Ban will be a bane

It is our considered view that the old arrangement has served well the cause of public interest and the administration's need to be accountable. We feel that any government that is keen on getting the genuine picture of a matter as well as on seeing the ends of justice served, cannot have missed the inherent flaw in the new directive.

We fail to see the rationale of changing the system that worked well for the press; unless, of course, it has brought to light the inherent weaknesses of the police and their sometimes-not-too-transparent way of functioning.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

The benefits of direct access of the press to the relevant police functionaries are many, not least of which is the real time information the press can access. Getting the facts from the 'horse's mouth' ensures accuracy and correctness, because it comes from the man on the ground, having knowledge of the event first hand. Should the authorities have felt the need for further clarity, there were plenty of scope for providing an updated version of an incident subsequently.

We are dismayed at the government's attempt to stifle the free flow of information in an important area of public service. It is important for the government to realise that by putting a lid on potential news it would be so much the worse off. For, it might very well end up feeding only on those stories that the official sources want the government to hear and not what it should hear.

Making the whole procedure circuitous would also result in delay in the dissemination of information related to public interest. Moreover, it could lead to dilution of news, and manufacture of speculation and rumour.

In all these lie the dangers of the truth being swept under the carpet, something that can be desirable to none.