Daily Times

Media is a business and media is in the business of news, but when media gets in the business of breaking news at breakneck speed, the danger of breaking rules and going overboard is all too apparent. What has happened in the last few weeks is a sobering comment on the interpretation of freedom of expression that can actually be twisted to endanger the very cause and mission of promoting independent and strong institutions. A free and independent media is the hallmark of democracy. In Pakistan, the media has played a pivotal role in raising the voices of the voiceless. Media independence has seen government performance exposed, corruption laid bare, information made accessible and public education increase. In the last one decade the contribution of media to making the man-on-the-street more informed is highly commendable. The movement for restoration of an independent judiciary is a prime example where the media and journalists made huge contributions against a hostile government to actually raise the voice of people demanding democracy.
The introduction of social media further increased the media’s reach and message. The younger generation, which hardly watches television, could upload and share television programmes, clips and statements of people in the millions at all odd hours of the day and night. Then came Facebook and Twitter to give each opinion aired in the media global viewing within minutes. Now with 3G and 4G technology, the minutes will turn into seconds and the gadget in your hand will allow you to experience the power of instant viewing. With this power of penetrating mass mindshare, the media in Pakistan has become a powerful mass opinion maker and breaker. As they say, with power comes responsibility, but normally the opposite happens. The greater the power, the greater the license to go beyond limits. The media has fed itself on sensationalism. The race to be the first one to break the news, particularly bad news, has gotten them into the rat race of saying things without verifying them. The race to be the first one to show scenes like heads being blown off, minors after being gang-raped and accusations being hurled has made them forget the ethics and norms of authenticated and verified reporting.
The attack on Hamid Mir is a classic example of overkill. While the reports of him being targeted were still being absorbed, snippets of what his brother was saying, reported as ‘breaking news’, started a nerve wracking sequence of accusations on institutions and personalities that shocked the nation. This is what happens when the belief in the media is that ‘bad sells’. Whenever the question is posed of why such negativity is shown in the media while positivity gets hardly any air time, the answer by media reps is simple: good news is no news. This is why we see accusations, conspiracies, investigations and scandals sell more and more.
Tabloid journalism all over the world has appeal but to take it to the extent of making it a license to show and say whatever holds audience attention, no matter how damaging it is, will ultimately be counterproductive. The prime example of this is Hamid Mir’s case. The attack against him is highly regrettable. The purpose of the media should have been to make sure that the process of investigation be made as thorough and authentic as possible. On the contrary, due to the media trend of dramatising everything, the issue has become a minor one compared to the focus on how each institution in this screaming match has nationally and globally suffered due to the reactive approach of being the first to break the news. Everybody has been hurt in the process. Hamid Mir is still bemused at the verbal attacks against him, media houses have gone to war, the government is confused on what stance to take, the ISI and armed forces are shocked at this knee jerk approach and the global media is loving the commotion, painting the picture they want to paint to their own advantage.
In adversity lies opportunity. This is a real chance to redefine the role of institutions, this is an opportunity to redefine the boundaries of freedom of expression, this is a moment to reflect on the system of checks and balances, and this is a moment to rethink the role of the viewer in regulating content. The talk show format reflects the way channels use fighting and instigating techniques to bring the worst out in participants. Accusations, abuse and walkouts are rerun multiple times to gain viewership. The formula is this: the bigger the fight, the higher the viewership, the higher the rating and the higher the advertising money. In this race, norms of decency or checking the veracity of the news takes a seat so far back that many times it never comes to the fore. The Hamid Mir case was a classic example of this trap; an anchor made allegations against an intelligence agency of Pakistan; what better material for keeping people glued? Unfortunately, the damage, intentional or unintentional, it has done is not retrievable this time but definitely preventable in the future.
For the government, it is imperative that they realise that keeping key institutions either headless or trying to fire people and replace them with their own choices will never strengthen the institution. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) has become a victim of the tussle between the PML-N government trying to replace people with their own lot and this tussle inevitably leads to institutional paralysis. Making PEMRA regulations stronger and the people who head them more capable is essential. Media houses need to learn a lesson from this unfortunate episode. They need to see not only the legal side but the ethical side as well. In the long run the balanced and principled approach wins. Taking the viewer for a ride may work for a short time but in this interconnected global world, the truth will come out on some platform. Last but not least comes the responsibility of the viewer. The biggest driver of media content and trends is what people watch. As a public we need to question how we keep on cribbing about the negativity of media content and keep on watching it more and more. Eventually, what people watch less will sell less. Thus, for each one of us the responsibility of streamlining programming is crucial. The day the public realises that their collective power is stronger than any regulation on the media, serial dramatics going on in the name of news will give way to genuine, authentic and balanced information.

The writer is an analyst and columnist and can be reached at andleeb.abbas1@gmail.com