Daily Times

The pursuit of ratings by the electronic media and the rat-race for being the first to break the news has pushed all considerations of responsible journalism to the margins. Judging from the news content, decisions seem to be informed by how scintillating the story is, and how best to package it to the general audience. Rapidly changing tickers, which are animated and loaded with sound effects in such a manner as to create a sense of urgency, show how form is given precedence to the actual substance of the news. As the audience is turned into a willing consumer for a project that appeals to their basal instincts of conflict and revenge, the electronic media’s positive role in shaping public opinion for the better gets seriously called into question.

An alarming consequence of this phenomenon is the recklessness with which attacks are made on individuals by news anchors and talk show hosts. And more often than not, these are nothing more than thinly veiled attempts to sabotage an individual for the benefit of certain interests. Accusation ranging from fraud to treason are bandied, mostly by design, ad nauseam. The fact that these are very serious charges, which should be supported by strong and concrete evidence, seems to be lost on the media houses that do so. Not only do these hollow accusations amount to libel but also make the act morally abhorrent.

This does not mean that journalists and media houses should not play their part in bringing forward information just because it may lead to someone’s incrimination. There are arguably two competing principles at play here that need to looked at with certain nuance. At one end is the duty of the media-particularly investigative journalists-to expose any wrong doing by influential businessmen or public officials. However, an equally important role of the media is to both ensure that the evidence that they have without any reasonable doubt demonstrates the guilt the person who they are going to incriminate, and prevent that incrimination from turning into a media trial. At the end of the day, these are matters that the courts have to decide, and opinions should not be built on them to the extent that they put pressure on the courts.

Where the role of the media has been called into serious doubt, the fact that now court cases of this nature are being filed in the UK also point to the serious deficiencies present in Pakistan’s judicial system. If speedy justice was given to parties who were victims of media slander, then it is reasonable to assume that things would not have gotten so out of hand. The complete resolution of civil cases in Pakistan takes anywhere from two to three decades-hardly the speedy justice that deters those who seek to profit from such unconscientious activities. UK courts may provide a temporary check on Pakistani electronic media, but if Pakistani media is to be turned into a responsible entity then its effective regulation would have to come from within Pakistan. Otherwise, only the strong and mighty would be able to take these news channels to task, leaving the rest to the mercy of an ill-equipped judicial system.

The writer is an assistant editor at Daily Times