John Wilkes, the pioneer of media freedom in UK during the 18th century writing in the first issue of his newspaper "North Britain" on June 5, 1762 declared "The liberty of the press is the bright light of Briton and is justly esteemed as the foremost bulwark of the other liberties of this country." The declaration has won universal approbation and adequately explains why media enjoys the status of the fourth pillar of the state.
A free media is a catalyst of social, political, cultural and economic progress in a society and also regarded as a flag bearer of the national morality, more so in democratic dispensations. However, freedom of expression does not mean unbridled liberty or a license to act like a lose cannon. The exercise of the freedom of expression is contingent upon adherence to the recognised social and professional ethics. In other words freedom with responsibility is the name of the game.
The introduction of the private sector in the field of electronic media and the accompanying freedom of expression, is probably the best thing that has ever happened in this land of the pure. While it is heartening to see the media enjoying its freedom and guarding it zealously, it is equally disappointing to see the absence of the component of responsibility. There is a discernible propensity to scandalise things, rumour mongering and playing favourites in disregard to the internationally recognised professional ethics; more so among the electronic channels. It is quite an ordeal to watch the current affair programmes and talk shows, hosted by some uncouth and non-professional anchor persons - barring a few exceptions - yelling at the top of their shrilling voices at the panellists trying to rub in their peculiar perceptions and getting involved in a debate with them, instead of listening to their views on the questions put to them. Being aggressive in approach is adorable but descending into an insulting mode is absolutely non-professional and detestable.
They also lack the ability of a professional moderator to control the flow of the arguments as is evident from their nod to the shouting matches among the participants, presenting a spectacle of the shindigs rather than serious forums to discuss national issues; so repulsive to the eyes and jarring to the ears. A professional anchorperson and host of such shows would always thoroughly brief the participants about the etiquettes of the discussion before coming on air and also curb his own inclinations to join the melee. Some anchorpersons seem to be not well conversant with the professional culture of the electronic media and the art of conducting panel discussions or talk shows. Some even have not worked as journalists at all before landing into the arena. That probably is the reason that these shows look more like an entertainment stuff than the forums for informative and educative debates. Nobody would grudge an ambience of freedom for the media but at the same time nobody would either welcome erratic and irresponsible conduct on its part. The media must be mindful of the fact that the onus for preserving its freedom of expression is inextricably linked to the exhibition of a responsible behaviour.
There is a need to consolidate the gains of democracy and promoting democratic culture in the country in which the media has a pivotal role. Being a representative of the society, it is incumbent upon the media to show unswerving dedication to the cause of democracy and the promotion of national interests. These are indeed very serious issues and are required to be handled and commandeered by the thoroughly professional and knowledgeable individuals.
In a democratic set-up, the government is also under obligation to ensure an unfettered press in the country and its growth on healthy and professional lines. From this perspective, it is encouraging to note that the government is contemplating to set-up a media university in Islamabad in collaboration with China.
The setting up of such institutions will hopefully help in strengthening the professional and ethical ingenuity and competence of the media persons and the evolution of the professional and ethical code of conduct like it was done by the media institutions in the US in the 19th century.
While the media is a watchdog against the indiscretions of the government, the government is also a watchdog against streaks of undesirable behaviour by the media. That relationship needs to be respected and strengthened. This is an age of self-regulation and less intervention by the governments.
In most of the developed and democratic countries, the media - with the encouragement and support of the respective governments - has taken upon itself the role of ensuring adherence to the professional ethics and redress of complaints against irresponsible, non-professional, unethical and erratic behaviour by any electronic channel or a newspaper.
In this regard a 19-member Press Council headed by a Chairman appointed by the government from amongst the judges of the higher judiciary, is already functional. The other members include four representatives each from APNS, CPNE, PFUJ, one each from Pakistan Bar Council, National Commission on Status of Women, HEC, leader of the house and leader of the opposition in the National Assembly and one mass media educationist.
It is hoped that this body will be able to choreograph a comprehensive professional and ethical code of conduct for the media in Pakistan in line with the internationally recognised principles of professional journalism tailored to our specific social environment that would enable the media as well the government to play their complimentary roles for the development of the country in an effective manner. The sooner it is done the better.