Power of the media — session promises more than it delivers
Reporting in Pakistan had changed especially in cases like some political parties, the military and extremist groups.
KARACHI:
The fourth estate. Media. Censorship. Afghanistan. Pakistan.
It was supposed to have it all - which is why I signed up for it.
I wanted to know what Canadian journalists Matthieu Aikins and Meghan Davidson Ladly, Wall Street Journal’s stringer Saeed Shah and our very own Prof Rasul Baksh Rais would have to say.
When I saw one of the panelist, Matthieu Aikins, driving to the Beach Luxury Hotel a little before 12pm, I was excited. I had read his piece ‘Our Man in Kandahar’ for The Atlantic and have been a fan since.
At the venue, I saw Saeed Shah and Ladly, getting ready to go on stage as Ghazi Salahuddin, the moderator, asked a boy to get more chairs on the stage. Half an hour after the event was scheduled to start, Salahuddin said: “Ajaye?”
Salahuddin, a former editor, introduced the panel and gave them 10 minutes each to talk. Rais, a LUMS professor and now heading the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad, started the session with a brief history of the media. Described by Salahuddin as a serious observer of what is happening in Pakistan, Rais said that he had a pessimistic and deterministic view of the media. He added that whether it’s Hollywood, political talk shows, documentaries, they all had a purpose - to get the story out there.
Meghan continued Rais’s discussion and said that the media is a large dialogue. “It is confusing to some extent because there are so many voices,” she said. “There are stories in English, Urdu and then other regional languages.”
Matthieu, who was dressed immaculately in a suit and red socks, was very comfortable being centre stage. He had his points written on a piece of white paper. As a journalist from the West living in the East, he said that what he kept in mind while reporting was the audience. He said that when he wrote pieces like the one he wrote in November last year on war crimes by US Special Forces published in The Rolling Stones, people often ask him why he doesn’t write about militancy. “Writing about them won’t make a difference. It’s not a risk for me. But reporting on US/Israel might close a few doors for me,” he said. “What will make a difference is writing about the US and what they are doing around the world. It might change policies.”
Shah’s stance on the media was more aggressive and maybe a bit positive. He said that reporting in Pakistan had changed especially in cases like some political parties, the military and extremist groups. “There is a lot more that can be published now,” he said. “When I got here in 2007 things were different. After 2009, the Pakistani media has had uncomfortable relations and became a target for the militants.”
The real power of the fourth estate was captured towards the end of the session when Shah, busy on what looked like a Blackberry claimed, “If you own a news channel in this country, no one can touch you.”
Published in The Express Tribune, February 8th, 2014.
The fourth estate. Media. Censorship. Afghanistan. Pakistan.
It was supposed to have it all - which is why I signed up for it.
I wanted to know what Canadian journalists Matthieu Aikins and Meghan Davidson Ladly, Wall Street Journal’s stringer Saeed Shah and our very own Prof Rasul Baksh Rais would have to say.
When I saw one of the panelist, Matthieu Aikins, driving to the Beach Luxury Hotel a little before 12pm, I was excited. I had read his piece ‘Our Man in Kandahar’ for The Atlantic and have been a fan since.
At the venue, I saw Saeed Shah and Ladly, getting ready to go on stage as Ghazi Salahuddin, the moderator, asked a boy to get more chairs on the stage. Half an hour after the event was scheduled to start, Salahuddin said: “Ajaye?”
Salahuddin, a former editor, introduced the panel and gave them 10 minutes each to talk. Rais, a LUMS professor and now heading the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad, started the session with a brief history of the media. Described by Salahuddin as a serious observer of what is happening in Pakistan, Rais said that he had a pessimistic and deterministic view of the media. He added that whether it’s Hollywood, political talk shows, documentaries, they all had a purpose - to get the story out there.
Meghan continued Rais’s discussion and said that the media is a large dialogue. “It is confusing to some extent because there are so many voices,” she said. “There are stories in English, Urdu and then other regional languages.”
Matthieu, who was dressed immaculately in a suit and red socks, was very comfortable being centre stage. He had his points written on a piece of white paper. As a journalist from the West living in the East, he said that what he kept in mind while reporting was the audience. He said that when he wrote pieces like the one he wrote in November last year on war crimes by US Special Forces published in The Rolling Stones, people often ask him why he doesn’t write about militancy. “Writing about them won’t make a difference. It’s not a risk for me. But reporting on US/Israel might close a few doors for me,” he said. “What will make a difference is writing about the US and what they are doing around the world. It might change policies.”
Shah’s stance on the media was more aggressive and maybe a bit positive. He said that reporting in Pakistan had changed especially in cases like some political parties, the military and extremist groups. “There is a lot more that can be published now,” he said. “When I got here in 2007 things were different. After 2009, the Pakistani media has had uncomfortable relations and became a target for the militants.”
The real power of the fourth estate was captured towards the end of the session when Shah, busy on what looked like a Blackberry claimed, “If you own a news channel in this country, no one can touch you.”
Published in The Express Tribune, February 8th, 2014.