Hamid Mir doesn’t disappoint. His Capital Talk, even at its worst, won’t be as devoid of substance as some of the political talk shows on our airwaves. But it is when he is on another talk show, specially if he is the only one being interviewed, that he truly shines.
Why? Because he is too professional on his own show to drone on himself. He respects his guests, but not by the low bar of merely not being rude to them, but by also actually listening to what they have to say. Though we might be able to infer Mir’s own views from the intro, closing and the questions, but that’s it, basically.
It is when he is on another show, and doesn’t have the burden of the show on his shoulders, he can hold forth his views and does, specially when the interviewer is also a serious sort.
That is what happened on Capital TV’s Awaam on the 21st of May. A sprawling range of topics, as usual, where Mir laid bare everything, from the political crisis in the aftermath of the Panama Leaks to civil-military relations, from international relations to the state of the free media.
Awaam – 21st May 2016 door malikjan12
Amongst the things that struck as a bit different: Mir doesn’t think that Imran Khan wants to destabilise the democratic system; there is a different perception about him, yes, Mir concedes, but he knows that the only way he can become the prime minister is through this very same system. But what of all that talk of the “umpire”, host Shehzad Raza interjects. That was back during the 2014 dharna, comes the reply. Things are different.
Imran Khan’s reluctance to upset the democratic apple cart is a hard sell, even if Hamid Mir is the one making it, but the PTI leader’s recent decision to go to the parliament and expound his views there does seem to be some sort of indication.
On foreign relations, Pakistan’s isolation from neighbouring countries and nearby friendly countries was bemoaned. Isn’t this our own fault, Raza asks. Well, yes, but what can one do if we don’t even have a foreign minister, Mir replies. But then immediately corrects himself and says when he had asked a senior government minister about this, the latter had replied with a question: do you think we would have been in control of foreign policy even if we did have a foreign minister?
On the state of the media in the country, Mir sounded a bit pained. Now, senior journalists talking about the falling standards of journalism in the country is a sight seen ad nauseum; specially by the ones who have nothing much to show as real journalism except the number of years in the profession. But, one figures Hamid Mir himself has earned the right to blow off some steam in this regard, given how he has walked his talk. A bullet from the attack on him the year before last is still inside his body; surgeons chose not to remove one of the bullets because of certain complications.
It’s a ratings race. We’re just racehorses being ridden by the owners.
But isn’t the viewing public to be blamed as well, Raza asks. These are the type of shows they watch; and you’re giving the public what they want.
The reply: Well, I don’t want to cause any problems for you or your organisation so I won’t be completely honest in my answer here — a refreshing candour about the lack of candour — but earlier, I used to have huge ratings. Back then, I used to do bold shows on a range of subjects. The public used to watch these shows. Then, the attack happened. Those who wanted to put us in our place, did put us in our place. The ratings dropped, because I have a set of restrictions on me. Even the questions that you have asked on this show, I can’t talk about them on my own show (a vindication of my earlier statement: catch Hamid Mir off his show). To that end, I am going to write a book, specifically on the range of topics that I have been barred from discussing. In fact, also about the restrictions themselves.
A banned book whose pirated copies will fly-off the bootleg shelves, I would dare to guarantee.