ISLAMABAD LETTER:Proposed media Bill will stamp out criticism of the government as well as Pakistan's raucous new talk shows, say opponents
THE CIA was responsible for crashing two airliners into the twin towers on 9/11. Indian spies are the hidden hand behind terror attacks blamed on Pakistan. And Islamabad is riddled with Blackwater agents on covert operations.
Every evening millions of people sit down to watch Pakistan’s burgeoning number of TV talk shows, which peddle a popular line in conspiracy theories, paranoia and anti-American sentiment.
But now the government is planning a controversial media clampdown to rein in the shock jocks and curb what ministers believe is a dangerous tendency to glamorise terrorism.
The proposed Pakistan electronic media regulatory authority Bill would ban live coverage of militant attacks and the broadcast of anything “defamatory against the organs of the state” – a broad definition opponents believe will stamp out criticism of the government and the raucous new shows.
“There’s no doubt about it,” said Zaid Hamid, one of the country’s most colourful and controversial talk show hosts, “the target is programmes like mine.”
The issue cuts to the core of modern Pakistan, an often conservative Muslim society grappling with democracy after a decade of military rule. The government is struggling to contain a growing extremist threat and knows its close relationship with the US puts it at constant risk of a backlash.
Conspiracy theories are popular among a population that views the American-led war on terror with suspicion.
With his red hat and grey goatee, Hamid is one of the most recognisable – and feared – of the new breed of presenter.
He coined the term Hindu Zionist to describe the Israeli and Indian forces he believes are allied in a plot to destabilise Pakistan. And he has repeatedly advocated invading India.
His show, Brass Tacks, which focuses on the country's military establishment, was massively popular with young people but was pulled recently after protests from student groups who believed he was intent on creating a cult of personality.
He is also under investigation in a murder case, allegations he believes are politically motivated.
“I am being lent on all the time by people with a pro-US agenda just because I tell the truth they don’t want to hear,” he said.
Other controversial figures include Hamid Mir, host of Capital Talk, who is revered as one of Pakistan's most influential journalists. Hillary Clinton and Osama bin Laden are among his interviewees. Indeed, he was the last journalist to interview bin Laden. However, his access to al- Qaeda-linked militants has led many to question whether he is a sympathiser with their extremist position. A tape recording surfaced recently of a phone conversation he is alleged to have had with Jihadi gunmen, apparently urging them to kill a hostage. He claims the tape is faked. The phenomenon is relatively new. Dozens of private channels sprouted during the early 2000s under former president Pervez Musharraf. Today they number almost 100.
As they chase ratings and advertising, the presenters have become more extreme. News shows try to outdo each other with gory images of dead bodies or interviews with militant leaders. The result is a major problem for a government in Islamabad which has belatedly woken up to the threat posed by militant groups to its own existence – after years funding Jihadi organisations in Afghanistan and Kashmir.
Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani general who now works as a political analyst, said the shows were fomenting strong destabilising forces.
“The government doesn’t have the political will to say they are on the right course, whether that’s about tackling militants or a close relationship with the US.
“That leaves these hosts to operate in a vacuum, and they can develop their own narrative – anti-western, anti-American, anti-government, anti-democracy.”
The new government, under President Asif Ali Zardari, had until now been content to leave well alone, hoping self-regulation would be enough as the new industry began to mature. Attempts to introduce voluntary codes of conduct have stalled. Farahnaz Ispahani, a member of the ruling party who sits on the standing committee on information and broadcasting, said the legislation was part of the war on terror, designed to stop militants using the airwaves.
“One view is that the problem is the owners don’t give a damn about anything other than ratings, so they want their programmes and news shows to be as sensationalist as possible,” she said. “On the other hand, the party believes in media freedom so it’s a complicated issue.” Offenders could be sentenced to up to three years in jail or a fined a maximum of 10 million rupees (€90,000). That leaves government and media squaring up for a clash. Mazhar Abbas, deputy director of news and current affairs at the ARY channel, said the proposals would be challenged. “The media will not accept any form of suppression from the government,” he said.