Region 
 

Region

‘Independent Media’

What could we expect from those democracies of South Asia which are camouflaged versions of kinship, wealth and thugs?

By Shazia Anwer Cheema | November 2021

Whistleblower Frances Haugen who is a former Facebook employee has accused the company of putting profit over the public good and her revelations have generated a heated debate about how media giants have become so powerful that they are now acting as states within a state.

Media outlets can be immensely powerful and can overturn or even deny the existence of the sovereignty of the public. As all human atrocities boil down to capitalism, media corporates also have become commodities and can be purchased and sold out. This means the basic right of citizens can be sold and purchased.

Media outlets can prolong the tenure of a corrupt fascist government and with the help of the same outlet, a coup d’état can be executed against a democratically elected government. For the sake of the capital they are getting, they can force you to believe the alternate truth.

If the Western textbook democracy is alarmed by the influence of media, which is of course far better and transparent in terms of electoral procedures, what could we expect from those democracies of South Asia, which are by core camouflaged versions of kinship, wealth, and thugs?

The logical moral declination of a street thug making his/her way up to State Parliament is undeniable. The power-hungry individual hustling his way upward can never be the saviour of those who have elected him willfully or he somehow staged that he has been elected by power, bullying, wealth, and fear.

As a communication practitioner, I strongly believe that in dictatorships the media is controlled by the State while in democracies media is controlled by wealthy individuals and objective media and journalists simply do not exist in the mainstream. I also believe that the western form of democracy is a total failure in South Asia and the infectious relation between media and power has made my case stronger.

A unique demographic is the criterion of becoming a politician is not the personal conduct and agenda for civil service. On the contrary, it is the level of corruption. The richer bully can become a minister. This is the indigestible state of affairs of South Asian democracies.

“You have to leave Lakhempur (a city of Kheri district of the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh) otherwise you know what I can do against all of you if you will not obey me”.

“Come on line, otherwise I will do that. I am not only a minister, you better know what I was prior to that; you have to leave Lakhempur”.


This is not a recorded conversation of a drug cartel but a public speech of an Indian state minister who was threatening innocent farmers while refereeing his previous criminal record and barbaric acts against his opponents. He was not only owning his shady past but also harassing the public by giving it as a reference. The media coverage of his speech did not solidify the pretence the minister was providing because media men might have gotten their booty. During the same protest, five people got killed among whom one was decisively crushed under the minister’s vehicle.

All big Indian media hubs bombarded the information which was fed to them and which was part of their contract with the current serving democracy. After this sad incident, BJP ministers and Godi Media had been blaming the farmers for the accident by claiming that farmers were armed and were not even farmers but paid agitators. Godi media also claimed that the incident of killing five persons took place somewhere else. Media also claimed that protestors were members of the Khalistan Movement--- a banned organization in India. However, a video clip that got viral on Twitter exposed the reality, showing peaceful farmers and a fleet of vehicles owned by a minister crushing an innocent farmer.

(Godi Media is a term coined and popularized by NDTV journalist Ravish Kumar, for the sensationalist and biased Indian print and TV news media, which supports the ruling NDA government).

If the protestors are not farmers (as claimed by Godi Media), there could be a point when citizens are not citizens. It will be a powerful ruling class and a loaded media that will decide who are the protesters, who is a parasite and who is an andolanjeev - (One who cannot live without protests and is constantly finding ways to stoke protests).

The role of Indian media during over one year and long peaceful protests of farmers has exposed what kind of democracy India has and what brutal role the media can play to block any group of society who wishes to execute democratic rights ensured in the Constitution. Therefore, the handling of farmers’ protests exposed the credibility of democracy as well as of media in mainland India. Forget the situation in Indian occupied Kashmir and seven sister states where special laws are playing havoc against subjugated communities and religious groups.

Such events indicate ethical declination of media as well as democracies and no one seems to worry about it while professional integrity of media and decency, the so-called power of democracy, have become cliché.

I remember an article written by a senior Pakistani journalist who narrated the proceedings of a meeting of media owners and practitioners with a former President after he clamped Emergency in the country in 2008. In the meeting, the then powerful president told the delegation of Pakistan Broadcasting Association (PBA) that there is (was) no relation between media and democratic rights and media owners would keep getting good business even if there were no democracy in the country. He added that private and corporate businesses flourish (flourished) under autocratic rule so the share of media in advertisements was good. Such veracities indicate that the conventional view has gone away with the wind that the interrelation of media and democracy is based on inevitable existence of both. This understanding has become just a cliché because of changing formats of emerging media scenarios and the huge money involved in advertisements.

We must accept that majority of South Asian media succumb to financial gains and democratization of society is the agenda of few in the South Asian media scenario. The un-proportionate growth of private media, the introduction of social media, the contests around government-controlled media, and broadcast deregulation in South Asia have formed a complex democracy-media relationship. We are living in the midst of a communications revolution that is affecting democracies born in the era of print media. As a result, we seem to be heading towards a more pluralistic but also more fragmented media environment that may pose a threat to the shared civic arena essential to democracy.

I believe free media and the rights of those not in power have binary relations and media has to play the role of a watchdog and whistleblower. However, realities tell me that the aforestated statement can be my innocent desire but not the reality we are living in.

Read More