Facing a media world war by Javed Jabbar
Article…
In real terms, Pakistan is today the target of a media world war. Virtually all substantial news coverage and all analytical or editorial comments about Pakistan in global media and in the internal media of most nations are predominantly negative or hostile. In response to this relentless onslaught from across the planet, Pakistan is not using a single world-scale media weapon to counter the attack.
The anti-Pakistan media world war has a direct impact on our national security. It questions our capacity to exist as a responsible state and as a stable member of the international community. It projects an image of a dangerously volatile and destructively violent country. It stunts our economic growth by discouraging foreign investment and tourism.
Overtly as well as subtly it promotes the view that our state should be subjected to new multilateral monitoring mechanisms and that we might even be a fit case for unilateral intervention. While not being physically destructive, the media war, in one sense, is worse. It erodes and diminishes the contours of our true identity in the minds of billions of people exposed to overseas media.
In addition to being a threat to our state’s security, the anti-Pakistan media war is a gross misrepresentation of a unique nation. Our warts are magnified out of all proportion. Our finer features are ignored. Even after we allow for the innate preoccupation of media with ‘bad’ news, Pakistan does not get a fair deal.
The global media view of Pakistan as it prevails in 2004 has been formed through a cumulative process over several decades. But the present image was acquired more intensively during the past ten years.
Our poor social development indicators, our association with the Taliban, the violence in different forms against women, our linkage with the violence in Indian occupied Kashmir, our tolerance of religious extremism, the disruptions of our democracy, the role of the armed forces in political affairs, the recurrence of bombings and killings in which both foreigners and our own citizens have perished; and, most recently, our role in nuclear proliferation, have combined to contribute to the way the world – and the world media – perceives us today.
Whether the content about Pakistan in global media is news, current affairs analysis, coverage of social and cultural issues, depiction in feature films, TV plays or literature, for every nine negative references to Pakistan, there is barely one positive reference.
This severe imbalance is unrelieved partly because our positive attributes are rarely, or never acknowledged. And partly because we ourselves provide enough grounds to justify negative coverage.
From the brutal murder of a leading American journalist to the carnage of Muslims. killing fellow Muslims, we certainly keep the world’s media well-occupied with the worst possible news from our country.
If nine out of ten items on Pakistan in overseas media are negative, it is ironic that nine out of ten foreigners, specially those from the West who visit Pakistan for the first time are always pleasantly surprised to discover that our country is a far more hospitable and harmonious place to be in than what they had been led to believe by media coverage in their country.
When President General Pervez Musharraf appears in overseas media as a staunch ally in the war against terror and as a modernist in contrast to the mullahs, the ferocity of the anti-Pakistan media war wanes just a bit.
But even as foreign media portray him as a friend and even as our western allies abandon reservations about dealing with military rulers in an increasingly civilian and democratic world, doubts and apprehensions about the general’s sincerity, his effectiveness and his longevity in office are emphatically expressed. These provisos neutralize much of the goodwill that the General generates through his appearances.
By himself, the president remains in media terms, a valuable yet inadequate counterweight to the imbalance of the media forces aligned against us. Occasional “good” news about us such as a Pakistani victory on a sports field is sometimes diluted by allegations of ball tampering and match-fixing!
Also inadvertently adding grist to the mill of this media war against Pakistan are several Pakistani public figures, news analysts and columnists. Most of them are based within the country, some of them based overseas.
Motivated by the admirable desire to say what, in their opinion, is true and that which they believe is good for the country, they actually manage to damage our image.
Whereas their valid target is a particular government or particular actions of the present government, the result of their writings and utterances makes the state and the society of Pakistan the real victims. Their views are eagerly used as confirmation of our negative aspects which most overseas media already claim to know.
Some of our own journalists and analysts who contribute to overseas media and to Pakistani media, often use a particular tone and approach in their comments about the government’s actions which are so close to the overseas media’s views about Pakistan that one sometimes cannot make out whether this is an unfriendly foreigner writing about Pakistan or one of our own citizens being courageously self-critical.
There are also some think-tanks and groups, either indigenous to Pakistan or Pakistan-based branches of international networks. These prepare periodic reports on those aspects of our government’s policies and actions that are of special interest to major overseas countries.
By and large, these reports are highly critical. They add fuel to the already raging fire. Universal values cut across national and continental barriers and should be espoused.
But it is certainly painful to see how some of our fellow-citizens help reinforce perceptions and prejudices about Pakistan. Their sincerity and patriotism are deeply rooted. It is their judgment and choice of approach that are disturbing.
Rarely do overseas media refer to the fact that in print media and in private electronic media, Pakistan has some of the highest standards amongst developing countries in freedom of expression.
Territorial frontiers are visible and enforceable. Communication frontiers are, for the most part, invisible, and generally unenforceable, except in extreme cases. For instance, countries as varied as China, Malaysia and Singapore have controlled access by their citizens to satellite TV channels and the Internet – which has not prevented them from becoming economically dynamic countries! The communication frontiers of the US cover the whole globe.
Similar Indian frontiers dominate South Asia and also extend to other parts of the planet because of Bollywood, because of the country’s willingness to be part of a contemporary global culture.
Pakistan’s communication frontiers are weak and vulnerable. They are breached with impunity and our communications space is invaded every minute and every day.
With the PTV World signal being potentially visible in 60 plus countries and with private TV channels from inside and outside Pakistan also making large “footprints” across Asia we delude ourselves that we are projecting our country better than we did in the past. We ignore the fact that such channels are viewed largely by overseas Pakistanis, and not by those who are the unconverted.
It is cold comfort that PTV remains the only TV channel in the entire world that presents daily reports on the violations of human rights in Indian-occupied Kashmir. And that India’s extremist groups such as the Shiv Sena in Mumbai, and others across the country intimidate Indians against watching PTV.
The websites of our leading English newspapers may produce enthusiastic responses from non-Pakistanis. But altogether, our present communication frontiers are no match for the huge task of defence and benign ‘offence’.
There are five factors that motivate or shape the media world war on Pakistan. These are:
1) The ugly and unpleasant reality of certain aspects of our own condition for which we alone are responsible. Thus, overseas media serve as mirrors of what actually exists.
2) The sheer ignorance and bias of many personnel in overseas media outlines the superficiality and skin-thin approach with which they portray our complexities.
3) There are inherent prejudices overseas against a country like Pakistan that calls itself an “Islamic republic” and yet fails to pursue “ijtehad” and reforMs., when other states are becoming increasingly secular.
4) Barring a few exceptions, most overseas media, specially western media despite being “independent” serve as instruments to further the objectives, interests and values of the states, the societies and the corporate sectors in which the media are based. Sometimes, these determinants are entirely opposite to the interests and values espoused by Pakistan.
5) Historically, and continuously to this date, we have failed to invest the diverse, the professional and the financial resources required to project a credible, positive portrait of ourselves in overseas countries and in world media in particular.
We cannot, in the short term and in the medium term, do much about the second, the third and the fourth of the above five factors. However, we can make efforts to change the first and the fifth factors for the better.
Source: Dawn
Date:3/22/2004
” 
” 
” 
” 
