National 4 (Spotlight Weekly)

‘We Must Avoid Creating A Media Monster' — RAJENDRA DAHAL

RAJENDRA DAHAL, editor of fortnightly Himal Khabarpatrika, has been involved in journalism for nearly two decades. Dahal, who also teaches journalism, spoke to SPOTLIGHT on various media-related issues. Excerpts:

How do you view the Nepalese media today?

The Nepalese press has seen two phases in the last 12 years: the periods before and after the imposition of the state of emergency. In the larger context, the development of the last 12 years has been positive. This is the right way to development. The press cannot develop on the basis of a readymade formula. The press develops in accordance with the changes in society. There is an evolutionary process. I don't think the Nepalese media has gone wrong.

Then, why are people complaining about the media's role?

The press had a different mission before the restoration of democracy. Today it has its own mission. If people see the development of journalism on the basis of the realities of the previous era, today's progress will be meaningless. In totality, journalism evolves in accordance with social development and is forward looking. Other societies took a decade to adapt to new realities, but the Nepalese press has achieved it in a short time. Our media have become mature and professional.

Have you seen any changes following the imposition of the state of emergency?

We have definitely seen certain changes. Frankly speaking, the Nepalese media are still rational. This means they are against violence and killings. I think the media have done a lot, but what is lacking is a creative role. The press alone is not responsible for this. A lot depends on the country's politics. The country has seen many much ups and downs in politics over the last six years and the media have not remained untouched. But the media are with the people and against murder and violence. The media have exposed the forces of violence. Unfortunately, the government and concerned officials have failed to support the spontaneous interest shown by the media. The government could not mobilize the media as a supplement to the gun. Many journalists like myself continue to write against violence and terror, but the government has not responded. The press has had to face many restrictions following the imposition of the state of emergency. Because of this, the press cannot play a constructive role. These are influences coming from the political sector.

At a time when press freedom is coming under all kinds of threats, how do you view the government's decision to allow the involvement of big media houses in radio, television and newspapers?

The press is a very sensitive and delicate sector. If you allow it to stretch it wings, it will go. There is a possibility of misuse. You cannot control the media by placing too many legal restrictions. But the state has to develop certain rational guidelines to regulate the media. There should be a code of conduct and other ways to discipline the media. In absence of such a system, one cannot control the media. The market has created glamour in the media sector. So there is a possibility of everyone entering the sector. There should be rules and regulations maintain order.

How responsible are the media?

In the absence of law, media are sometimes very irrational and irresponsible. The state, too, is responsible for creating this situation. While expressing commitment to press freedom, the government has not framed appropriate laws and regulations. The government uses its powers arbitrarily to decide what the press has to do and what it doesn't. In the process, the government issues a license to one company and denies it to another. This creates the possibility of the emergence of a monster organization. There is no country in the world where all licenses are issued to one business house.

What will be the impact of this decision?

This will create trouble in future. For instance, Himal Khabarpatrika has to go to daily newspapers for advertisement. We used to publish our advertisement in one daily paper. But as soon as the publication house has launched its own periodical, it declined to publish our advertisement. The decision infringed the right of Himal Khabarpatrika. If there is no other paper available tomorrow, we will lose. The state should develop a mechanism. Unfortunately, the minister of information and communication is giving long statements calling for a new policy. But he is also issuing license to particular parties. Instead of developing a policy, the minister is taking subjective decisions. This is a misuse of authority. Because of the such decisions, the country and society would have to face bad days in the future. No one would benefit by creating a media monster.

‘The Press Council Should Be Made A Statutory Body' — YUBARAJ GHIMIRE

YUBARAJ GHIMIRE, editor of two leading newspapers, Kantipur and The Kathmandu Post, has a had a long innings in journalism. Before joining Kantipur, Ghimire held senior editorial positions in leading Indian newspapers. He also worked briefly for the British Broadcasting Corporation in London. Ghimire, who went to prison for a month last year for publishing a controversial article, spoke to SPOTILIGHT on various issues related to freedom of the press. Excerpts:

You have been here for nearly two years as the editor of the leading Nepalese newspaper. How do you see the role of the media?

Undoubtedly, the last 12 years of journalism in Nepal has seen the rise of professionalism. Practically speaking, response to what the media have produced is growing. Until a decade ago, no one responded to what the media said about anyone or anything. Today people take seriously the issues raised by the press. We have our own legacy, which determines our behavior. The media in other countries, too, suffer from a similar legacy. The extent of such practices may be higher in Nepal. Media outlets guided by individuals, political parties and other vested interest groups always ignore the truth and promote their own agenda. It is in this environment that yellow journalism thrives. There are many newspapers run by various power centers. It is unfortunate that many of us have placed our professional credibility in doubt to become a journalist. In the last 12 years, however, professionalism in journalism is growing. Through this process, yellow journalism will be eliminated.

At a time when media freedom is coming under threat from various fronts, including the state, big business houses and violent groups, how do you see the outlook for the future?

Freedom of expression is the symbol of the constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Freedom of expression always faces threat from various power centers. Whether it is the government, which functions under the constitution, or organized rebel groups, they always want their voice in the media. When someone challenges the legitimacy of the government, officials want to control the press. If we take the case of the Maoists, they are now crueler than the government. There is a threat from the Maoists as they have kidnapped some journalists. One cannot rule out the possibility of an increase in such threats. The issue of whether big business houses will curtail freedom of the press is being debated. Disputes over the ownership of the media by big business houses only occurs in socialist countries where various forces see commercial involvement as a threat to freedom. But this is not an issue in the United States and Western European countries. In these countries, big business houses own a large part of the media. In India, too, there was a debate on whether big houses should have a monopoly on the media. Now there is no such debate. The owners of the Hindustan Times, the Birlas, had played a very prominent role in the independence struggle. The National Herald was born to promote Indian independence. In a country where professionalism is yet to develop, there is always a threat to freedom.

Don't you think checks and balances are required?

Certainly, checks and balances are required. The government must set up a strong Press Council. The council should not be a political rehabilitation center. It should be statutory body. Unfortunately, I have to admit that Nepal's Press Council is very much political. In the United Kingdom, there is a Press Complaints Commission. If the press does not follow the track and indulges in bad practices, the people should have the right to complain. This way, media houses cannot exercise unlimited power and must abide by the law. Instead of formulating restrictive laws to control the press, there must be a statutory body. The people should get justice when they feel injustice committed by the press.

It is often complained that Nepalese media are creating hatred against institutions and individuals. How do you look at this allegation?

There is a thin dividing line here. When I criticize the prime minister, I always have some facts to support my contention ó be it his involvement in corruption or his taking wrong decisions. If the government takes a bad decision, the country has to suffer. Whoever holds the post of prime minister is just a face. If newspapers criticize people who take harmful decisions, that is not bad. We should not take such criticism as a plot to demoralize institutions. If a person feels the media are doing injustice, there should be a system to quickly redress their grievances. This should be done through the Press Council or through anti-defamation laws. Everyone should get justice. Through such a system, journalists would be compelled to work with social and moral limitations.

How do you see the quality of media professionals in Nepal?

I came to Nepal two years ago after working in leading newspapers in India and the BBC. Journalism in Nepal is gradually being recognized as a respected profession. In the last 12 years, the media have received wider recognition. I have to admit that a person who joins journalism does not consider it to be a secure profession. This is the reason why talented people still prefer other areas. Some journalistic practices have also discredited the profession. There is blackmail and shady non-journalistic functions. These create a reluctance among people to take journalism. Those who are in journalism today must set good precedents of morality and professionalism. This depends on leadership.

Now that your publishing house has received a license to set up a television station, it is going to have become involved in all forms of media. Wouldn't this monopoly affect freedom of the press?

Frankly speaking, I am not related to television and radio. I am just with Kantipur and The Kathmandu Post. From my long interaction with the publishers, however, I have found that they are committed to the development of professional journalism. As long as the existing laws allow such business, one cannot deny opportunities. Nepal is not the only country where a media house is permitted to go for TV, print and radio. There are many conglomerates like AOL Time Warner in the United States. I am not saying that Nepal has to follow the model of the United States or India. Personally, I am not in favor of foreign investment in the print media, but it has come. If there is a strong Press Council or Press Complaints Commission, I don't think anything can undermine media freedom.