ISPR that it is unacceptable for media groups to allow controversial and questionable information that is insufficiently qualified to stand unchallenged. We further agree that concrete evidence is a necessary requirement of proper reporting.

Pakistan Media Watch looks forward to our own media adopting this same standard.

The Nation Sets Example For Others

Monday, May 30th, 2011

The Nation logoWe noted last week that a report in The Nation mischaracterised a recent speech by Ambassador to US Husain Haqqani at National Defence University Islamabad. Two days later, the same newspaper issued a correction noting that actually the speech was friendly.

Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani was not ‘shell-shocked’, as reported in a newspaper report, when a poll he took during a lecture in Islamabad last week reflected anti-American sentiment among the audience, a statement posted on Pakistan Media Watch, a website devoted to fact-checking, said.

The website also placed a video of the ambassador’s exchange with students of National Defence University (NDU) in support of its assertion, saying the May 21 report in The Nation mischaracterised his speech about foreign policy and Pak-US relations.

“Nowhere in the video does one see a ‘shell-shocked’ or ‘speechless’ Ambassador,” the statement said, referring to the newspaper report. “Also, video clearly shows that the exchange was part of a broader, friendly discussion with NDU students about how foreign policy and specifically Pak-US relations should be considered with logic and reason and not emotions driving the debate.”

This is a good example for other media groups to follow. It is not unheard of that a news source will give incorrect information either intentionally or unintentionally and the reporter may be none the wiser. Even the great journalist make mistakes sometimes or are misled themselves. It is a sign of the greatest journalistic professionalism to admit those mistakes and offer corrections so that the readers will get the correct information. The Nation deserves recognition for issuing a correction. We hope other media groups will follow this example.

Geo Caught Plagiarising, Censoring Report On Drones

Tuesday, May 17th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)Editors and journalists may think they can get away with plagiarizing articles and changing the facts reported without being caught. But in the modern age of the internet this is simply not possible. Most recently Geo has found itself embarrassed on the world stage when US think tank ‘AfPak Channel’ caught it plagiarizing an article from AFP and changing the facts without any explanation.

On Monday, international news agency AFP reported that ‘US drone attacks kill seven in Pakistan’. Later that same day, Geo reported that US drone attacks kill nine in NWA. The articles are nearly identical.

In fact, the only difference between the two articles is that Geo removed paragraphs from the original story that note the body count from the attack. The original AFP article contains the following paragraphs:

“At least seven militants were killed in both the US drone strikes. The vehicle was completely burnt and the compound was also destroyed,” a security official in Miranshah told AFP.

A second security official in Peshawar confirmed both the drone strikes and the casualties.

“We don’t know their exact identities but we were informed that there were foreigners inside that compound,” one intelligence official told AFP.

The US strikes doubled last year, with more than 100 drone strikes killing over 670 people, according to an AFP tally, and the CIA has said the covert programme has severely disrupted Al-Qaeda’s leadership.

The raid also rocked Pakistan’s seemingly powerful security establishment, with its intelligence services and military widely accused of incompetence or complicity over the presence of bin Laden close to a military academy.

As you can see, each of the paragraphs Geo removed from the original article contain either mentions of the news agency that originally published the report, AFP as well as paragraphs that mention the death count and references that might be considered as critical to the establishment.

The action by Geo was noticed and reported as “strange” by US think tank AfPak Channel on their Twitter account.

How strange that Geo http://ow.ly/4VOcS took this AFP story http://ow.ly/4VOf2 and just changed 7 to 9, without attribution

US media groups were rightly criticised heavily for covering up the identity of CIA contractor Raymond Davis earlier this year. If Geo is also found to be removing paragraphs from reports that could be seen as critical of the military and intelligence agencies here as well as changing facts such as death counts and plagiarizing reports from other news agencies, it must be asked whether other reports from Geo have been censored, changed, and plagiarized.

Geo has been on the front lines of calls to protect and defend the freedom of media. But if Geo is censoring and editing reports to protect the establishment from criticism, it must be asked how free their media really is.

What do McDonalds, Tata Group, and Osama have in common?

Friday, May 6th, 2011

Express Tribune LogoYesterday we wrote about the two-faced reporting on Osama bin Laden coming from Jang Group‘s newspapers. But Jang Group is not the only media group that has been promoting one perspective in its English language media while projecting a sympathetic or pro-jihadi message in its Urdu publications.

On 4 May, Express Tribune published opinion pieces about Osama bin Laden by Pervez Hoodbhoy and Fasi Zaka.

Here’s what Fasi Zaka says about media treatment of Osama’s death:

I just don’t understand how our TV anchors are glib enough to justify calling Osama bin Laden a shaheed. The man had no regard for life, especially Muslim life. He engineered attacks on the West, so they would retaliate and kill Muslims en masse in their vengeance upon selected countries. Every Muslim was a pawn to his mad dreams.

Sadly, Fasi Zaka may want to talk to his own employer.

Daily ExpressAppearing on the same day in the group’s Urdu language newspaper Daily Express there appeared a piece by Abdul Qadir Hasan titled, “Shaheed Osama Kay Baad” – “After Shaheed Osama” – in which the author terms Osama as “the greatest martyr of the present age”. (Full English translation below)

Abdul Qadir Hasan – After Shaheed Osama article from Daily Express

Back in the English language Express Tribune, for the rest of the world to read, Pervez Hoodbhoy hopes that bin Laden’s death will end any double games of telling the world that we are fighting terrorism while secretly supporting it.

Bin Laden’s death should be regarded as a transformational moment by Pakistan and its military. It is time to dispense with the Musharraf-era cat and mouse games. We must repudiate the current policy of verbally condemning jihadism — and actually fighting it in some places — but secretly supporting it in other places. Until the establishment firmly resolves that it shall not support armed and violent non-state actors of any persuasion — including the Lashkar-e-Taiba — Pakistan will remain in interminable conflict both with itself and with the world.

While in Urdu, for the awam to read, Abdul Qadir Hasan hopes there are “many amongst us willing to be Osama”.

Khuda karay humara emaan salamat rahay aur Osama jaisay sanihay ko fatah-e-azeem kehna wala koi hum mei say na ho, Osama ban nay walay bohat hon.

Daily Express and Express Tribune are both owned by Lakson Group which owns and operates several other companies in Pakistan including McDonalds and Tetley (a Tata Group company).

Lakson Group Companies

 

This list suggests that the owners of Daily Express are probably not Osama sympathising jihadis. Osama earned his money the old fashioned way – he got a check from daddy. Lakson Group seems to be following the modern model of investing in popular brands to make their money. Why else would they operate 22 McDonalds restaurants in Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad, Hyderabad and Faisalabad? And McDonalds – an iconic American brand – is not the only international brand sold by Lakson Group. Actually they also have joint ventures with Titan watch and Tetley Tea (owned by Tata Group).

So here we have a Pakistani company that makes millions selling American and Indian brands…but also selling the al Qaeda brand? One explanation is that it all comes down to money. Daily Express presents a jihadi perspective in the Urdu newspaper because the parent company knows that the liberals like Pervez Hoodbhoy and Fasi Zaka are not going to sell newspapers to people who buy Daily Express. Their English language readers want to read these authors, but their customers who prefer Urdu take their tea a little more bitter.

Abdul Qadir Hasan may believe that Osama bin Laden is a shaheed and an inspiration for young Pakistanis to follow. But by paying him money to say this, and publishing these opinions for the masses to read, Lakson Group is also supporting the al Qaeda point of view. On the Lakson Group website, the company brags that Daily Express has a 24 per cent Market Share in Circulation. Therefore, this pro-al Qaeda viewpoint is being circulated to millions of people. From the regular subscriber to the chaiwalla who picks up the newspaper his customer left behind.

The question that must be asked is whether Lakson Group is aware that their Urdu language newspaper is being used to promote extremist ideology among the masses. If so, do they promote this point of view out of a cynical love of money? Or is it out of an ideological sympathy for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda also?

More likely, Lakson Group is unaware that their company Daily Express is praising Osama bin Laden and promoting pro-al Qaeda views. They should be informed immediately so that they can decide if they want to continue paying for this.

A free media allows Lakson Group to choose to pay for and publish extremist and pro-militant views. But a free media does not REQUIRE Lakson Group to do this. It’s time for companies funding pro-jihadi authors to take responsibility for their products.

Below is the article published in Lakson Group‘s newspaper, Daily Express

After Shaheed Osama
by Abdul Qadir Hasan

Abdul Qadir HasanThis Saudi national who, after sacrificing billions of rupees, his family and children and entrusting his life to Allah, stepped into the field of Jihad and reached his goal on the land of pure. Without doubt, he is the greatest martyr of the present age but the Prime Minister of Islamic Republic of Pakistan has called this great tragedy as a victory of someone else. Everybody received whatever he was destined for. Someone embraced martyrdom and the other flattered the killers and imperialists.

The newspapers of Pakistan are rife with the news of the tragic incident which took place on the Pakistani soil. The news is conflicting but the air will clear gradually. Americans have told that since no Muslim country was ready to accept the dead body of Osama, therefore, it was shrouded and deposited in the sea. One of our poets had said “it would have been better to have drowned after dying so that no bier was taken out and no tomb was built”. What Ghalib said did not happen to him but Osama was lucky to receive the kind of burial the poet had desired. It has been told that the imperialist killers placed the dead body of Osama on a plank and entrusted it to the sea waves. Someone had appropriately said “I am a river and will descend into the ocean”. A news item says that he has been buried in an island but one of the many news headlines circulating tells that the Americans wanted Osama not to find a tomb so that it does not become a world center of anti-imperialists and Islamic activists. This is why he has not been given an earthly burial. A glance over the world map would reveal that the Muslim world stretches from one end of the world to the other. In this land of millions of acres, a man could not find two yards of space who sacrificed everything for the sake of Islam and showed the world that those who would lovingly die for Islam are still alive. Never mind if Osama did not receive a grave his death and his memories will always remain shining. His death has been made disputed. For some he is “deceased”, for some “killed” and for some “died” but the time to come will bear a testimony to the fact as to who died and who was martyred. Ahmed bin Humbal fell from the stripes he received but did not compromise on a polemical issue and stood his ground. He said that his funeral procession will testify to the truthfulness of his standpoint. On the day of his funeral there was no one left to say prayers in the mosques of Baghdad. All the prayers were said in the funeral compound. This was a testimony to the truth.

Osama is a target of the anti-Muslim super power these days but he represents a weak and fading super power. He boldly stood against the anti-Islam western imperialism led by America. He became a symbol of Islamic resistance. This innocent man the love and glow of whose eyes will attract you was suffering from kidney disease for years. First he was cured in the Pakistani mountains but now for sometime he was comfortably staying near Abbotabad. He had declared sometime that he will never give himself up alive in the hands of his enemies and, in his ill health, he went down fighting because he had decided long ago to fight and die while fighting. He invested his unlimited wealth and high modern education in the way of God. How fortunate was he that the Providence accepted his sacrifice. Today he is not a prisoner but Shaheed Osama bin Laden. He will remain alive in the Muslim memory with this appellation.
It is a great success for America. Its thunder will further increase and the Muslims will live a life of fearfulness. They have neither the wealth of Osama nor the army of devotees. They do not have the faith which bursts into flames. I do not know who will take his place. He has become a legend. Look at the history there have been greater people than Osama and the Muslims could not find their replacement. Only their living example remained and Osama was a part of it. Who knows we remain without another Osama. May our faith remain strong and no one should arise from us to call this incident a “great victory” but there should emerge more people to become Osama.

Yawar Abbas: Is the media fanning extremism?

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

The following thought provoking column by Yawar Abbas raises several excellent points for examination. The piece was originally published in Daily Times on 24 March 2011 and is re-posted here for your consideration.

The assassination of Salmaan Taseer at the hands of a religious zealot threw open the debate over the media’s role in encouraging extremist tendencies amongst the people of Pakistan. The proposition that the media is fanning extremist propensities may be somewhat overstated but is, at the same time, not completely unfounded.

During the last decade, Pakistan’s media has contributed positively to the cause of democracy in the country and also played an active role in the restoration of the judges through round the clock coverage of the famous Lawyers’ Movement. Nonetheless, serious doubts and conflicting views regarding the media’s role in the country have also accompanied these wide-scale developments.

Some of these views rise from concerns that the media is strictly averse to the idea of even the most modest regulation by the government and that it refuses to abide by a unanimously agreed code of conduct or ethics. The media groups in the country have grown into big mafias; they own print as well as electronic media — a situation that is almost unprecedented anywhere in the world. Critics also maintain that the Pakistani media is creating an environment of despair and hopelessness by presenting a very bleak picture of the country. This constant fear mongering and pessimistic outlook on such a broad scale can have its own psychological ramifications for Pakistani society in the future.

The most serious allegation levelled against the Pakistani media is that it is very cautious in reporting about the violence caused by religious extremists. TV channels are dominated by far-rightists and hardcore conservatives. There are very few left-wing journalists. Terrorists are called “militants” or, at the most, “miscreants”. This nomenclature is chosen very carefully. So far, the media has not been able to come up with a well-defined campaign against the terrorists’ extremist propaganda, except for a few occasional songs or advertisements. The media, at the very least, has a very high tolerance for accommodating extremist ideas in its mainstream reporting. A plausible reason put forth for the media’s sympathetic and sometimes apologetic tone towards terrorists is the lack of protection given to journalists and reporters by the government against such extremists. Nonetheless, at this critical time, maintaining such an indifferent posture is suicidal.

The propaganda put forth by extremists has undoubtedly been more effective than that of the government. Pakistan’s war effort has greatly suffered due to the lukewarm response of the country’s media. The media, it appears, is only obsessed with reporting about the death toll of drone strikes and army operations debating whether it is ‘our’ war or ‘their’ war. Blowing trivial issues out of proportion and ignoring issues of vital importance cannot be disguised under the garb of ‘neutrality’ — this is nothing but dishonesty. Sensationalising news, broadcasting hate speeches, inciting anger by inviting religious bigots on talk shows, re-telecasting events that are of a sensitive nature and may give rise to public unrest and a general feeling of helplessness, distorting somebody’s statement by quoting him/her out of context, allowing extremist figures to indoctrinate viewers by glorifying terrorists as jihadis, giving more airtime to apologists and sympathisers of militants and very little time to their critics and exposing audiences to the fanatical views propagated by semi-educated anchor-persons and politicians is by any standard yellow journalism and is reflective of an irresponsible media.

The masses, already susceptible to extremist ideas due to their exposure to fanatical preaching prevalent in society, are easily influenced by such radicalised media items. Under these circumstances, it is no wonder that the same are gradually encouraged to take the law into their hands, without any regard for the sanctity of the rule of law and the system of justice. There is no doubt that such uninformed decisions emanate from the doctrine of ignorance being fed by such shortsighted political and religious ‘analysts’.

A possible solution to the problem is the development of a clear-cut position by key media players on extremism and terrorism. In this sense a well thought out counter-propaganda policy is much needed. The need of the hour is zero tolerance for extremism. Pakistan is at a crossroads in its history and the media has a crucial role to play in its future. One can only hope that it will play its part responsibly.

The writer is in the Foreign Service of Pakistan

Creating Competition for Quality Media

Tuesday, March 15th, 2011

Media and Society Foundation logoAn often noted problem with media stems from the competition among a large and growing field of television stations and newspapers. This competition is believed to be responsible for a severe decline in the quality of journalism including the proliferation of conspiracy theories, the use of anonymous sources that promote political bias, sensationalism, and the rush to be the first to break a story at the expense of verifying facts. But competition should not mean a decline in quality. The creation of industry standards has been used by other industries to create incentives for improving quality. The same should be done in the media industry.

The International Organization for Standardization is the world’s largest developer and publisher of international standards spanning 160 countries. The Central Sectariat of the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) resides in Geneva, Switzerland which seeks to create consensus on solutions that meet the needs of both business and the society. Pakistan is a member of the ISO through the Pakistan Standards and Quality Control Authority (PSQCA) which has headquarters in Karachi.

At the PSQCA website, individuals can find lists of licensed manufacturers of products such as biscuits, cement, edible oil, razor blade, and three wheelers. Also available are lists of brands that do not meet the basic requirements as well as a list of each product’s non-conformities and when it was tested.

These standards, certifications, and exposures of non-conforming brands helps inform customers about the quality of products while also creating an incentive for manufacturers to provide products that meet minimum standards of excellence. This is especially important for items such as foods and building materials, but why not for media also?

Actually, this question has been asked in the home of the ISO, Switzerland, where the Media and Society Foundation developed a set of international quality standards for media known as ISAS BCP 9001:2010.

The MSF initiative is a concrete response to broadcasters’ demand for independent evaluation and recognition of their quality-management system in order (1) to benefit from unbiased, external reviews of their services and productions; (2) to create an ongoing process ensuring that the highest standards of quality would continue to be pursued in the following areas:

  • Service to listeners, viewers and the general public
  • Service to the society in which they operate, notably by promoting the free flow of information essential to democracy
  • Service to other important stakeholders, including staff and advertisers

Most importantly, this programme is designed as a voluntary compliance so there is no threat of government censorship or interference with media freedom. Also, as the guidelines are based on international standards, it avoids the possibility of undue influence from the owners of domestic media groups and internal politics.

Adopting the ISAS BCP 9001:2010 standards for media could do much to cut through the confusion presented by the present unregulated media environment. With questionable newspapers like The Daily Mail setting a standard of the lowest type, otherwise professional media groups get dragged to the same depths of irresponsibility and unprofessionalism as well. However it is the public and society which suffers from this degradation as the people are left misinformed and confused about issues of vital interest.

Presently, the proposed media standards of the Media and Society Foundation are quite fresh and new. This presents the opportunity for Pakistan to take a leadership role not only at home but on the world stage by transforming the present situation which is a mockery in world opinion to a shining example of how to enact voluntary reforms that ensure a high quality media free from outside interference. Best, though, would be the improved knowledge and understanding of current events and issues of the national interest among the public which would lead to progress in the society and improvements in the lives of the people.

Hajrah Mumtaz: Who Watches the Watchmen?

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

Who Watches the Watchmen?When we started this blog a few years ago, many people said that it was a waste of time because the media groups were too big and too powerful to listen to care about one small blog. But over time our assumption proved correct: People were tired of irresponsible journalism and wanted to see more accountability in media.

Recently, more people have begun to speak out against the irresponsible and unethical practices of some journalists and media groups. Maitullah Jan’s expose of journalists taking advantage of government funded Hajj facility gets to the very heart of corruption among those who are supposed to be watchdogs of society. Likewise, the column by Zohra Yusuf recommending media groups follow the leadership of Express Tribune by hiring ombudsmans to manage complaints by the public is another example of media taking responsibility for improving its own sector.

The latest column of Hajrah Mumtaz who is on the staff at Dawn is the latest example of journalists speaking up about ways that journalism can be improved if media groups will adopt some basic policies to ensure accuracy and accountability.

DURING the past couple of months, particularly in the wake of controversy over the proposal to bring the blasphemy laws under review, there has been much discussion over the airwaves about religious dictates.

The proposal, which never even made it to the stage of being tabled before parliament, has been dropped by a government that appears to be perennially on the back foot — the ways of government are often strange to behold. What concerns me, though, is that while the discussion of religion continues, an accusation is being made with increasing incidence in various columns and blogspots.

A number of writers have pointed to certain guests on different talk shows, claiming that the citations (mainly from religious sources) that these guests presented in favour of their argument were taken out of context, their meaning was altered by omitting to mention context, or were plain incorrect.

In many cases, those levelling this criticism have attached transcripts of or uploaded clips from the television programme in question, so that readers can themselves look up the original text to check whether the accusation is justified. I found it worrying enough to undertake this exercise. And in all the cases I checked, the accusation was justified.

Be that as it may, it is hardly unknown, anywhere in the world, for personalities of standing and power, particularly those of a stature to be invited on televised talk shows, to resort to glossing over facts to suit their ends, or to twist facts to their desired end.

What I find particularly worrying, however, is the role of our programme hosts who, in most such cases, evidently had neither the knowledge to pick up on altered ‘facts’ nor, perhaps, the gumption to point them out. In most cases, while X guest made Y announcement that, upon investigation, turned out to be incorrect, the host was merely sitting there nodding his or her head in agreement,.

Which leads us to the question, what good is the much-mentioned power of the fourth estate — the media — if it fails to pick up on shady statements pronounced by the people it claims to be bringing under review? The media’s ability to bring contradictions and inconsistencies to light is, after all, one of the prime sources from which it claims its power.

This is what allows the media to act as an entity that imposes checks and forces balance upon opinion-makers and the otherwise powerful. If anyone can get away with any sort of story, and the host can’t tell the difference or won’t, then what is the point of all these supposedly erudite programmes? Who watches the watchmen?

As I said earlier, everywhere in the world, people expect politicians and other powerful people to talk according to their agendas, and this often involves twisting and glossing over facts. They ought not resort to this, of course, but that seems to be the nature of the beast and people have come to accept it. Guests on television, similarly, are in many cases there to express their opinions — and sometimes those opinions are not or not entirely factual.

For these reasons, the abilities of the programme host are of crucial importance. Viewers look to the host to be able to spot the erroneous statement, the inconsistency, the prevarication or the U-turn — and this requires the host to have serious levels of knowledge about the topic under discussion.

This is where the value of a professional programme host lies, for only then can he or she meaningfully explore the subject. If the host has little knowledge about the subject, then really, it may as well be you or I, a layperson, sitting there asking the questions.

The argument could be made that every host is not expected to — simply cannot — have knowledge about all things under the sun to a sufficient degree that allows him or her to be able to challenge the experts. True. But the answer is, this is precisely why different hosts specialise in different areas.

In countries where the media industry is a little more professional, a host who specialises in current affairs and politics will rarely, if ever, host a debate on Catholicism or the relevance of religion in everyday affairs — unless the two spheres have overlapped, in which case considerable research is undertaken. There are specialists in for the environment, for public policy and governance, international affairs, economics and business, culture and the arts, and so on.

Most of the developed world has grown beyond the sort of jack-of-all-trades hosts that are the norm in Pakistan. I gave the example of debate over religious matter in the beginning of this column, but as television viewers are well aware, this is far from the only area where topics outside the purview of the hosts are taken up.

It is tempting to blame the hosts themselves, and to be sure they must shoulder at least part of the responsibility for this sorry situation — the lack of research, for one. But the real problem is systemic, and has to do with the way and the speed with which the televised media industry developed.

Media organisations hired talk show hosts, many of whom became celebrities and most of whom are paid salaries in accordance with this status. If you’re paying an employee such large sums, there is obviously the expectation that (s)he will handle whatever topic is given.

Yet a more constructive model may be to employ a greater number of specialists. The pie might have to be divided into smaller slices, but organisations as well as their audiences would benefit. A crime reporter is not expected to also be writing theatre reviews or political commentary; such expectations ought not be thrust on, or appropriated by, television personalities either.