Who is responsible?
The recent brawl between a lady reporter of a TV channel and an FC constable was further amplified by mass media
The writer tweets @alibabakhel
“Action indeed is the sole medium of expression for ethics” — Jane Addams
The recent brawl between a lady reporter of a TV channel and a constable of the paramilitary force was further amplified by mass media. The good part of the heartrending event is that unlike in the past, the media did not portray a one sided picture. The episode gave birth to a number of questions that need public debate and institutional structural readjustment.
Was it a conflict between two individuals or institutions? Was it a failure of two professionals to recognise and respect their limits? Though an FIR of the incident has been lodged and inquiry of the incident has been ordered but question arises, is there any probability of the conviction of an accused and compensation of the victim?
Though by repeatedly broadcasting it, the media was enthusiastic to amplify the incident with sound effects but if the findings go against the reporter, would the media be generous and fair to allocate enough time to the incident? What about the role of the media to promote investigative and interpretative reporting of the incident? Why must our media create bubble like effects and evaporate? Does Pakistani electronic media satisfy the curiosity of the viewers and respect their right to information? I question as to why are our institutions confronted with severe ethical deficits? Does the incident depict poor training or low level of tolerance on the part of both individuals?
Was the reporter trained on how to cover such scenarios and in odd situations what options were supposed to be exercised? Was the FC constable trained to manage crowd or handle media persons including female folk? Is there any institutional apparatus within the media and law enforcement to regulate the ethics? Would such enquiry and registration of a case be helpful in prevention of such like happenings? Is there any passion on the both sides to learn a lesson and avoid such like incidents in future? After watching the video clip, one learns that in a male dominated society in case of sudden provocation a constable from a tribal Para-military force having total male presence was left with what options to tackle the situation? Was a low ranking constable with minimum education, capable of handling such situations? As a consequence of this incident what psychological implications took effect on both individuals? Who authorised the media to act as a judge or police the society? Had the reporter any right to grab an armed constable in the public?
Was she aware of the dire consequences of provoking an armed person? Such act may have endangered her life and the lives of other bystanders.Were both professionals trained as to how and when to react in extreme situations? Though law enforcement departments comprise heavily of internal discipline apparatus, they are severely ill equipped confronting public trust deficit. On the contrary to proceed against media persons found guilty of such incidents, there is no operational media accountability apparatus.
Another issue that cannot be ignored is that our law enforcement agencies are primarily reliant on punitive actions instead of corrective. By taking punitive action their prime motive seems to extinguish the public ire. To me the incident is not to be solely viewed with legal prism but rather to be evaluated from ethical perspective. Both sides should take it as an opportunity to improve the ethical and professional standards. However, ground realities suggest that the gap between media and law enforcement may further widen.
The truth is that the episode occurred not only due to poor professional capacity of two individuals but it also depicts institutional deficiencies.
While analysing the situation it is also important to review the mandate of the FC. The FC is a paramilitary force primarily mandated to police the border between the settled areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal areas against tribal incursions and criminal gangs operating across the border but post 9/11, the scenario totally changed the dynamics.
The FC is not only actively participating in operations against militants but its engagements in urban areas including crowd management, security of diplomats and sensitive installations are often applauded. Since the FC is no more a tribal force but rather undergoing a transit from a tribal traditional force to a modern force to be deployed equally in tribal and urban areas hence its law and training manuals need an objective review.
In Pakistan, journalism is an open field of stories, complicated cases and dilemmas — consequently, objectivity is often compromised. Non-professional journalists primarily rely on sensationalism. Novice in electronic media shall realise that the freedom being enjoyed today by the electronic media is the dividend earned by print media journalists. The irresponsible role of those performing in live transmission is unable to understand the sensitivities. They need to understand that their irresponsible words may be more lethal than the bullets hence in such scenario a reporter while covering live event needs to simultaneously perform reporting and gate keeping functions. Further, “Live reporting” weakened the gate keeping role of producers and that role has been taken over by the owners and reporters.
By conducting a raid with a camera actually the reporter not only tried to police the scenario but also suggested that for media rating is more important than the ethical standards.
The law enforcement personnel shall learn that journalists often try to provoke hence it is imperative to inculcate handling of such scenarios in training.
Self-regulation warrants that before assigning every new journalist should qualify the minimum ethical and safety standards. However that is not possible without a compliance and evaluation unit within the broadcasting organisations. The ground realities suggest that both sides are to be given the benefit of doubt as it seems unintentional on their part.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 18th, 2016.
The recent brawl between a lady reporter of a TV channel and a constable of the paramilitary force was further amplified by mass media. The good part of the heartrending event is that unlike in the past, the media did not portray a one sided picture. The episode gave birth to a number of questions that need public debate and institutional structural readjustment.
Was it a conflict between two individuals or institutions? Was it a failure of two professionals to recognise and respect their limits? Though an FIR of the incident has been lodged and inquiry of the incident has been ordered but question arises, is there any probability of the conviction of an accused and compensation of the victim?
Though by repeatedly broadcasting it, the media was enthusiastic to amplify the incident with sound effects but if the findings go against the reporter, would the media be generous and fair to allocate enough time to the incident? What about the role of the media to promote investigative and interpretative reporting of the incident? Why must our media create bubble like effects and evaporate? Does Pakistani electronic media satisfy the curiosity of the viewers and respect their right to information? I question as to why are our institutions confronted with severe ethical deficits? Does the incident depict poor training or low level of tolerance on the part of both individuals?
Was the reporter trained on how to cover such scenarios and in odd situations what options were supposed to be exercised? Was the FC constable trained to manage crowd or handle media persons including female folk? Is there any institutional apparatus within the media and law enforcement to regulate the ethics? Would such enquiry and registration of a case be helpful in prevention of such like happenings? Is there any passion on the both sides to learn a lesson and avoid such like incidents in future? After watching the video clip, one learns that in a male dominated society in case of sudden provocation a constable from a tribal Para-military force having total male presence was left with what options to tackle the situation? Was a low ranking constable with minimum education, capable of handling such situations? As a consequence of this incident what psychological implications took effect on both individuals? Who authorised the media to act as a judge or police the society? Had the reporter any right to grab an armed constable in the public?
Was she aware of the dire consequences of provoking an armed person? Such act may have endangered her life and the lives of other bystanders.Were both professionals trained as to how and when to react in extreme situations? Though law enforcement departments comprise heavily of internal discipline apparatus, they are severely ill equipped confronting public trust deficit. On the contrary to proceed against media persons found guilty of such incidents, there is no operational media accountability apparatus.
Another issue that cannot be ignored is that our law enforcement agencies are primarily reliant on punitive actions instead of corrective. By taking punitive action their prime motive seems to extinguish the public ire. To me the incident is not to be solely viewed with legal prism but rather to be evaluated from ethical perspective. Both sides should take it as an opportunity to improve the ethical and professional standards. However, ground realities suggest that the gap between media and law enforcement may further widen.
The truth is that the episode occurred not only due to poor professional capacity of two individuals but it also depicts institutional deficiencies.
While analysing the situation it is also important to review the mandate of the FC. The FC is a paramilitary force primarily mandated to police the border between the settled areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal areas against tribal incursions and criminal gangs operating across the border but post 9/11, the scenario totally changed the dynamics.
The FC is not only actively participating in operations against militants but its engagements in urban areas including crowd management, security of diplomats and sensitive installations are often applauded. Since the FC is no more a tribal force but rather undergoing a transit from a tribal traditional force to a modern force to be deployed equally in tribal and urban areas hence its law and training manuals need an objective review.
In Pakistan, journalism is an open field of stories, complicated cases and dilemmas — consequently, objectivity is often compromised. Non-professional journalists primarily rely on sensationalism. Novice in electronic media shall realise that the freedom being enjoyed today by the electronic media is the dividend earned by print media journalists. The irresponsible role of those performing in live transmission is unable to understand the sensitivities. They need to understand that their irresponsible words may be more lethal than the bullets hence in such scenario a reporter while covering live event needs to simultaneously perform reporting and gate keeping functions. Further, “Live reporting” weakened the gate keeping role of producers and that role has been taken over by the owners and reporters.
By conducting a raid with a camera actually the reporter not only tried to police the scenario but also suggested that for media rating is more important than the ethical standards.
The law enforcement personnel shall learn that journalists often try to provoke hence it is imperative to inculcate handling of such scenarios in training.
Self-regulation warrants that before assigning every new journalist should qualify the minimum ethical and safety standards. However that is not possible without a compliance and evaluation unit within the broadcasting organisations. The ground realities suggest that both sides are to be given the benefit of doubt as it seems unintentional on their part.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 18th, 2016.