The writer is a graduate of Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism and currently teaches journalism at SZABIST in Karachi
Surveying this landscape, would it be fair to conclude that Pakistan’s free press, much like its fragile democracy, appears to be desirable in theory and intrinsically flawed in practice?
It’s increasingly clear that commercial pressures on news outlets are leading to a race to the bottom, with ratings driving a never-ending supply of sensationalism and ‘mirch masala’ infotainment dressed up as news. Tune into any television channel and observe the fixed template that defines prime time news in Pakistan: ‘in the headlines — X, Y and Z happened today. In news analysis, X, Y and Z are the latest in a series of damning incidents that demonstrate the complete failure of the government to deliver results for the people in the last five years.’
This is the equivalent of a premeditated shot in cricket. In cricket, whenever a batsman — particularly with a ‘Boom Boom’ temperament — misses a premeditated shot, he is sent back to the pavilion. Unfortunately, no such pavilion of shame exists for Pakistani journalists, engaging in the ‘hit and miss’ culture embedded in sensational reporting.
In Pakistan, the job description of a journalist appears to include confronting, embarrassing and rhetorically defeating every politician (read: David) on behalf of the common man (read: Goliath). In short, a journalist can do everything except actually seeking to objectively understand a particular story. Alas, the Pakistani journalist is so busy holding powerful people ‘accountable’ that seeking the truth is only important in so far as it can help him achieve his premeditated objectives.
If you step out of Pakistan, credible journalists have the potential to single-handedly make or break public opinion on national issues. For example, after a not-so-glowing report on the Vietnam War by legendary broadcast journalist Walter Cronkite, American President Lyndon Johnson is famously reported to have concluded that “if I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost America”. Can you name a single Pakistani journalist who can make or break public opinion on a particular national issue? Not really. This is exactly why Pakistan has such a fractured media landscape today. Citizens prefer getting their news from multiple sources to account for credibility gaps in individual news sources. News consumers piece together a complete picture of the truth themselves, instead of relying on journalists who are employed full-time to do this. Unfortunately, this is a time consuming process and Pakistani citizens are increasingly avoiding this in favour of a different expectation from journalists.
News consumers no longer expect Pakistani journalists to help them understand the truth objectively. Instead, they expect reporting that projects one version of reality, which enables them to reinforce their own larger narrative about the country, including their conspiracy theory of choice. Put simply, Pakistani citizens want journalists to tell them what they want to hear about the country. This is a reflection of and a contribution to the broader trend of polarisation in Pakistani society. If your consumption of news simply reinforces your worldview and drowns out challenges to your thought process, it will eventually lower your tolerance for differing points of view.
Fortunately for Pakistan, there is one potential upside to this otherwise sorry state of affairs. Pakistan’s media landscape today presents a ripe opportunity for journalists and news outlets to step up and carve a niche for themselves as the ‘go to place’ for credible, objective reporting. Creating an island of excellence and objectivity in reporting will enable news outlets to fill a real vacuum that Pakistani news consumers will reward with ratings.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 7th, 2013.
COMMENTS (6)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
-(1)1717678110-0/Kendrick-(1)-(1)1717678110-0-405x300.webp "article")
so well articulated lines. The "Breaking News" syndrome will i guess revive the print media which is rapidly loosing audience. This is virtually happening in our country that a newly enrolled TV anchor, who merely completes his masters, and is in his mid 20s, immediately becomes a "National Security Analyst" and starts teaching this ill-fated nation issues like "Strategic Depth"
By the way,there is a difference between a journalist and a TV anchor.
Media is serving the purpose of establishment where politicians are rivals.Moral collapse is thus evident from media's talk shows and other programms.Establishment vs democracy and net result is lack of real linformation and virtually a nation with very low IQ.They can not make public opinion that's why they have employed herd of ghairat brigades in print and electronic media. Excellant article.
@Bilal: Are you passing the buck? Mohammad Malik wrote a piece in which he held you the owners responsible for the way journalists behave. Anchors and most desktop journos, of whom there are a lot, hold owners responsible, and the owners lay it on the doors of journos or intelligence. The question is where does one now stop the buck and begin to mature the media?
Your comments are very appropriate. This brand of journalism by TV talk show hosts seeks to knock out the guests without regard to fact or manners. The host frames the topic, shouts at his guests and pushes his views for most of the show. The host knows it all. Egos of journalists are bigger than Pakistan itself. Of late -not satisfied with their 'soft' foreign office, they have taken to represent Pakistan's policies in international forums. The venue changes but the style is the same. Thin skinned and all assuming.
"Can you name a single Pakistani journalist who can make or break public opinion on a particular national issue? Not really. This is exactly why Pakistan has such a fractured media landscape today"
Fractured media reflects fractured polity. You cannot name a single journalist in USA today for whom LBJ's statement about Cronkite would be true. None in India either. Also this is not necessarily a bad thing. Group think is comfortable in the shrt term but can lead to major blind spots over a period of time. Group think on WMD hurt Iraq immensely but also hurt US both financially and in terms of credibility.
"In Pakistan, the job description of a journalist appears to include confronting, embarrassing and rhetorically defeating every politician (read: David) on behalf of the common man (read: Goliath)."
Huh? The politicians with their VIP security and fancy cars, can continue to have uninterrupted electricity despite not paying their electricity bills are the David and the common man who gets killed randomly anywhere and everywhere and suffers long hours of load shedding - helpless to have his voice heard is a Goliath?
"News consumers no longer expect Pakistani journalists to help them understand the truth objectively. Instead, they expect reporting that projects one version of reality, which enables them to reinforce their own larger narrative about the country",
This is true worldwide not just for Pakistan. It is upto individuals to sample different news sources so that they can get a holistic perspective - assuming they want it.