VIEW: Reaction of the media to criticism —Azhar Ghumro

The timing of the resolution was arbitrary and the intention behind the passing of such a resolution was to put the media under pressure so it would not follow up on the fake degrees scandal. However, the allegation levelled in the resolution against the media was not without substance

In Pakistan, criticism has become a favoured sport and everybody considers it a birthright to criticise others without letting the opportunity to criticise slip away. However, critics consider themselves immune from criticism. The reaction of the media against the Punjab Assembly’s resolution is testament to this fact.

Before delving into the subject, I consider it necessary to mention here the common definition of criticism. As per its simple definition, “Criticism is analysing the merits and demerits of either an animate or an inanimate thing or an object from various points of view of a person who embarks upon the task of criticism.” Winston Churchill viewed criticism as a necessary ‘bitter pill’, which is evident from his words, “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.”

By and large, people do not like criticism because they do not want to be seen in the low esteem of others, nor do they want to see themselves exposed. But, in Pakistan, criticism has become a trademark of Pakistani politics where our politicians criticise their opponents for all their actions and inactions, mainly for their vilification and petty score settling. Criticism against the federal and Punjab government by the PML-N and PPP, respectively, is part of their scheme to belittle each other’s leadership and indulge in political score settling.

Criticism is a highly specialised job and people unless qualified, intrinsically at least, should refrain from engaging in it as it can harm more than the intended good. But, after the advent of the electronic age in Pakistan, our 24/7 news crazy media jumped onto this bandwagon and thus criticism turned into entertainment. Now, every day, willingly or unwillingly, we are compelled to absorb a daily dose of criticism in the form of TV news shows.

Here it is worth mentioning that almost all TV show hosts invite the same sharp-tongued politicians, retired generals, bureaucrats and pseudo-intellectuals to hold a debate on critical issues being faced by the country, irrespective of whether the invited guests possess or do not possess any influence on public opinion or party policy making.

During these TV shows, a majority of the show hosts, instead of facilitating such debates towards a conclusive and logical end such as highlighting the weakness or absence of a tangible policy to handle a particular issue, providing suggestions and seeking commitments from the guests to address these issues, prefer the unnecessary grilling of their invited guests. In such an exercise, guests belonging to rival groups accost them. This unnecessary grilling has become a trademark of all such TV shows and the rating of shows and show hosts are now being based on their degree or height of grilling their guests.

In response to the exposure and persistent follow-up of the fake degrees scandal by the electronic and print media, the Punjab Assembly passed a resolution against a section of the media, accusing them of blackmailing and corruption. The timing of the resolution was arbitrary and the intention behind the passing of such a resolution was to put the media under pressure so it would not follow up on the fake degrees scandal. However, the allegation levelled in the resolution against the media was not without substance. It is common knowledge that many media houses have taken positions against different political groups and various media representatives either remain on the payroll of agencies or collect a monthly fee (bhatta) from contractors and government officials throughout the country. The menace of monthly bhatta collection by regional representatives of local newspapers is most commonly seen at the district and town levels.

In reaction to the Punjab Assembly resolution against the media, media representatives covering the assembly proceedings boycotted the session and resorted to hooting at the MPAs at the end of the session. In a tit-for-tat situation, a few insecure parliamentarians of the Punjab Assembly retaliated in a similar manner and threatened the offending media representatives. This hot exchange of words between media representatives and Punjab Assembly members was avoidable but elements on both sides were unwilling to budge from their positions.

Subsequently, the media community throughout the country stood against its criticism in the Punjab Assembly and the regrettable exchange of words outside the assembly. The media held countrywide demonstrations against the parliamentarians and political parties involved in the episode. During these demonstrations, effigies of the movers of the resolution were burned and they were cast as villains. Similarly, the electronic media dedicated regular shows in solidarity with their community and started making fun of the involved parliamentarians.

Here, I will not hesitate to acknowledge the fact that all the criticism by the media against the government in power is not bad, as it has — in the past — helped in the ouster of dictator General Pervez Musharraf and the restoration of the arbitrarily sacked Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. But the crux of this article is to stress the need to differentiate between abuse and criticism.

Notwithstanding the merits of the allegations against the media, the response of media representatives and groups against parliament and parliamentarians is not worthy of its character. He who does not have the courage to take criticism positively and lightly, should forfeit his right to criticise others.

The writer is an Islamabad-based development professional. He can be reached at ghumro@yahoo.com