Bridging The Communication Gap With PPP!

With time, disconnect with the Pakistan Peoples Party is widening. The more one listens to news and reads newspapers, the more one is convinced of the distending communication gap between the PPP and non-PPP camps. It seems both of them are talking to themselves only. Watching talk shows on TV channels, where representatives from both camps talk face to face, is an experience these days as they appear to be an exercise in monologic dialogue, without communicating a bit!

No doubt, both camps are talking quite heavily meaningfully. When Khawaja Saad Rafique, or anyone from the Pakistan Muslim League (N), says the PP is using all its energies in defending the President Asif Ali Zaradri against his Swiss money laundering cases, when Fauzia Wahab or anyone from the PP says media is targeting President Zardari, and when Qamar Zaman Kaira says the PP is always a victim of anti-people forces, they all are talking meaningfully. In fact, they mean very seriously what they say. But they do not understand each other. Or the PP does not want or intend to understand the other party. There lies the disconnect, the communication gap!

Being in government, it is incumbent on the PP, and for that matter whoever it is, to heed meaningfully to every piece of criticism, blame or just any expression of hatred, whether it comes from the non-PP camp or from its own partners. That is better for its own health! However, the PP not taking any such thing in any serious manner amounts to its own failure, and implies its having been plagued with a psychological disorder of very serious nature. If it is so, it is fatal for a nation and its country, when a whole political party, and one with such a good following, and one wherein sanity has been pushed to its fringes (read Safdar Abbasi, Naheed Khan) comes to be such a patient who needs to be quarantined. The latest ‘internal’ evidence to this diagnosis is the PP’s own decision to boycott a media group, Jang Group and Geo.

In fact, a person may catch such a psychological disorder, for a political party comprising a good many number of people catching it is next to impossible; only if all the members of its leadership layers are diagnosed thus which is almost an unlikely phenomenon. A political party may have other diseases, as in the present case, PP is afflicted by populism which is characterized by utter denial of going by any norms and rules. That is why mostly it is under the PP governments that rules and laws are laid down to show its loyalty to the same. At the same time it is under the PP governments that norms, traditions, rules, laws, constitutional provisions are not adhered to. For it, the norm is to disregard, ridicule and trample them. Appointing Justice Deedar Hussain Shah (R) as Chairman NAB is the newest episode to this drama!

Thus, it may not be far from the truth that such a posture in fact is a strategy to take liberty and to act freely. The history of events that unfolded since February 2008 general elections proves that.

Never in the history of Pakistan was a political party’s government especially that of PP, welcomed with such enthusiasm by the opposition parties, and all other elements, as was the case this time with PP’s government. Recall the friendly and encouraging sentiment prevailing throughout the political environment both inside and outside the parliament. All the political parties, such as PML (N), Awani National Party, Pakistan Muslim League (Q), Muttahida Qaumi Movement, Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Islam (F), which otherwise would make a robust opposition, were on the side of the PP. They all turned into coalition partners with PP to materialize the dream. The way Yusuf Raza Gilani was made Prime Minister and Asif Ali Zardari President no one would believe now. Both print and electronic media were writing and telecasting goodwill to the PP. Quite incredible, nowhere could be found slightest hint of difference and disagreement vis-à-vis PP.

There is more to it, all that was in perfect sincerity on the part of the non-PP camp, without any bad faith. Its sole reason undoubtedly was successful culmination of a mass movement under the leadership of lawyers against General Musharraf’s dictatorship, and in favor of an independent judiciary, constitutionalism, rule of law, and fundamental rights, at the end of which PP had come to form the government. On that high-tide, PP could have made miracles for the people of Pakistan. Alas, it ruined and lost all that golden moment!

It’s no place to narrate all those events that gradually exposed malicious intent of the PP leadership, and deliberate thwarting of the achievements of that mass movement. It fooled not only PML (N), and with it all the political forces inside and outside (Jamat-e-Islami, and Tehreek-e-Insaaf) the parliament but also all the ordinary people of Pakistan. Just like its founder, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the present PP leadership tried to cheat on all and sundry who came on its side, partnered with it, and supported it. The tenure of this PP government presents more than a graphic representation of treacherous callousness of the PP leadership!

The latest Nawabshah speech (October 11) of President Asif Ali Zardari, replete with the same old rhetoric, and the adoption of the same hazy and symbolic rhetoric by the Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani also, proves the same point that the disconnect or the communication gap is but a deliberate strategy to refuse to follow the norms, rules, laws, and constitutional provisions. Whatever its motives are, the PP leadership has taken refuge behind the populist parlance. In this vein, every piece of criticism of whatever nature is dumped under the carpet of conspiracy against the people of Pakistan, and their Party, i.e. the PPP.

As the patient, i.e. PP, by boycotting Jang and Geo Group, is shutting itself in a shell of its own making to achieve what it wants to achieve, the realistic way out is to follow the same course of action to get it out of the communication gap with others. Not only will this break its disconnect, but will bring the PP to come to communicate with others meaningfully in terms of norms, rules, laws, constitutional provisions, and adherence to them.

Thus in order to save the country and the nation from the dangerous consequences of the PP’s populist politics, it is necessary, like the last ditch effort made to revive a dying patient, to quarantine all the layers of the PP leadership. May it be suggested that all the private media and news outlets should not invite any representative of the PP for interview, talk show, etc, and they should not accept any such invitation from the PP camp also. Let them chirp on the PTV and Radio Pakistan alone, and lonely. Only the vital news coming from the government’s quarters should be printed and aired.

Though, no other option seems viable to make the PP leadership realize the significance of their deliberate disconnect or communication gap with others but to subject it strictly to rules, laws, and constitutional provisions operative in the country; however, as a test case a boycott in terms of PP’s presence on print and electronic media may be resorted to - in the hope of bringing it to communicate meaningfully with others, and thus be able finally to deliver!

Note: This article was completed in October 2010.

Media consumption?

The theory of media consumption stands vindicated in Pakistan!

The story goes thus:

On June 29 the Federal Defense Minister, Ahmed Mukhtar, who had been sleeping all through the May 2 Abbottabad-Osama-Bin-Laden and May 23 PNS-Mehran-Karachi happenings, awoke to talk to a group of journalists apprising them that Pakistan had asked Washington to vacate the Shamsi airbase in Balochistan which was used to launch Drone strikes against the militants. The Minister remained awake to tell the Reuters on the following day that Islamabad had been pressing the US to leave the base even before the 'Abbottabad incursion' and did so again after the 'incursion.'

Very next day, the message had already generated its rebuke. The US officials in Washington reacted that there was no plan to vacate the base.

Then it was on July 1 that the Federal Minister for Information, Dr. Firdous Ashiq Awan, had to settle the matter. She while talking to media persons in Lahore declared: "It was just a statement for the media." She clarified that 'she was a member of the defense committee and the matter was not discussed there.'

Is there something such as for the consumption of media? Should there be something such as for the consumption of media? If so, as is the case, what is media for, then? To consume? To consume endlessly? Yeah, it's a voracious consumer, 24 hour consumer. Now, they say it is its freedom what it chooses to consume? But this freedom of it does not work for a 24 hour long day; that means it has to consume sometime or most of the time it has no choice in having it on its table, and it depends on the nature of its appetite and its taste. There the governments find room to bring in the media to consume they want it to consume; though, there are many other ways governments have got to regulate the appetite and taste of the media.

Functionally, media is sort of an information bridge between the rulers and the ruled. But it has come to be a one-way bridge at best, and most of the time. The two-way traffic on this bridge is not allowed and needs media-men like Omar Cheema and Saleem Shahzad, and may cost life. This is this one-way traffic about which the Federal Information Minister alluded when she brushed aside her government's Defense Minister's substantive talk by terming it something which was meant for the media. Why do media need such stuff? Of course, it does not need any such thing (or otherwise), for its own sake, or for its staff, or for its bosses, or for nothing? Obviously, it goes to the citizens of the country with what it picks up from here and there, or is "given" to it by X, Y or Z. After separating wheat from chaff it brings it to its end-users.

However, it is here that it sets itself to consuming chaff, and not wheat. That is what the Information Minister alluded to. The media picked up what the Defense Minister threw or the Information Minister threw and brought it up to its viewers, the citizens, who are ultimate end-users. In other words, what Information Minister dubbed as 'for media consumption' is for the consumption of the viewers, the citizens, finally.

That is what is known as Public Consumption. Also, government has laws and rules such as official secret acts, or classified information; it goes beyond that and conceals its affairs from the citizens, and makes their leaking a crime. In addition to concealing its affairs, government lies as well as misleads the citizens. It contrives incomplete, incorrect and false information which they mean for “public consumption.” In this game, the media serves as a tool of the government. Otherwise, what else the Information Minister's 'for the media consumption' may amount to?

As no one from the media protested over the Information Minister's 'for the media' theory, it meant not only the media is ready to consume such misleading stuff; it is ready to mislead its viewers also. The question is: Is media an accomplice in the Great Crime being committed in Pakistan against its citizens?

Media wars

It is essential to seek out enemy agents who have come to conduct espionage against you and to bribe them to serve you. Give them instructions and care for them. Thus doubled agents are recruited and used. [Sun Tzu]

Before March 9, 2007, it was all dark on the horizon of Pakistan. A military dictator was ruling while dressed in khaki uniform; he was intent upon continuing his rule for the next 5 years; and the criminal politicians were all ready to help him rule for more than a hundred years. Such was the hopelessness that no rational being could dream of a silver lining. One could only fear what happened to Iraq after it grabbed Kuwait, may not happen to Pakistan.

All of a sudden, and it was just like a bolt from the blue, a hope started taking shape. First time in Pakistan, the point was made that the government must be run by the book. So, the lawyers’ movement taught the people of Pakistan three lessons in democracy: constitutionalism, rule of law, and fundamental rights. During this movement, the dynamics of Pakistani society changed the repercussions of which will be felt far deeper into the future.

One of the new forces that emerged in the midst of that movement is electronic media. Rather it may rightly be asserted that not only the plethora of TV channels got allied and aligned with the people at large, but they realized their power also. That made them self-conscious elephantine! Ensuing of a fierce competition among them was quite natural. In a Robbinsian economic sense, viewership as well as advertisement revenue was scarce, and they fought for a larger share forgetting all the norms and rules of the game. The one which won not only a larger portion of the viewership but revenue also became the target of envy and conspiracies by other lesser obtainers.

Previously, it was all melodrama. There was only one TV channel, the state-run PTV. For its survival, it was dependent on the doles from the state, and it blew the stat’s trumpet. In order to survive, it’s still extorting Rs.35 every month from every TV set owner by using the might of the state. Emergence of dozens of new TV channels, which of course were to be run like businesses, completely altered the scene on the stage. The state-run PTV slipped behind the curtain, and lost both its viewership and revenue to the new breed of TV channels, which in no way were dependent on the state. Instead they depend on their market of viewers who indirectly yield revenue to them. Thus, in the world of electronic media in Pakistan loyalty to the market is the rule, and loyalty to the state and its institutions is an exception (loyalty to the constitution is quite something else).

As the art of the statecraft requires, the private TV channels were brought under a regulator, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA). However, in essence the ruling political parties came to control these channels for political gains and privileges. That the regulator in this case, as in so many other cases, was not given autonomy and the government kept it under its authority, it remained spineless, resulting in a chaotic broadcasting environment. A number of attempts on the part of these private TV channels to self-regulate failed, which provided ample space to the state and its various institutions and agencies to dictate their agenda items to this or that TV channel.

But that was not like PTV days, the golden days of melodrama and happy eulogies. The competition among these channels drove them to uncharted territories and unfathomed depths. They have already realized their elephantine powerfulness during the lawyers’ movement when they helped defeat a military dictator. Now they have their own fish to fry. They started questioning every practice of the state, its various institutions, including the security entities; the pivot and the point of reference was and is the constitution of Pakistan. The stories and acts which previously went untold and unheard, now found tongues and ears. The tales of Saleem Shahzad, Umar Cheema, and Hamid Mir had a rebellious tone, and challenged the perpetrators. It may also be explained thus that where politicians were required to act boldly was taken up by a TV channel itself. This shows the utter desperation of those who have no hope of justice.

Under the circumstances, the most relevant question is about the role of the state and the politicians. Related with it are other crucial questions, such as: why the constitution is not followed in letter and spirit by the various institutions and entities, be they security or otherwise. Or why the politicians fail to enforce a constitutional rule in Pakistan. Why there is blatant power play which in fact repudiates the spirit and provisions of the constitution. Why the politicians fail in securing the fundamental rights to the citizens, be they journalists. Why the politicians fail to set up independent and autonomous regulators and let them do their job.

In other words, it means had there been rule of law in Pakistan, no institution and entity would have engaged itself in un-constitutional activities. Had there been independent and autonomous courts, no suppressing of the fundamental rights would have been possible. Had there been due accountability mechanisms existent at every level of the state institutions including the Army and the intelligence agencies, there would have been no cases such as of Saleem Shahzad, Umar Cheema and Hamid Mir on the one hand, and on the other, no media campaigns against any security entity may have been unleashed. But all that remains completely absent in Pakistan; which emboldens every individual and every institution to do what they like.

No doubt, the anarchy prevailing in the realm of electronic media in Pakistan at the moment may not have been the case, had there been an independent and autonomous PEMRA, which would have acted in the nick of time in case of any irregularity committed by any media house. However, the PEMRA is still conspicuously absent from the scene whereas weeks have passed that a media war has been raging in Pakistan. That speaks volume about the failure of the ruling PML-N’s leadership!

Note: This article was completed on May 27, and was originally posted in July 2014.