Media and Democracy

Prof. Dr. Prem Uprety, T.U

The relationship between media and democracy is like the relation between the head and the heart. One can’t exist without the other. If democracy can survive only where mass media is free then mass media can function only in a democratic atmosphere. The mass media, whether the newspapers, television or the radio, by bringing into light the distortions in government and society helps the society to march forward in the field of reform and progress.

However, in the past the media has been responsible for building the atmosphere for revolutions. Here I would like to cite Penny News Paper of the United States during the colonial period in the eighteenth century. It had a very wide circulation and together with numerous pamphlets and leaflets contributed to the genesis of the American Revolution of 1776. Again it was the newspapers of France, the cartoons and pamphlets as well the articles that appeared in the Encyclopedia of Diderot that contributed to the French revolution of 1789.

Coming to Nepal, it was the Indian newspapers like Tribune Hindu, Amrit Bazar Patrika and the Janta of Patna, Bihar, together with the news letters, pamphlets and leaflets that were produced by the Nepali revolutionaries in Kathmandu through the mimeograph machines that formed the background for the revolution of 1950. Then it was the media that played a decisive role in the recent revolution of 1990.

Relationship between the media and government:

The relationship between mass media and democracy can be often tense. Even in the United States, inspite of the first Amendment that safeguards relationship between the Press and the Government is not free from friction. It was during the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal the relation between the media and the government became extremely bitter. The government always fears the media for its investigative journalism.

Investigative journalism is the most important trend in modern journalism which involves field research, scientific analysis and interpretations. It was investigative journalism that brought into light the Water Gate scandal, which otherwise would have been buried in the pages of history, and Richard M. Nixon would have never resigned. The credit for investigating the Watergate scandal goes to brave and courageous reporters of the Washington Post and other newspapers like Jack Anderson, Carl Bernstein, Robert Woodward and Seymor Hersh. In Nepal also fearless editors have sacrificed their lives for the cause of investigative journalism.

Dictators always fear journalists. The French Emperor Napoleon Bounaparte used to say, "I am more afraid of the journalists than an army of a hundred and a thousand. The Russian statesman of the Soviet Union like Nikita Kruschev had a horror for the journalists and historians. He used to call them rats. Just like rats they move through holes and obscure corners of archives and state bureaucracy and unearth facts and figures which could be very damaging to the government. Therefore he urged that they should be kept away from the State Archives and the state bureaucracy.

Good governance and the media:

It is true that perfect governance exists nowhere. Yet, in this age of mass culture, the masses have been turned into a virtual deity all governments do try or at least give lip service to serve the minimum needs of the maximum numbers. The most important role of the media is to promote good governance. The media does this in two ways: first, on the positive side the media judges the activities of the governmental and non-governmental organizations through certain parameters like; participation, transparency, rule of law, responsiveness on the part of decision makers, efficiency, equity and accountability. So the people must be involved in the decision making process and implementation. The decision-makers must make their decision within a legal framework and they must be made accountable to the decisions they make; and the end result is: the quality of life of the people must be improved. While talking about transparency and accountability it applies to reporting also. Transparency does not mean reporting rumors and half-truths. It is to be remembered that exaggeration, misinformation, under information are all as bad as distortions. Second, on the negative side the media can play the role of a watchdog by citing cases of bad governance like the abuse of authority, malgovernance, inefficiency and above all corruption.

The media should focus more on improving the decision making process and its implementation thereafter. It should focus less on the individuals. The system of DASTURI still practices in the customs offices in Nepal can be cited as an example of corruption. In other words, it should stress on issues rather than symptoms of bad governance or simply on digging the skeleton of the individuals. On the contrary, the media should provide alternative to the people to make changes, educate the people on contemporary issues and propagate social and economic changes.

Challenges to Nepali journalism:

--Electronic media in Nepal is very weak partly because of the fact that only 14 percent of the people of Nepal have access to electricity and partly due to the fact that the people are poor. When a person can’t afford a pair of slippers or buy one square meal a day, he can’t be expected to buy the television or a radio set.

--More than fifty percent of the people of Nepal are illiterate. This is certainly a set back to the Nepali print media. Judging by the Western standard or even Indian standard, the circulation of Nepali newspapers is very low. Here one must distinguish between the effective and sale circulation. One newspaper is read by many and the illiterate have them read.

--Today Nepali journalism is representing more the political parties rather than the public opinion. They should represent more the public opinion help in generating public opinion.

--Investigative journalism in Nepal is very weak so yellow journalism flows freely from the press. This is the outcome of the under-educated and under qualified editors and sub-editors. Independent organization like the civil societies should help in educating them.

--It is a tragedy that the Nepali media is urban based and the ninety percent of the countryside is untouched. The result being eighty percent of our news reporting is political. But more and more rural reporting would bring the social and the economic issues into the forefront thus would alter the unnecessary weightage given by the news media to the political sector.

Conclusions:

It is round the clock reporting on the part of the journalists that keep the candle of liberty burning even in moments when the government is highly despotic and arbitrary. In fact it is the media that has kept the intellectual freedom of a nation alive. Now the question arises what is intellectual freedom? To an average citizen intellectual freedom is: freedom from arbitrary powers, freedom to think, freedom to express one’s own opinions. But to a man like Bakunin, intellectual freedom was something more. It consisted of "liberation from the belief in God, in the immorality of the soul and in general freedom from all kinds of idealism".

Today we are living in an age of mass-culture, mass civilization and even if you permit me to say even mass-prejudice and it is on the wheels of the mass media and democracy that that the modern civilization gravitates. The mass media has not only built bridges between hostile nations, but also between different actors in the society and among different ethnic groups. At present the radio, television and newspapers have turned the world into a global community. A news in the darkest corner of the world hits international headlines within minutes and thus promotes both international brotherhood and understanding. Thus, the media and democracy, which glorifies the masses, are inseparable from each other.

# Speech made by the author at a Telegraph weekly/FES media seminar held on December 3, 2003, on Media, Development and Democracy as the Chief guest— The author is a professor of Modern History and Diplomacy at the Tribhuban University--Chief editor.

Nepal’s Multiple Challenges in the search for peace

Dr. David Scott Palmer, Boston University, USA

Nepal is going through a difficult period in the search for resolution of serious armed conflict. Political violence since the declaration of a "people’s war" by Maoists rebels on 13 February 1996 has caused to date almost 8,000 lives and up to $5 billion in property damage. Most of the violence and destruction occurred between November 2001 (when the Maoists unilaterally broke off talks with the government and resumed their people’s war) and January 2003 (when both sides again agreed to a cease-fire and peace talks). After two rounds of discussions in Kathmandu over several months in which the rebels made most of the demands and the government gave most of the concessions, both sides agree in mid-August 2003 to begin a third round outside the capital that would focus on their respective political agendas.

Following just two days of meetings, however, the Maoists threatened to scuttle the talks unless their minimum demand – constituent assembly- was met. When the government did not accept the rebels’ stipulation, the Maoists declared the peace talks at an end and returned to armed conflict. In the four weeks following this latest rupture, bombings of government facilities has resumed and more than 200 have been killed. As this final report is being prepared, a three-day national work stoppage called by the rebels is in effect, virtually paralyzing normal pursuits in much of the country.

The uncertainty of the current situation is further complicated by the recent change of Prime Minister, on 4 June, and the decision of the major political parties to refuse to participate in what they see as an illegitimate government. Such uncertainty is compounded by a lack of consistency in the Maoist rebels’ position. On the one hand, they agreed to a code of conduct with the government on 13 March that was intended to formalize the cease-fire. On the other, even as the first rounds of peace talks were being held, the rebels carried out increasing numbers of armed actions and extortion of payments from the local population, both clear violations of the code of conduct. The Maoists gave equally mixed signals regarding terms for the third round of talks with the GON, at one point suggesting the continuation of the monarchy was not an insurmountable obstacle and then, as talks were beginning asserting that only a constituent assembly would be acceptable.

Making matters even more difficult for the government is the way it put itself at a negotiating disadvantage in the first two rounds of meetings between January and May by accepting most of the Maoist demands rather than putting forth its own alternative proposals. The government has also often allowed the Maoists to take the propaganda advantage by not countering revel public statements with an equally clear and forceful articulation of its own position. There are recent indications, though, that the government is beginning to remedy its past tendency to be reactive rather than proactive, as demonstrated by its ability to produce a comprehensive political agenda in August to serve as the basis for the third round of negotiations.

Nevertheless, given the progressive erosion of democracy and the weakened position of the GON as a result, government officials continue to find themselves in a disadvantageous position that will be difficult to overcome. In the context of the most recent breakdown of the peace negotiations, the Maoists have once again seized the strategic initiative. With the eventual re-initiation of peace talks uncertain at best, Nepal’s brief history as a constitutional monarchy is unquestionable at a critical juncture.

Furthermore, the larger political context is, on balance, not favorable for the government either. Nepal’s new and fragile democracy has been significantly undermined since May 2002, generating increased political uncertainty and reduced government legitimacy. The initial action involved the dismissal of parliament on 23 May 2002 and declaration of a national state of emergency thereafter in the face of rapidly accelerating political violence. The Prime Minister at that time, Sher Bahadur Deuba, determined that conditions were not conducive to holding new elections within the six-month period stipulated by the constitution after any suspension of Parliament. With the decision not to extend the terms of office of the thousands of elected officials at the District Development Committee (DDC) and Village Development Committee (VDC) levels and to replace them with officials appointed by the central government, the country lost most of what remained of its democratic process.

There followed, on 4 October 2002, the intervention by King Gyanendra to dismiss Prime Minister Deuba and this cabinet and to replace him with his cabinet and to replace him with his own choice Lokendra Bahadur Chand. When Prime Minister Chand resigned on 30 May, the king again intervened to replace him on 4 June with anther personally selected successor, Surya Bahadur Thapa, even though he had previously indicated that he would accept the recommendation of the political parties. At this juncture, five political parties, including the two major groups, Nepali Congress (NC) and United Marxist Leninist (UML), determined that they would oppose what they saw as the king’s arbitrary decision and begin to "Agitate" against the government to try to force a change back to constitutional democracy. These parties have chosen to remain outside the peace process to date in spite if strenuous efforts by the government to bring them back in on their side, even though it is generally recognized that their involvement will be essential for the successful implementation of nay peace agreement that might be reached.

With the government’s change of Prime Minister and negotiating team in June, in the midst of peace talks with the Maoists, it was less prepared for the challenges of that process than its rebel counterpart. The government was further handicapped by its difficulty in maintaining a significant presence in much of the countryside outside the district capitals, which left the citizenry adrift and allowed the rebels to fill the vacuum created. In spite of the gravity of the situation and the need to take significant measures quickly to deal with multiple problems in the more remote districts and VDCs, there was a curious lack of urgency among much of the Kathmandu elite, particularly the party leadership and many government officials. Compounding the unfavorable dynamic for the government, at least until mid-August, was the tendency to relate to the peace process with ad hoc and improvised approaches rather than a carefully thought through strategy based on specific objectives and sequencing.

The ability of key GON officials to put together a realistic and well thought through political agenda for presentation at the 18-20 August peace talks with the rebels represents a significant positive development, suggesting that the government is indeed capable of making an effective response when challenged, and that the new team is better able to work together, even though the rebels rejected the agenda almost immediately, there is now a clear and coherent proposal available. What still appears to be lacking, however, is a well thought through strategy for negotiation, an indispensable component of nay future peace talks that might occur.

Excerpts from the author’s article entitled "Nepal’s multiple challenges in comparative perspective". A small portion of the author’s article has already been printed in our December 3, 2003 issue. Text courtesy: American center, Kathmandu. The author could be approached at dspalmer@bu.edu

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Letter | Past