Posts Tagged ‘VOA’

24/7 News Cycle Bad For Journalism, Deadly For Journalists

Friday, December 31st, 2010

Pakistan journalists danger

By now it’s fairly well accepted that the 24/7 news cycle and the competition that comes with it is problematic for the state of journalism. The most embarrassing result, of course, being the fake WikiLeaks story that wound up on the front page of several reputable newspapers (and continued to be published in some less reputable ones). But the race for to be the first group with the most sensational headlines is not only bad for journalism, it turns out that it’s bad for journalists, too – and by ‘bad’ I mean deadly.

A new report from Committee to Protect Journalists found that Pakistan earned the dubious distinction of being the deadliest nation for journalists in 2010, beating out Iraq and Mexico. In all, eight journalists were killed while doing their job this past year. And the CPJ report does not include incidents in which journalists were shot at or issued death threats such as Kamran Shafi received in 2009.

Nafees Takar, the chief of Voice Of America’s Pashto-language Deewa service, says that part of the problem is the pressure to be the first to deliver on-the-scene reports from dangerous areas.

“Most of the time, when one media outlet in Pakistan uses a report, for example, on [U.S. missile] drone attacks, another media outlet will also be forcing the reporting in the region and will be expecting from their reporter a story which might be better than other one, with the soundbites of the people, and maybe the outlet will also be expecting that he or she should get some pictures of the area which has been hit by the missle attack. And that makes trouble for them in the sense that nobody can go to those areas. And if a journalist tries to go there, they are sure for inviting trouble for themselves.”

As we enter the new year, let’s pray that our journalists are safe from harm. Let us also ask the media groups, the publishers, the editors, and ourselves the consumers to have some patience and not put unreasonable demands on the men and women reporting the news. Already journalism can be a thankless and difficult job. But please, no one should have to put their life in danger just to get a headline ten minutes before the next guy.

The Jang Group – how low the standards would fall?

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

The following was posted by Mr. Yousuf Nazar at his own blog, State of Pakistan, on Saturday, 10 April 2010. Mr. Nazar makes excellent observations about the increasingly poor so-called ‘reporting’ being published by The News (Jang Group).

I am getting quite fed up with the planted, biased, illiterate, and highly unprofessional so-called reporting by the The News International.  Its current owner Mir Shakil ur Rehman was not above cheating in the exams. More about this in a moment.

At one point of time, I was very negative about Asif Zardari, and still am, [read my article of Sep. 04, 2008] but whatever he is or his past, he is at least a known commodity. And to be honest, what the PPP government under President Zardari has achieved in political terms in just two years, Zia and Musharraf could not achieve in the twenty two years, these murderers and traitors ruled the country. Zia killed ZAB and Musharraf killed Akbar Bugti. Whatever ZAB and Bugti’s wrongs might have been, every one deserves a fair trial. Both Zia and Musharraf violated the constitution and the law of the land with impunity and contempt. So it is not out of line to accuse them of murder and treason.

Now about the Jang Group. On Saturday, April 10, 2010, the News published a report by Ahmad Noorani that claimed, “a highly controversial clause regarding the judges’ appointment in the 18 Amendment bill has changed the whole scenario of lawyers’ politics with the government trying to gain their loyalties. According to the Law Ministry sources, sensing the lawyers’ reaction on the passage of the controversial clause of judges’ appointment, the law ministry has decided to launch a full-fledged campaign against the country’s independent judiciary. Credible sources confided to The News that senior officials of the ministry had been deputed for this purpose and they had been assigned to give cases to certain lawyers so that they feel obliged and sympathise with the government at an appropriate time.”

What kind of nonsense, unprofessional, planted and inspired reporting is this or for that matter reporting at all. Law Ministry sources, credible sources, reliable sources.. and so on! Another one was “lawyers plan to challenge the 18th amendment” without naming a single lawyer. This is not reporting. Name the sources or have the guts to say that it is your opinion. But then put it on opinion pages and stop publishing one-sided and inspired material as front page news items.

First of all, to term the clause regarding the judges’ appointment in the 18 Amendment bill as highly controversial is ludicrous, dishonest, and factually incorrect. The Amendment won an overwhelming majority and this particular clause was passed without any opposition, whatsoever, by the National Assembly. Would any one who is a journalist worth his salt and has any professional caliber, term this as “highly controversial” unless he is either very biased or is working on some agenda.

Such journalists should join politics and then they would be free and entitled to say whatever they fancy but as long as they profess to be journalists, they should learn to observe some professional standards. Or is that too much to expect. Maybe it is.

Specially from the Jang Group. This Group has played a special role in Pakistan’s history in promoting dictatorships, jingoism, sectarianism, ethnic conflicts, and in general keeping its readership in a world that can be described as xenophobic. Its role in projecting Jamaat-e-Islami in the 1970s, turning the newspaper into a pamphlet and printing highly inflammatory slogans [as a border] that provoked the language riots in Sindh (1972), barely six months after the dismemberment of Pakistan, remains one of the darkest chapters in Pakistani journalism.  Jamaat Islami Chief, Tufail Mohammed was an uncle of Zia ul Haq and an agent of the CIA as Mr. Bhutto documented in detail in his book, If I am Assassinated.

Jang Group’s TV channel has promoted people with dubious credentials like Aamir Liaqat Hussain who have fake degrees. GEO, on its website,  prides itself as the CNN of Pakistan, totally oblivious of the reality that in most countries outside the United States, CNN is considered to be a biased mouth piece of American establishment and is not exactly known for objectivity or independent reporting. GEO TV colloborates with the Voice of America, which is an official news arm of the government of the United States. Yet, it claims to be indpendent and objective.

Observing this lowly and sleazy standard of journalism, I have been reflecting on an evening in the distant past. I was preparing for my final exams for the B.Com in 1976 in Karachi. One evening, when I was studying, my door bell rang. When I went out, it was my friend Zain Ghazali, son of Commander Ghazali, a former manager of Pakistan’s cricket team. He asked me to come and sit in the car parked outside my house. As I got into the volkswagen, I saw a nice looking boy on the wheels. It was Mir Shakil ur Rehman. He was very excited as he had managed to get the Accounting paper “OUT”. So I asked what then was the problem?  “I don’t know how to solve it”, was the answer. I hope the readers get a picture.

I believe, Shakil has now moved to Dubai with his family and does not even live in Pakistan. I wonder if such people, who did not have the ability to even cheat in an exam and do not even live in Pakistan despite making so much money here, would have even bothered to provide some elementary training in journalism and its basic standards to the members of their staff. It seem not.

Ahmed Quraishi Criticizes VOA, Fails to Disclose He Asked VOA For Job

Wednesday, November 4th, 2009

Last week, Ahmed Quraishi wrote in The Nation, “VOA takes over PBC?” While Mr. Quraishi was critical of the Voice of America (VOA), he failed to disclose that he previously applied for a job with the same agency.

In his article, Mr. Quraishi refers to the VOA as a “US propaganda network,” but a 2007 article by Shaista Sindhu reveals that Mr. Quraishi had previously applied for a job with VOA and been denied due to discrepancies with his resume.

During the course of applying for the VOA job, Ahmed Quraishi was actively promoted by the Government of Pakistan’s Secretary for Information and Broadcasting Anwar Mahmood who is a key figure in the Musharraf regime’s media handling for several years. Mr Mahmood made calls on Mr Quraishi’s behalf to the then head of VOA Urdu, Brian Silver, who was later removed from his position due to professional reasons.

Mr Silver and Mr Mahmood had worked closely in the run up to VOA getting permission to start an Urdu TV program on the Geo network. The United States government paid Geo for air time in a deal that has never been fully made public. Allegations that could not be independently verified suggest that a Pakistani media company close to Mr Mahmood acted as middle man betweenVOA and Geo at the time and the key individuals on both sides personally benefited from the financial arrangements.

Mr Mahmood also sought the help of VOA’s Islamabad correspondent Ayaz Gul to promote the case of Mr Quraishi. Several senior members of the media cell of inter Services Intelligence (ISI) also put in a good word on Ahmed Quraishi’s behalf. The ISI had earlier succeeded in securing a job at VOA Urdu TV for Faiz Rehman, a pro-government activist with close ties to the Pakistan embassy in Washington. Mr Rehman has now relinquished his job at VOA.

Mr. Quraishi goes on in his article to criticize PBC Director General Murtaza Solgani for having a “policy direction [that] betrays itself in the recent deal and might even be seen as running counter to what Pakistan should be pursuing in terms of its own public diplomacy,” despite his admitting that Solgani “is a professional radio journalist by the testimony of most of those who worked with him.” This is, as with his omission of his previous attempt at working for the organization, troubling as it suggests that Mr. Quraishi believes in a policy “political litmus test” for journalists. Such a test would clearly, especially in a government funded operation, result in a propaganda machine rather than an unbiased reporting outlet.

Mr. Quriashi’s failure to disclose his failed attempts to obtain a job with the VOA in an article represent a disconcerting lapse in journalistic ethics and should be soundly reprimanded by his supervisors at The Nation. In the future, we suggest Mr. Quraishi fully disclose any relationships he has had with a person or organization before he offers a critique.