Free media under attack (03012009)

But this time around the attack is not from the Government or the Taliban or any other element, this time attack is from within media. Editors and senior journalists of daily 'The News' and the Jang Group of Publications have decided to sue the Pakistan and Dubai-based TV channel, ARY One World, in Pakistani, UK, Canadian and US courts, for airing allegedly baseless and false allegations against them, which amounted to, it is claimed, blatant and malicious libel and defamation before TV viewers of ARY inside Pakistan and abroad.
Ansar Abbasi has served the legal notices on Zahid Bashir, former press secretary to the prime minister; Dr Danish, host of ARY One World; and M/s ARY Communications (Pvt) Ltd through his counsel, demanding immediate public apology, failing which legal proceedings against them would be instituted in competent courts for the recovery of damages of Rs500 million in Pakistan and other amounts to be determined for the US and the UK. In addition, a criminal case under section 499 and 500 of Pakistan Penal Code, read with the provisions of the Defamation Ordinance 2002, would also be initiated. The notice pointed out that the ARY talk show, "Sawal Ya Hai Kai", in which Mr Bashir was invited as a guest, was completely dedicated and devoted to defame Mr Abbasi aided and abetted by the host and the TV channel. With the permission, instigation and incitement of the host, the guest Mr Zahid Bashir levelled many false and frivolous allegations just to settle his own score of malicious intent and ulterior motives against Mr Abbasi.
The case has become a battleground between the Geo media empire, owned by the Jung group to which Ansar Abbasi belongs and ARY group which does not own any newspaper or other media entities and is owned by a Dubai based business group. The Jung Group is dedicating precious newspaper space to publish its own and the journalists' position against the alleged slander and defamation of character. The primary remedy being sought by the complainant, the newspaper and the journalist is that of an apology, which under normal circumstances comes forth fairly easily. But in this case the Jung group has deemed it fit to make an example of the TV channel which aired the program. If this is not an attack on the freedom of media then what is? The people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Ansar Abbasi has published high profile stories casting slander and defamation on scores of people including military officers, judiciary, politicians and businessmen. People have often wondered of the source and motivation of stories floated by Mr. Abbasi. What has now happened is that someone decided to pay Mr. Abbasi and his newspaper group back in the same coin and that has hurt.
Mr. Abbasi has access to scores of TV channels, some of them far more popular and viewed, especially their own channel Geo, then ARY, thus all that needed to be done was to use these other mediums to put across his own side of story. But to use legal notices and threats is not becoming of a journalist or a media organisation. All that appears to have happened is that two journalists and their masters appear to be washing their dirty, stinking laundry in public and the stink is overwhelming.
When the government metes out the same treatment, the journalists complain and claim freedom of media, but when they do it themselves then their case for freedom of media is shot to smithereens. Mr. Abbasi has adopted a high moral ground, but the public has every right to know if there are indeed any skeletons in Mr. Abbasi's cupboard, but this can only happen if the media is truly free from even its own people, otherwise who will do the accountability of the media. The journalists may not like it but they do not enjoy the reputation of being purer than the driven snow, quite the contrary. It is also a fact that many journalists are on the payroll of agencies, political parties and businessmen. Therefore, rather than hiding behind the legal notices, Mr. Abbasi and his group should face the public and answer all the questions, even those which are slanderous and defamatory, just as they expect every one else to answer their queries as media people. People must not be denied their right to know, after all this is what the freedom of media is about.