Perception Is Reality

To understand what happened in Pakistan roughly Sixty One hours ago, one needs to take a look at and understand the sociology and workings of the media. This article is not meant to be a critical analysis of the situation. The author is not directly involved. This article is also not meant to be one of scholarly stature.

The independent media, as we now know it, came to Pakistan roughly 10 years ago. Along with broadcasters and news channels, came a wave of employment, talent and economic progress. The independent media was allowed in by the government, but was funded by private institutions. Whereas the exact location of the funding is not known, there is no doubt that a lot of the funding may come from political institutions or “parties” as we know them in Pakistan. Just as in the west, CNN and Fox News have completely differing opinions and views, so does the same thing happen in Pakistan. The reason for different views are the investors. If a party or institution invests in the media, they want to see their own views reflected. This is what happens in the west: one news channel is for the Republicans, whereas the other is for the Conservatives (for sake of argument). This is one reason why the Pakistani media has been so leftist. The views reflected are not necessarily of the public, nor of the employees, rather, the views of those who pay wages to these employees, in turn shaping not only their view, but also the public.

A lot of the times, the media resorts to sensationalism. What is sensationalism? Dog bites Man. This is old news. We already know the outcome. Man bites Dog. Hold on: rewind. What was that? Man bites Dog. This is sensationalism: it immediately stirs the listener’s mind and is the cause for great hype. I hear this news, call up a friend and tell him what the media is showing in turn setting off a chain reaction of television sets being turned on. This leads to profit: The sole motive of any privately run institution. In context of what is happening currently in Pakistan, then, the dramatic background music, images of clashes between security officials and civilians, and riots all form a part of sensationalism, enticing the viewer to turn on the television set. Whatever the truth, does not matter, television is selling, making money and that is the true motive. This adds to the leftist tilt.

Many on occasions, the media will side with the viewer to give them what they want to see and hear. In the context of Pakistan, a lot of people side with one of the political parties such as PPP, MQM, and PML-N. The presidents of these parties hold either spiritual or tribal hierarchical significance. The followers – or “underlings” for lack of words – of these leaders then side with the party that they represent. So, if I was to consider Mr. Altaf Hussain as my “pir,” to incur his goodwill, I would also side with his party, the MQM. As a result, a large majority of the populace sides with one particular view, usually that of the party leader. To have the party leaders (who may or may not finance the television broadcasters) views reflected, along with the crowd, the media rakes in more ratings and approval. Never mind if the views these stations reflect are very leftist, it brings in more money and higher ratings. This partly answers the question: “so are all the T.V. channels lying?” They are just being businessmen.

With reference to Geo, a highly popular news channel, I would like to draw attention to what it did wrong. Over my examination of the archival footage from Geo, I noticed that when anchormen are in phone conversations with prominent figures and correspondents, note how when there is a hint of something being said which is contrary to the view held by the station, the anchormen cuts the individual off and asks another question. An example was when a spokesperson for the Pakistan Human Civil Rights Association was discussing the conditions of the seventy odd members who were arrested. The question asked was about the size of the jail being too small to fit so many individuals. As the spokesperson went on to say that she did not think the size was too small, the anchormen interrupted, asking her another question.

Over years, especially in Canada, there have been independent institutions which govern and judge the media’s actions, both private and state-owned. For a brief period, there were new broadcasting acts and amendments to these acts every year. For the record, Canada is a country which is has existed since about the mid 1500’s. Pakistan’s media, having not even reached adolescence, has a lot left to be desired. In his conference, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz said that there are rules that need to be followed, the media needs to be sensitive to people and that all of this is fair. Anyone of rational thought would agree that an organization breaks down if there are no set laws or policies governing the institution. The Prime Minister mentioned that criticism, especially constructive criticism is always welcome. I would like to add, however, that bashing, culminating hatred, and maligning government institutions is equal to treason. The PEMRA ordinances are just like the broadcasting acts in Canada in context of social and political sphere. The media needs to come to the table to sort out an understanding.

Dr. Shahid Masood, a very well respected man of high integrity stated on national television that their job as the media was to show a balanced account of what was happening, to show that in society and politics, there are two edges. However, no one from the Musharraf Regime was coming forth to the media to discuss and explain even if over the phone, as to why certain actions were taken. I believe this is a genuine problem, and I laud Dr. Shahid Masood for stating this. Discourse and debate needs to take place for the citizens of Pakistan to gain a better understanding. Note however, Dr. Shahid Masood said the above on Geo TV with whom he does not have any direct ties, and consequently, may not reflect Geo’s or its financial backers’ opinion. Constantly, there were calls from individuals of all stature condemning what is happening in our country except those from the current government giving food for thought for the general masses, trying to take them into confidence. Were the calls being filtered out, not being made by the Geo staff for comment is something that may well be under speculation. Note also, that breaking the laws imposed by the government, Geo still broadcasts to Pakistan albeit on the web.

We have to understand that our history is not a pleasant one. We have gained independence while being burnt at the stake, brutally murdered, beaten and made victims of many other gory acts. As such, we as Pakistanis think with our hearts not with our brains. We do not try to analyze the situation, rather attack on what the media feeds to us. Given, what happened should not have, but we have to ask ourselves, if that is purely the current administration’s fault. Did we as individuals, and as society as a whole have any role in the events that unfolded? Did our rage and impatience help at all? What happened was not a good thing, but was necessary. We as bastard children of the media do not understand the importance of functional government, especially since we have rarely ever been part of a democracy, if at all. However, we need to take action, not by coming to the streets and chanting spells of hatred, rather use wit and intellect to overcome the situation: we need to look forward to what can be done, as opposed to fight about what happened and why.

In the end I would like to express my own personal opinion: I support the President Pervez Musharraf and his administration fully, Dr. Shahid Masood an individual I hold in high esteem and regards and the Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz. All the while I hope and pray for the country’s salvation, and for the Lord to grant us understanding, patience, love and humility.