A historical review of the Pakistani media and how this was bound to happen
“You have great power. You can guide or misguide people. You can make or mar the biggest personalities. The power of the press is really great, but you must remember that this power which you are wielding is a trust… At the same time I expect you to be completely fearless, if I go wrong or for that matter, the League goes wrong in any direction of its policy or programme, I want you to criticise it honestly as its friend, in fact, as one whose heart is beating with the Muslim nation”.
Mohammad Ali Jinnah while addressing Muslim Journalists, March 1947
The conception of a modern, efficient media is one in which a citizen is able to gather required news from unbiased, unfettered and free sources of information; information that can help in forming both short and long term world views as well as facilitate daily life.
Unfortunately, this modern media continues to suffer from issues of biased content, enforced opinion formation, agendas and corporate or establishment dictation to point out just a few problems.
The aim of this article is to show how the present crisis in Pakistan media is an expression of a larger, perhaps even global, challenge i.e., the separation of individual interests and information dissemination or the lack thereof.
Pakistan and media
Infancy
Just ten years before partition there were only 32 English dailies and 32 weeklies being published in the subcontinent. By 1947 this number had increased to 51 dailies and almost 258 weeklies – all because it was clear that the realisation of an independent Pakistan was imminent. Giants like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Maulana Mohammad Ali Johar, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad and Hasrat Mohani were deeply engrossed in literature generation while simultaneously being staunch political activists. It would be safe to say that the very nascent version of Pakistani media (or press in this case) was dominated by ‘crusaders’. It is for this reason that some of the defining features of what the media has turned into today can be traced back to the very infancy of Pakistani media. These can be summed up as follows:
· The Pakistani media always had a friction-based relationship with the State.
· The Pakistani media has always been agenda based (though every news agency of the world is liable to this argument).
“Professional editors”, despite competence, have found it difficult to extract themselves from inbuilt biases, given that biased reporting was a trait encouraged systemically by a press devoted to an anti-colonial struggle.
Dealing with what was perceived as a rabid press, the newly empowered ruling elite of Pakistan resorted to old colonial tactics such as cancelation of press licenses or enforcement of gag orders
Dictatorships and turmoil
Having survived and triumphed over the British colonial and perceived Hindu majority through the formation of a separate Muslim homeland, the Pakistani media soon found itself at odds with the very State it had campaigned to secure and erect. Blundering and weak regimes after the death of Jinnah, compounded by an early departure from democracy due to Ayub Khan’s takeover, reignited anti-State sentiments within the Pakistani media. A tussle arose between successive dictators (whether civilian or military) and journalists over whose version of Pakistan was ‘viable’.
Dealing with what was perceived as a rabid press, the newly empowered ruling elite of Pakistan resorted to old colonial tactics such as cancelation of press licenses or enforcement of gag orders. In a country where Ayub Khan established the National Press Trust (NPT) to counter the Progressive Papers Limited (PPL) and eventually turn publications into government mouthpieces; In a country where even self-confessed civilian ‘liberators’ like Zulfikar Ali Bhutto launched brutal anti-press campaigns between 1971 and 1977 and nationalised any publication which dared to defy his government; In a country where Gen Zia-ul-Haq publically flogged and humiliated journalism stalwarts for establishing a counter-narrative… in such a country truth and justice suffer at the hands of unrestrained power.
This is the cradle offered to the young Pakistani media. What else could one expect from such institution building except the birth of a multi-headed Hydra snapping at itself and others?
The Big Boom
After the Kargil debacle of 1999, it was felt that Pakistan had largely lost the war in the international press as well. Pakistan Television – the State owned media hegemon was woefully ill-equipped to get a word in, edgewise, much less counter Indian propaganda. For this purpose, a new paradigm of Pakistani media was constructed which encouraged free media production and broadcast emphasising, specifically, news dissemination. Under Musharraf’s ‘liberal dictatorship’ this new concept grew into the media Goliath we see today. Almost 90 television channels (a vast majority of which are news channels), 28 foreign channels, 106 FM Radio Stations and countless ‘cable television’ channels sprang up between 2001 and 2011.
Media unity doesn’t functionally exist:
There was a time in Pakistan when the press was united, at the very least, when it came to the preservation of its rights and freedom of expression.
The reason is simple: you can cement working journalists into collective bodies (such as press clubs) designed to ensure collective action of a minimum non-negotiable agenda but you can’t expect the same rules to apply to non-journalist media tycoons who have agendas and interests beyond journalistic ethics or individual rights.
The historic anti-State character of the press is still present:
One cannot expect a media born in the hellfire of civil strife and brought up under colonial or dictatorial regimes to be ‘level headed’ when it comes to self-preservation. Though that much can be said about most Pakistanis anyway, it is especially true for the media because what you see on TV is ‘larger than life’, magnified… exaggerated.
Similarly, battles that are fought on television will also ‘exaggerate’ the issue – make it seem larger than what it actually is.
It is mostly about the ratings
I would not say that the entire media industry revolves completely around ratings but, yes, the tone and tenor of how a debate unfolds on the media is constructed around how the viewer ‘wants’ to see it rather than ‘needs’ to see it. Ask yourself, when has any media debate ever resulted in consensus of opinion?
Today, a powerful player in State, regional and international politics, the media is utterly powerless in securing justice for one of its own
People want to see politicians and spokespeople butting heads rather than speaking coherently. They like to see verbal and physical violence rather than amicable and gentle behaviour.
That is because such contention leads to higher ratings. Higher ratings lead to greater income. This is an example of a carnivorous system feeding upon its own carcass. Such systems cannot exist perpetually in any case nor is there ever ‘enough for everyone’. Capitalist media models follow the same logic as any other capitalist business enterprise – the will and interest in monopoly formation.
Hamid Mir is not just wounded by bullets but is a casualty of Pakistani media
The entire issue which was supposed to revolve around Hamid Mir, his attack and his need for justice, has now turned into a media-free-for-all. I have observed that when air-time given to Hamid Mir’s attack is stacked up against air-time given to GEO’s transgressions, it is merely a fraction.
In its current state, Pakistani media may, incidentally, be a force for good but that is not by design. Today, a powerful player in State, regional and international politics, the media is utterly powerless in securing justice for one of its own.
Conclusion
In my opinion the very founding premises of Pakistani media have been historically distorted – that successive attacks against its existence by the British Raj, non-Muslim majorities, military and civilian dictatorships followed by a period of unrestrained, unplanned growth have given rise to a lumbering autistic monster that is unable to understand or safeguard itself or others.
If this media is to function as a progressive entity in Pakistan its greatest minds must sit together and agree on some form of minimum agenda. They must draft a self-governance document that cuts across all boundaries of channel affiliation, ideological affiliation, class-division, etc.
Otherwise, history, unfortunately, repeats itself far too often.