Farrukh Khan Pitafi

Whenever a political group relies too much on the media for any policy decision, it often ignores the inherent flaw in the plan, that of mortal weaknesses and the interests of businesses owning any particular media outlet

The research methodology of the Pakistani political elite remains woefully flawed. Consequently every research effort yields queer dividends in the shape of further exacerbated crises. It takes no rocket scientist to study and follow the examples of established democracies where opposition parties form shadow governments and take up the tedious task of oversight and preparing for the day when they would rise to power. Hence, whenever the opposition replaces the government, there we see a new group fully prepared for handling the national crises. Not in our country, though. Here the sole agenda of every opposition member is to throw out the incumbent government and for that no area of specialisation is developed. Every member discusses diverse matters ranging from energy issues, inflation, judicial activism, defence, foreign policy, and if any time can be spared, health and education. This replaces the expert opinion with simplistic, populist and often unrealistic slogans. And when these parties rise to power, there is no homework done.

In the current situation, however, the onus has been placed on us mortals in the media and civil society. And then, since the ongoing war on terror ensures that some semblance of secrecy has to prevail for the greater good, the information reaching the media is usually patchy, unreliable and often ripe as a vehicle of propaganda. We pick the most appealing piece of information and use it to put a spin on the situation according to our own worldview.

Whenever a political group relies too much on the media for any policy decision, it often ignores the inherent flaw in the plan, that of mortal weaknesses and the interests of businesses owning any particular media outlet. In a free world where institutions have taken root, politicians would seldom be found blaming the media for their own lack of preparation or incompetence. In Pakistan, however, when a crisis starts, the resulting polarisation is given an ideological twist by the spin-doctors while invoking the highest values of the political profession. Yet, when anything goes wrong and these parties realise that they have been used, they put all the blame on the media. This is unfair.

As journalists, it is our unfortunate duty to know as much of everything as we can. Certain better trained among us have acquired the ability to cultivate an image of being better informed than they actually are. In reality, what happens is that the juicy bits of information that they disclose in the media are usually provided to them by their sources that often include the shady wilderness of mirrors, or simply put, the intelligence agencies. Since this information is provided strictly on a need to know basis, it is not the journalist who is usually calling the shots. On the contrary, it is the person on the other end who sets the agenda. At a given time, the journalist buys and imbibes the agenda of his handler to such an extent that he actually believes in it and hence is prone to exploitation. Frankly, it has more to do with vanity and other mortal weaknesses than any kind of professionalism, yet professionals are mortals too. This, I agree, is our bad side; thus we can never replace the position of a well-informed political advisor.

But why on earth should the politicians be totally dependent on our input? There is no gainsaying that among seasoned journalists, like in any other profession, there are intellectually deep individuals who have ideas that can be highly useful in any policy debate. But, like in any other field, not everyone is so gifted. And the recent expansion in the media space of the country has brought quite a few half-informed quacks to the fore. This of course includes a spin-doctor, nay the doctor of sleaze, who accepted and then deserted a highly lucrative post from the government and since then has turned against it. But that is just another queer fact of our lives that we ignore such a distinct case of opportunism and still worship the opportunist. We know that there is absolutely no reason for the politicians to blindly follow our prescriptions. But they do, because they do not want to invest in the institutions within their parties where proper research is done. A politician would hence watch a popular talk show one night and, taking a cue, would wake up with an angry rant on any particular issue.

But this distinct dilemma lies with the opposition groups only, especially because they do not have enough information owing to the lack of steady homework by the shadow government and are seen hardly taking any advantage of the committee system of parliament with the exception of extracting maximum political mileage. Of course it does not mean that the media should be ignored altogether. In better-informed societies, media input is also included in the final decisions, but that is through a system of weightage and not done blindly.

The government’s dilemma is usually altogether different. Thanks to its lack of homework, the government is usually totally dependent on the civil, military and of course judicial bureaucracy. While the latter is consulted only occasionally, the former two provide consistent input to the government. Since bureaucracy is usually wary of the free media, the rulers inherit this prejudice without much resistance. Where the bureaucracy is shunned, its place is usually occupied not by the technocrat advisors but the voluminous coterie of sycophants. The newborn political process is hence nipped in the bud. The extent to which bureaucrats and sycophants set the mediocre agenda in the Islamic republic is obnoxious. Even in the current political, constitutional and energy crises and even on the issues of relations with the country’s neighbours, these influences are quite evident.

So, is there any way out? Or are we destined only to pick up pieces from the wreckage of our dreams and promises of democracy? I think there is a way. We have to go back to the basics. Every person in this country has to ask him/herself, what are the responsibilities of his/her profession? If everyone can figure that out and there are even a few sane individuals alive, things can improve. For instance, the primary function of the opposition is not to throw the government out but to correct its course through public exposure whenever there is a mistake and, meanwhile, prepare itself for its turn. Likewise, the task of the government is not merely to struggle for survival but to offer relief to the people. The media, defence establishment and the judiciary, the big three currently being blamed for collusion, also have their well-defined roles. If we cannot go back to the basics, we are in for an absolute catastrophe because we have already been surrounded by the vultures. And in democracy lies our only survival.

The writer is an independent columnist and a talk show host. He can be reached at farrukh.khan@pitafi.com