President, Media And What Not To Do

• Why some journalists are complete write-offs

by Wimalanath Weerarathne

Mervyn Silva once held something called a news discussion in order to blame Rajapaksa whilst leaning towards the government. Journalists attended that discussion. It would be so much better if journalists have the capability to reject such requests and stick to a decision to boycott such ‘media discussions’ organised by discredited elements. Sadly, some journalists will publish any false statement made by politicians such as Silva. What will be the public perception of the media because of such matters?

 

True journalists

Journalists who did have confidence and dignity never went to the President during his workout sessions nor to places where teledramas were being shot. Journalists like Lasantha Wickrematunge were killed because of their unbending nature and straightforwardness; other journalists were kidnapped, brutally tortured or had their legs broken.

Popular Tamil journalist Dharmaratnam Sivaram aka Taraki, cartoonist, political analyst and journalist Prageeth Eknaligoda and journalist Poddala Jayantha are examples of the above-mentioned oppressions. Some other journalists wrote against Rajapaksa but were clever enough to safeguard their legs. One or two scribes who established their reputations amongst the leading journalists of the country have been able to create a situation where no one could threaten them. Perhaps the contribution of such courageous journalists played a major role in defeating the Rajapaksa regime. All these people worked as independent journalists.

 

What media should do

First of all, it is highly important that one studies what not to do before examining what should be done by the media. If journalists are aware of what not to do, they will never visit a president during his workouts and a former minister in-between teledrama shoots. During the Rajapaksa regime, some journalists held positions in State institutions while at the same time working at media institutions.

In such a scenario, it is obvious that the journalists could not be independent. Some of them took measures to obtain all privileges accorded by the government. There were some leading journalists who languished in long queues at the Ministry of Economic Development in the hope of meeting the former Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapaksa in order to seek support to start their own businesses. Some journalists however quit their jobs at media institutions to take up ministry jobs.

On the other hand, journalists who did not belong to the above category continued writing stories about ghosts and sex for their own survival. There were some journalists who displayed bias towards certain companies by justifying the massacre which took place against the people’s protest in Ratupaswala. This is enough to showcase the declining nature and the lamentable story behind today’s media.

No journalists were in the forefront of exposing the hardships that people had to face due to the suppressions and oppression by provincial ministers.

This situation is somewhat justifiable because of the risk they would have been taking by writing such articles. No provincial reporters took a bold step in bringing to light the corrupt activities of former Chairman of the Deraniyagala Pradeshiya Sabha, Anil Champika aka ‘atha kotaa’, in the Nuriwaththa area. There is a method amongst friends who serve in different media institutions. That is the method of getting news that cannot be published in government media published in another media.  As such, stories such as these could have been passed on to an institution that was capable of publishing them. And there would have been no need of waiting till the murder of the Estate Superintendent of Nuriwaththa, Nihal Perera.

 

Media’s responsibility

A teacher who taught media ethics and journalism while holding a top position in a media institution, started serving as the media secretary to a leading politician of the country. It is hardly comprehensible as to why he did not decline such a position and if he starts aligning with one side, he will have to remain attached to the same side. Recently, we were able to see how a leading journalist who was appointed as a presidential advisor aligned himself with both the sides.

There is also a critical issue related to the commercialisation of media. Who are the people that benefit from the capital of the newspaper? Nowadays, the majority of media institutions as well as journalists have to commit themselves to this. Sometimes, it might be essential to write against the government.

Even though it is essential to point fingers at the government, the fact that it will be taken as an opportunity by the opposition, stops them from criticising the government. Will this safeguard the government or obstruct the opposition? Most of the time, journalists who were on friendly terms with the government took such measures during the Rajapaksa regime. Even though hiding information will be a successful attempt in safeguarding the government, such methods would do nothing to correct the mistakes of a government. This is the real truth and the absolute reality associated with any government. What is important is to confront the immediate issues in a more open manner.

Then, there is a possibility of being criticised by the opposition as a temporary matter. Thus, if the problems are always brought forward to the people, then the people will continue to stay on the side of the government.

 

Informing the President

Those journalists, who worked for the ex-President with no conditions, hid themselves once the current President Maithripala Sirisena left the then government. Further, some journalists avoided reporting on the challenges that the current President faced at the presidential election.

Even the journalist who reported continuously on everything related to the current President during the time he was serving as a minister, avoided reporting the incident when he stepped out of the then government, as he was afraid of the Rajapaksa regime. This is because he had sought support from both Mahinda Rajapaksa and Maithripala Sirisena. Yet there are journalists who did not hesitate to write on Maithripala Sirisena as the common candidate.

Those journalists see the wrong as wrong no matter who did it. They supported Maithri at that time and will definitely criticise the President if he is on the wrong track. Moreover, the journalists who hid during the time the current President won the election did not hesitate to meet him in order to receive privileges. Now they are the doers. Now they have become the messengers who deliver information about those who genuinely supported the President. Those journalists who maintain friendly terms with the President pay attention not to criticisms based on the policies of the President and the government, but to those hilarious criticisms that were made via social media.

They pay attention to comical articles that get published in newspapers as well. There is no use in availing the President of these trivial and comical criticisms. Instead these journalists should take steps to make the President aware of valuable analyses that criticise the nature or the system of the government. This will give the President an opportunity to focus on the issues highlighted that could be regarded as constructive. This will make the President realise that he is not isolated but has a link to the power complex. A link attached to a power complex cannot make unilateral decisions. Those decisions need the approval of the public.

 

Not visiting Kosgama

Kosgama villagers criticised the President for not visiting Kosgama after it was struck by deadly fires. When questioned regarding this, a media spokesperson stated that the President’s visit to Kosgama was restricted because of security reasons. Security forces may have advised the President, but the former President would have somehow visited a location hit by disaster despite advice not to undertake such a visit.

The visit of the former President to Kebithigollewa after the bomb blast is one such incident where he did not heed the words of caution by the security forces. He showed cunning in this instance or he may have genuinely cared. Nevertheless, the popular photograph where he was shown embracing the father who lost his child was published everywhere until the war ended.

We would not recommend that the current President visit Kosgama to photograph himself in order to garner support and popularity through a picture. The country does not need a person who engages in such cunning gimmicks, but Sri Lankans would expect and appreciate it if the President visited them during a disaster. It is true that Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe visited Kosgama twice and organised things. Still, the villagers expected the arrival of the President to share their plight.

The explosion in Salawa was completely under control by the third day. The security forces could well have organised for the President to visit and examine the army camp after taking measures to clear the remaining explosives within the neighbouring premises of the armoury. Perhaps the President also should have the capability to see through certain fictitious decisions and excuses of the security forces. Also it is important that the presidential media unit is aware and conscious of such matters.

They should stop being mere reporters who write letters but be responsible personnel with good ideas. Further, they should be an interpret facility for the President instead of playing the role of a reporter. If so, the presidential media unit will be something very beneficial and useful for the President since mere reporters are easily available.

 

Open to the public

The President has opened up an opportunity for the public to visit President’s House. Majority of the public visited with to view the underground bunker constructed during the Rajapaksa regime. However, someone from my village stated that they were not allowed to see the underground bunker.

When I asked the President’s office about this I was told that it was due to security issues. In my opinion there is no need of opening up a president’s house to the public. The general public should also reject such an invitation. Ideologically it is important to reject and stand against an invitation to see another person’s house.

It is true that the President is not trying to showcase his persona since he is not residing at President’s House. By doing so maybe the President wanted to imply that he is opening up everything that had been hidden by the Rajapaksas. But the intellectuals see all these as meaningless and useless exercises. The entire country knows that the President is a pure person; we have already given him that dignity and respect. What is important is to safeguard and protect that given respect by involving himself in something that would be beneficial to the public. People who think moderately believe that the advisors and media executives should make the President realise these kinds of matters.

 

(Translated by Amavasya Sirisena)