The state of the media in Bangladesh
Three decades after my professional involvement with Bangladesh media began, the situation still remains difficult and complex. As a journalism teacher at Dhaka University, I saw a Bangladesh, which was just recovering from massive political turmoil; one party rule, military coups and ban on all newspapers barring state owned ones. Censorship, license, and advice on what could be written and what could not, were rampant. Since then, the media and the state have grown, but the lack of cohesion among the different social forces that can make a successful state is still a matter of concern. It's not about being pessimistic, but the reality of unrealised dreams hurts us all.
At this point of time, Bangladesh is under an emergency, with the interim government having the full backing of the military, politics is banned and certain rights are curbed. It's a sad comment on our self-management abilities. The political situation had reached such a point before the imposition of the emergency that some kind of intervention was inevitable, and was ultimately welcomed by the people.
Today, many politicians admit their lack of acumen to take the country forward, and internal political reform has become a key point of contention. Of the two major parties, one has already split while the other is under stress.
Leaders of both the major contending parties are under internment, and many senior politicians and their family members have been tried and jailed.
As far as the media is concerned, we have seen a period of great growth in the last one and half decades. It came in the wake of the civil unrest in 1990, that saw streets protests topple a ruler who came to power through a military coup in 1982 and then floated a civilian party, a common practice. But after all the promise of political democracy it never came. But post-1990 political life is not any more democratic than before.
The main stumbling block is the dysfunctional parliament, which has become the symbol of our collective inability to be ruled by constitutional practices and law. While elections are duly held, the parliament is boycotted, so governance stagnates.
Politicians have clearly preferred to diminish its significance as accountability is also ignored by ignoring the parliament. Elections have become a way of gaining power rather than ruling through democratic institutions. So, after 37 years as an independent state, we still haven't achieved political democracy.
The media plays a charismatic role in Bangladesh history as the main player in building democratic aspirations. In the last 15 years, the post-1990 media has developed in all sectors and become powerful. But politicians have attacked the media for causing unrest and the supposedly anti-politician stance. The media has moved away from politicians and gone closer to the consumer.
In the absence of any space for political debating, which the parliament provides, we notice the remarkable growth of media as the alternative political space. In fact, the chat shows, columns and interviews literally became the quasi- parliamentary space.
The rise of the consumer market, on which media outlets depend, has also generated a symbiotic relationship between the consumer, the advertiser and the producer of media products.
This has, in fact, been very positive, and considerably ensures objective coverage of issues. The highly profitable TV news casting has been forced under market pressure and competition to provide unbiased coverage or lose ratings.
Thus, the traditionally political media has, to that extent, become more professional due to market influences.
In the last five years, the media scene had exploded, with about a dozen TV stations emerging. But the fragility of this growth was noticed when many of the owners who were powerful members of the last government were arrested, and the stations suffered.
The closure of Bangladesh's only exclusive TV news channel, which had quickly reached the popularity charts, on charges of forged permission documents and after being warned of irresponsible reporting, is also a negative development. Many owners are under scrutiny, and we can't call this a great time for media in Bangladesh. Self-censorship is common.
The media, in the end, is the describer of governance practices and processes, but lopsided development of one sector while others stagnate will not lead to media success. Our own experience says that whether it is poverty alleviation or media management, we require systemic development across the board.
Moneymaking is necessary for investment, but has to be transparent. That means due process in the all sectors, including the economy.
In some ways, the media has succeeded in market terms only within the limitations set by governance standards of the state. Right to information has become a movement spearheaded by NGOs in Bangladesh, but doesn't exist as a functional right.
The Official Secrecy Act continues to deny access to information. As expected, this control generates large information black-market that, in turn, leads to corruption and ethical misdemeanors on all sides. Information sources and the outlets play manipulation games.
There is confusion about the economic status of the media. ls it a profit maximisation outlet or a social service unit? Since many are making money, though not significant, from the media, and many who aren't keep on investing for extra-economic reasons, the media operates on individual terms.
Nor is there any regulatory body to say what should be the rules governing wages, products etc., leaving the doors of speculative decision making open to both the owners and the workers.
Agencies like the Press Commission have been set up to arbitrate on grievances between media and those affected by its reporting, but have not proved effective. Nor can there been any mechanism to provide protection to media members who have been targets of violence because of their work.
Yet media draws people, and is relatively more successful than other institutions, in terms of both reach and influence. Some are also making serious money. However, like most other institutions, media has no standards to maintain because the sector remains unstructured.
Although visible, this visibility is more incidental than designed. It was, in fact, moving towards that point, but such a mature transition can't occur when much of the rest is in a state of institutional confusion, unable to develop democratic practices and rule even after 37 years of independence.
Without a robust political process media may flourish for a while, but will be pulled back. Its success depends on the success of democratic practices and all institutions. As yet, that hasn't happened in Bangladesh.
[The above report was presented by the author at the World Congress of News Agencies (WCNA) held recently in Spain.]
Enayetullah Khan is Chief Editor, United News of Bangladesh (UNB). He is currently doing a research on Media and Democracy at the University of British Columbia.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments