Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

I think its about time.

Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media - The Washington Post
Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

By Richard Leiby, Published: March 3

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Media censorship is nothing new in Pakistan, where military dictators come and go. But newly proposed rules to ban TV programming deemed “against the national interest” spring from an unlikely source: a civilian government that has prided itself on inching the country toward democracy over the past four years.

The proposals were issued last month by a media regulatory body that says it is responding to public complaints about an explosion of increasingly shrill, fact-twisting and privacy-invading cable news shows. But the draft measures also take pointed aim at coverage that criticizes “the organs of the state” or undermines Pakistan’s “solidarity as an independent and sovereign country.”

Besides condemning the restrictions as impossibly vague, some foes of censorship see the powerful hand of Pakistan’s military behind them. Any ban on purported anti-state news would extend to coverage of the secessionist movement in Baluchistan, a province where the army and internal intelligence agencies are accused of extrajudicial killings of nationalists.

Last week the interior minister, Rehman Malik, asked cable news channels to stop booking Baluch separatist leaders on talk shows, saying the rebels were spreading propaganda about forced disappearances.

Government officials say the proposed restrictions are not meant to intimidate or impose censorship on the media but are instead intended to prod the raucous TV news industry to regulate itself.

“You have to define certain rules for their own betterment,” Firdous Ashiq Awan, the minister of information and broadcasting, said in an interview. “It’s not that government wants it; the whole nation wants it. There must be some rules and regulations.”

The prospect of such government intrusion unnerves free-speech advocates, who have watched an emboldened media take on civilian as well as military leaders in recent years. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, which operates under the information minister, contends that its proposals are benign, but the agency has the power to punish alleged violations by imposing fines and pulling broadcast licenses.

“The government’s goal is not to educate the media or the public,” said Hamza Farooq, a Karachi journalist who has worked at CNBC Pakistan and Geo TV, a leading broadcaster. “They are just trying to pressure the media.”

He and others pointed out that the release of the proposed rules coincides with stepped-up coverage of the long-running Baluch insurgency. Media, politicians and judges also have become more critical of the military and its Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency, calling on them to account for “missing persons” in the restive province and elsewhere.

“There is a deep appetite for control, both in civilian government and the military establishment, and obviously they are looking for a way to exercise some control,” said influential Geo TV anchor Kamran Khan. “This becomes a tool in their hands. It is not only in Pakistan but in China and Syria — whenever they want to escape accountability and criticism.”

Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Awan, the information minister, said Baluchis enjoy the same rights of free speech as everyone else in Pakistan. But she maintained that content restrictions are in the national interest: “We cannot compromise on the sovereignty of our country. That is our national duty and obligation.”

Musharraf’s legacy

Five years ago, Pakistan’s then-president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, blacked out cable shows in a crackdown on those protesting his consolidation of power, which included suspending the constitution, arresting political foes and removing the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The bans were imposed by PEMRA, the same agency now promulgating the content restrictions.

Yet it is Musharraf whom journalists frequently credit with creating a thriving independent media through deregulation. A decade ago, Pakistan had just one TV channel — the official one. Now there are 89, pumping out talk shows, religious programs, entertainment and news — and opinion mongering passed off as news.

The intense competition has sparked hysterical coverage that PEMRA says should be tamped down. One proposal recommends: “Gloomy, sensational, or alarming details not essential to factual reporting shall not be aired as part of [a] news-bulletin.”

Officials say the impetus for the regulatory drive was a January stunt by a Karachi television host who dispatched a band of middle-aged women to a park to determine whether spooning young couples there were married or engaged or had their parents’ permission to date.

Local media dubbed the hectoring inquisitors the “vigil-aunties.”

The show infuriated a public already sick of undercover TV investigations and other invasions of privacy. The host, Maya Khan of Samaa TV, was fired, but later she said all the love-struck couples on the program were actors — a subterfuge straight out of the American reality-show playbook.

Media as political force

In Pakistan, committees of volunteer media monitors unaffiliated with the government take public complaints about programming via a toll-free hotline. When PEMRA requested that committee members critique the draft guidelines, some quit, not wanting anything to do with government censorship.

Last week, committee members submitted clause-by-clause objections, but the regulators ignored those that involved prohibitions against criticism of the state.

“National interest — nobody knows what it is,” said Marvi Sirmed, a columnist who said she will remain a volunteer to work against government overreach. “We don’t want any government entity to implement this mechanism.”

Since deregulation, some arms of the fourth estate here have become so rich through cross-ownership of newspapers, radio and TV outlets that they have become political forces in their own right. And despite their faults, the cable news shows are widely regarded as protectors of Pakistan’s fragile democracy.

“The power of media is enormous,” said anchor Faisal Rehman of Waqt TV. “They cannot stop it even if they tried.”

2

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

That happens every time a government starts reaching its fag end, Musharraf also tried let this govt do their best as well.

3

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Bad idea. No muzzling the media. Bad bad bad idea.

4

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

too much criticism for ISI already?

5

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Why is it bad idea? Media had more than enough time to self-regulate itself. Its seems like they are incapable of doing it. Time for govt to act b/c every country in the world has type rule for media. Pakistani media is simply a destructive force & not productive...the way it is now.

6

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Because you can't muzzle freedom of speech by the whim of the government. Even in the US or the EU issues of treason or national interest are limited by the courts and not by the government with an on and off switch. When Musharraf did it it was wrong. Now when the PPP is doing it is wrong. You can't silence people just because you disagree with them and call it national interest.

7

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Shamraz, who will decide what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’ or to use your terms, what is ‘productive’ and what is ‘destructive’?

PEMRA is already policing the moral police…

8

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Do you think image projected by Pakistani media to outside world as if the country is on fire from end to end is good or bad?

9

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

I agree that concept of national interest is too broad, but that doesn't mean there should be no rules for media.

10

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

^ That is not the point.

The point is who is going to regulate the media? Is there any reason to believe that we have an agreed upon normative policy for our media and an authority which is capable, independent and effective that can be trusted with the task of regulating media?

There already are enough rules. I suggest going through PEMRA website.

11

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

So will keeping our heads buried in the sand help?

In 1971 till the very end (fall of Dhaka) our media was telling us that everything is under control and then we lost half the country, to solve a problem we first need to believe that a problem exists so that we can work towards solving it.

12

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Besides now the situation has changed a lot, even if the government tries to downplay some incidents they are highlighted through the alternate media like discussion forums, blogs, twitter and facebook. Our media was neglecting the Baloch issue until recently, but they couldnt stop the Baloch bloggers and users of alternate media from bringing the world attention to their plight. Keeping this in mind I dont think this would achieve much.

The government should in the meanwhile try to improve its performance and make its working more transparent and according to the law so that they dont need to shy away from the media.

13

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Is it reality is the question? Because 90% of the posters on GS have the same view.

14

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Are you saying that there should be no rules b/c media is some kind of holly cow? The govt exist for a reason & in democracy that govt represents will of the people. Therefore, govt should make rules & set proper boundaries so aunties like Maya Khan aren't hounding young couples on beaches demanding nekaah namas.

15

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

No, your point is valid, but we live in different era. You can't hide things from public view for too long anymore thanks to the internet, but that doesn't mean there should be no rules for the electronic media.

16

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

Lets see what kind of rules are put forward for regulating the media.

Since the elections are near, does the government want to hide their corruption scandals or due to the recent scandals concerning the military (do they want to gag the media in the garb of national security).

As both things will be dis service to the country in the long run. If there are problems in the governing system, it needs to be brought out and rectified. By sweeping it under the carpet we will be aggravating the problem.

17

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

i’m saying we have enough rules already. Implementation, as always in Pakistan, is the issue.

i think the issue is that people are criticizing military and ISI much more openly now than they used to.

18

Re: Pakistan proposes curbs on raucous media

lol we were talking about the curbs on media and the emergence of alternate media. It seems the government is trying to control the internet too… :smack:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/technology/pakistan-builds-web-wall-out-in-the-open.html?_r=1

Pakistan Builds Web Wall Out in the Open

PARIS — Many countries censor the Internet, but few spell out their intentions as explicitly as Pakistan.

**In an effort to tighten its control over the Internet, the government recently published a public tender for the “development, deployment and operation of a national-level URL filtering and blocking system.”**Technology companies, academic institutions and other interested parties have until March 16 to submit proposals for the $10 million project, but anger about it has been growing both inside and outside Pakistan.

Censorship of the Web is nothing new in Pakistan, which, like other countries in the region, says it wants to uphold public morality, protect national security or prevent blasphemy. The government has blocked access to pornographic sites, as well as, from time to time, mainstream services like Facebook and YouTube.

Until now, however, Pakistan has done so in a makeshift way, demanding that Internet service providers cut off access to specific sites upon request. With Internet use growing rapidly, the censors are struggling to keep up, so the government wants to build an automatic blocking and filtering system, like the so-called Great Firewall of China.

While China and other governments that sanitize the Internet generally do so with little public disclosure, Pakistan is being surprisingly forthcoming about its censorship needs. It published its request for proposals on the Web site of the Information and Communications Technology Ministry’s Research and Development Fund and even took out newspaper advertisements to publicize the project.

“The system would have a central database of undesirable URL’s that would be loaded on the distributed hardware boxes at each POP and updated on daily basis,” the request for proposals says, referring to uniform resource locators, the unique addresses for specific Web pages, and points of presence, or access points.

“The database would be regularly updated through subscription to an international reputed company maintaining and updating such databases,” according to the request, which was published last month.

The tender details a number of technical specifications, including the fact that the technology “should be able to handle a block list of up to 50 million URL’s (concurrent unidirectional filtering capacity) with processing delay of not more than 1 milliseconds.**”****Following the Arab Spring, which demonstrated the power of the Internet to help spread political and social change, Pakistan’s move to clamp down has set off a storm of protest among free-speech groups in the country and beyond.

Opponents of censorship say they are doubly appalled because they associated this kind of heavy-handed approach more with the previous regime of Gen. Pervez Musharraf than with the current government of President Asif Ali Zardari.“The authorities here are big fans of China and how it filters the Internet,” said Sana Saleem, chief executive of Bolo Bhi, a group that campaigns against restrictions on the Internet. “They overlook the fact that China is an autocratic regime and we are a democracy.”
**
“What makes this kind of censorship so insidious is that they always use national security, pornography or blasphemy as an explanation for blocking other kinds of speech,” Ms. Saleem said, adding that her site had been blocked for several months in 2010 when it made reference to a ban on Facebook. Access to the social networking service had been restricted because of a page featuring a competition to draw the prophet Mohammed — something that is considered blasphemous by Muslims.

The Technology Ministry’s Research and Development Fund says in its tender that the Internet filtering and blocking system will be “indigenously developed,” but campaigners like Ms. Saleem say they think it is likely the agency will try to adapt Western technology for the purpose.

To try to prevent this from happening, Ms. Saleem wrote to the chief executives of eight international companies that make Net filtering technology, asking them to make a public commitment not to apply for the Pakistani grant.

On Friday, one of them, Websense, which is based in San Diego, responded, declaring in a statement on its Web site that it would not seek the contract.“Broad government censorship of citizen access to the Internet is morally wrong,” Websense said. “We further believe that any company whose products are currently being used for government-imposed censorship should remove their technology so that it is not used in this way by oppressive governments.

”Websense had previously withdrawn the use of its technology from Yemen after facing accusations from the OpenNet Initiative, a U.S.-Canadian academic group, and other organizations that it had been used by the government of that country to stifle political expression on the Internet.

Governments around the world buy filtering and blocking technology to root out illegal content like child pornography. Some private companies employ it to restrict access to social networks and other distractions on company computers.

But the use of Western technology to rein in political speech in countries with repressive regimes has come under increasing scrutiny since the Arab Spring. The OpenNet Initiative said in a report last year that at least nine governments in the Middle East or North Africa had used such products, with the Western companies maintaining lists of sites to be blocked, including sites featuring skeptical views of Islam and even dating services.

Even before implementing its new system, Pakistan has been an active censor. The country was 151st, out of 179, on a ranking of media freedom by the Paris-based group Reporters Without Borders in 2011.“Reporters Without Borders urges you to abandon this project, which would reinforce the arsenal of measures for communications surveillance and Internet censorship that have already been put in place by your government,” the group wrote in a letter Friday to Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani.

To free-speech advocates in Pakistan, the government’s seeming insouciance about censorship is a particular cause for alarm.“This is a case study,” said Ms. Saleem of Bolo Bhi, which is based in Karachi and whose name means “speak up.” “No government has ever done this so publicly.”