Abdul Rafay Shaikhجان کی دھمکیوں کی بجائے کام بند کرانے کی دھمکیاں Eng

1335 words
Name roll No be written on top in the file
To be checked

Abdul Rafay Shaikh
2K18/MC/05
Urdu to English

سیلف سنسر شپ:'اب جان کی دھمکیوں کی بجائے کام بند کرانے کی دھمکیاں ہی کافی ہیں'

Relations between the government and journalists in Pakistan are mostly tense with freedom of expression. Journalists are still complaining about the censorship from government agencies for a long time. This complaint occurs more in front of the general elections of July 25 this year. On social media to suppress openly the criticism of state institutions is also became a part of this censorship.

The process of targeting writers is still continues. The news channels that are opposing the official statement are trying to suppress their opposing voices by moving them back and forth on the cable and are influencing the delivery of newspapers and the distribution of advertisements. BBC Urdu has tried to find out in their series that what’s the situation of censorship is in Pakistan. Let’s read the thoughts of the senior journalist Shahzeb Jilani:

A few days ago news has came that violent incidents against journalists in Pakistan have significantly decreased but at the same time it was said that the media has become more self censorship under military pressure rather than being free. How effective is this method of putting the media in silence can be know by the fact that on the day when the world organization committee “To protect journalists” has issued its report on this issue, most of the Pakistani channels and newspapers completely avoided to broadcast this news or buried it somewhere below.

In our media the self-imposed restrictions are not breaking news, a daily reality is. In every democratic or semi-democratic era the self-censorship is with us in some forms. As long as Altaf Hussain's order was in Karachi, the media considered themselves to avoid them so that they can able to survive. The days when the Taliban's bloodshed was on the rise, we avoid condemning openly for their terrorism. Still today we are still very respectful to those who spread religious hatred and sectarianism because if they get angry, it’s hard to live for us.

Nobody likes to do restrictions on their self happily. These compromises are mostly forced. If we live, there will be journalism. If we die because of work, it will not be good for us and no services for journalism. These were the challenges of old Pakistan, with whom we learned how to live. The restrictions that have been imposed for new Pakistan are of different nature. Now instead of threats of life, threats to closing work are enough.

In my view, this attitude started to make a regular policy at a time when someone decided to take Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif walk away. During the panama case it was declared controversially by some circles and it was said by the affected parties and some political observers about the judges, and it was reported that their attitude was biased. The architects of this operation came up with the solution to rein the media.

Some time ago, if you ask a journalist what is your red line here, he would have mentioned the issue of enforced disappearances in the army and Balochistan along with other things. During the past year and a half, this red line has been slipping and tightening.

This line of restrictions is a conceptual line. According to my information in the most media houses they do not have any editorial policy documents. In such an environment you don't know what to say and what to not. I was attached 15 years to an institution like BBC. I remained a reporter and editor. Had the opportunity to work with great journalists from different countries, worked inside and outside Pakistan.

In this period it has never happened to me that facts and certified information have been stopped or censored because of someone's pressure or fear. The pressure in which the Pakistani media is working has spread dangerously the fear of annoying the army and such unwarranted cuts to a dangerous extent.

Take the country's three major and old media groups: during the last era, the Jung/Geo, the Dawn and the Nawaiwaqt, they all know everything in the industry but no one is ready to speak. The apparent guilt of these institutions is the initial reluctance to kneel in front of the powerful institutions of the state. It is probably the punishment of free journalism that the army and its subsidiaries start to destroy a channel. In the every city, they stop the circulation of the newspapers in the cantonment areas and turn off the ads.

It can’t deny what the big media houses have played their role in the past and how much money they have been making, today their internal conditions are so overwhelming that they are not paying salaries to their employees for several months, employees are being expelled or are leaving themselves.

Heard from many journalists that how to please the army, media groups had to submit their institutional decisions to the uniformed people and they had to reprimand their journalists. A TV channel separated one of its senior analysts from their own program show for a while.

There were also some talks about an unannounced ban on some analysts who’s considered as the army's unwanted. Some prominent journalists of Islamabad had to stop expressing their views on twitter etc. Some organizations stopped to broadcast the entire program of some of their anchors.

When someone expressed outrage against this unjustified censorship on social media, there was more pressure comes to delete their posts, which they had to do. I myself had gone through to this kind of experience during reporting in the election days.

On the one hand journalists and journalistic institutions are being tightened and on the other hand new channels are being launched. Who is behind them? Where is the money coming from? How will these new channels be different or better than the two dozen channels already available? Not clear it all

The army is the most powerful institution of Pakistan and its shadow is present on every important aspect of national life, politics, journalism, court, foreign affairs. So if the army and its intelligence agencies cannot be reported then what is left to inform the public?

In the eyes of the army, the ideal media is the one who tells the story of political leader’s corruptions day and night and do not leave any chance to tarnish the elected leadership of millions of people and play a role to weakening parliament and the constitution and making a mockery of it.

But why? Because it is necessary to make every movie hero a super hero by making the bad deeds of villain increase and should be exaggerated. The main purpose of targeting political parties in the name of accountability on the first day has been that the people do not have confidence in the democratic process and the nation consciously or unconsciously considers the same institution as their messiah and the survival of this country.

The compulsions are of everyone. Media owners are more concerned about their business empire more than things like country, nation, and democracy. Anchor says what the truth is, what’s the lie just the show has to be always on Air. The journalist just wishes always to be employed. Some of us are happy to become the first column of the state propaganda, so some are trying to improve as much as possible with a positive work.

The old sinner of journalism in Pakistan says that if you want to move forward so you should have flexibility. The question is only remains that when this decision is not yours, whom to show live, whom to not, who can come on TV, who is not. Whose column can be publish, whose not. What can we say, what can not, and then what is left? What kind of journalism, what kind of expression of freedom on which people can trust a little bit.