Aashish Mishra

The relationship between the government and media has been visibly strained in recent years. Many of the ministers have presented themselves rather harshly towards journalists, accusing them of serving hidden interests. The government has also tabled many bills like the IT Bill, Media Council Bill and others which have a direct or indirect impact on journalism and journalists. Critics argue that relevant stakeholders were not consulted while preparing these bills raising suspicion among media personnel that the government is trying to stifle dissent and restrict the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression. All of this has created a situation where both the government and the media are uneasy with each other.

Sour relations
Dr. Sudhamshu Dahal, assistant professor of media studies at Kathmandu University, puts it quite bluntly, “The government-media relationship is very sour at the moment.”
Even within media, he says, the government’s discomfort is with the editors and the journalists, rather than the media owners. “The current government wants to create yes-men and praise-singers, which the media cannot be,” he states.
However, Surya Chandra Basnet, executive editor of the state-owned news agency Rastriya Samachar Samiti, disagrees with Dahal. Basnet points to the critical coverage and the investigative journalism being done by Nepali journalists for various media organisations.
“That would not have been possible if the authorities had been uncooperative or had tried to stifle the press,” he says.
He does acknowledge that the government’s relationship with the media is not at its best and certain bills introduced by the government have made the media fraternity suspicious. But he also credits the government for being receptive to feedback.
“It is a nice practice to consult stakeholders while drafting bills but the government has taken their concerns into account whenever they have been raised.” He points to the removal of the provision requiring journalists to obtain a license to get into journalism as an example of the government being receptive to feedback.
However, Dr. Dahal believes that this is an exception than the norm and points to other bills that the government has bulldozed through parliamentary committees based solely on numbers.
Also, the media’s problem with the government isn’t only with the laws it brings. Various elected and unelected government officials have repeatedly expressed remarks that journalists say are derogatory and paint all the media people with a wide stroke based on the objectionable actions of a few. They say that such words from high-ranking people may set a dangerous precedent for future governments and can serve to incite their supporters to violence against the press.
On Sunday, speaking at the second anniversary of the founding of International Network for Nepali Journalists (INNJA), Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Ishwor Pokhrel joined a long list of ministers and Nepal Communist Party officials who have accused the media of bias. Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli who “editors have no heart” comment is still doing the rounds on social media and in newspaper editorials and his co-chair in the party Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ who remarked that the press was in the hands of the “bourgeois.”
Minister Pokhrel said that the media was viewing the current elected government with the same lens with which it viewed the autocratic regimes of the past. He also accused the media of serving “hidden sources” and called on it to maintain a standard of integrity so it could stand up to a “public audit.”
Remarks like these, according to Basnet, is the government responding to the queries and criticisms raised by the members of the press. Dr. Dahal also agrees that these are responses but prefers to use the term “reaction.”
He says these remarks cannot be taken lightly because they come from people in powerful posts whose opinions can shape policy and impact the people’s lives.”
However, it is important to note that there is no smoke without fire. The government is able to criticise the media because there is something to criticise about. Not all reporters do journalism and some of our “YouTube reporters” are a shining example of that. Many online news portals have been repeatedly criticised for their insensitive and sensationalistic coverage of national and international events and some news media, do indeed, have vested interests.
In the age of social media, when most people consume information through Facebook or Twitter, there is also a legitimate threat of fake news. Especially in a country like Nepal where there is a lack of media literacy among a considerable portion of media practitioners and media consumers alike, people are not able to distinguish between the CNN and BBC feed they get on their Facebook newsfeed and the XYZ or ABC “khabar” they get on the same platform. So, unethical media practices do pose a real risk of misinformation which can, in turn, cause problems like mass hysteria and even impact our democratic processes.
“But this calls for education rather than regulation,” points Dr. Dahal. “We need to increase media literacy among the people so they can themselves differentiate between information and misinformation,” he says.
All in all, there is a lot of room for improvement in the current government-media relationship, both from the government’s and media’s side. The government needs to accept that the media will cover its activities the way they are perceived by the people. If it does good things that raise cheers from the people then the media coverage might also be positive. If it finds the media coverage too negative, then it needs to realise that its activities aren’t going down too well with the general public. The point is that media reflects the public opinion.
At the same time, the media also needs to question itself. It needs to hold itself to the same standard that it holds everyone else to. Like Minister Pokhrel said, it needs to be able to stand up to a public audit. It is also accountable to the public.

Media education
But, at the end of the day, simply regulating won’t solve anything. People need to be educated in and about media so that they can themselves read between the lines and understand what is news and what is propaganda.
Freedom of expression and freedom of information go hand in hand with media literacy and a media literate population will help smoothen the relation between the government and the media.
But, in the end, Dr. Dahal questions why there must be a cordial relationship between the media and the government in the first place. “Media is one entity and the government is another, both equally important, but both inherently separate,” he says, adding, “Media should be a watchdog always questioning the government and ensuring that it is as transparent as possible. Why must it be in any sort of relationship with the government?”

(Mishra is the TRN journalist)