Journalists - are they part of the problem or the solution?
This is a relevant question for any democracy - specifically when a system is going through reform and rebuilding
If you asked the same question to our honorable ex-advisor responsible for Information Ministry, he could answer either way, depending on the mode of the day, the program he is attending or the most recent events that might be fresh in mind. Indeed it is the case, almost always. Sometimes journalist are part of the problem, sometimes they are part of the solution. Ideally, the number of the later should be more than the number of the eariler category, at least that is the expectation if a democracy has to function well. But from the ex-advisers comments, one could conclude that it was not the case. He should know well, after all, he has a direct link to the profession.
This balance in favour of "part of the solution" is much more critical when the interim government has already indicated that they are counting on the media as a substitute or temporary replacement for the parliament, which remains to be reconstituted.
Given this scenario, the role of the journalists are even more important. Each of the reknowned journalists carry the weight of the MPs, since government is continuously indicating that they are listening to the media and there is demonstrable evidence that this current interim government is continuously adpating their policies and stands based on the media feedback. This has been a very important characteristics of this government, unlike any other government in the past. This government is probably one of the most unskilled government (politically speaking) which is running the country more than a year now. But they are honest. And they are learning fast, though the speed of learning may be not be good enough, which remains to be seen.
Since the role of the journalists are so vital for the success of the current day government, it is only necessary to ask ourselves whether we are satisfied with their service. Can they be wrong? Are they giving us wrong assessment of the people's sentiment?
Let us take a pause a bit. Before 1/11, there were 300 sitting MPs in Bangladesh. Did they correctly read peoples' pulse? Certainly not. They could not deliver according to the peoples expectation, that is why the country is going through turmoil and uncertainity now. You may not agree with many things that this government is doing, but you have to agree on a single point that this government was needed. A group of people (unskilled with politics) was given the responsibility of the government and they are trying their best to deliver people's expectation. As natuaral for any newcomer, they are making mistakes. But they are listening to the media to correct themselves. Presumably, the media is giving them good advice. Or at least, media is giving a correct picutre of the reality, if they can not give the government current advice.
Is it so? What if they are not giving the correct picture? What if they are also incapable of getting the people's pulse - just like it was the case with our 300 sitting and elected MPs?
If the same mistake is repeated by the journalists and as a result the government gets bad advice, where does the nation go from here? Can we afford another blunder? If that happens who will be responsible for that?
These are very important and difficult problems. That is why we were saying in the beginning of this article that ask the ex-Advisor of Information Ministry who is presumably an Editor (though to us, he is actually a son of an Editor), too - his answers would not be as expected. He would probably blame the journalists, after all, he knows them well, taina? We, the general citizens, can praise them, blame them, do whatever we like. But if you are the one who is responsible to manage the portfolio, you can not blame the journalist. If not, then what do you? How do you manage the risk?
Just for fun, let us assume that you are the latest appointed Special Asistant to the CA and you are given the portfolio of Information Ministry. What would you do what Barrister Advisor could not or did not do?
If you ask us, we will say, send all the news editors on vacation. The news editors who were appointed by Falu type people, what else do you expect from them? The professional quality wasn't probably the best criteria of selection, in those cases, let alone, professional ethics.
But that is not realistically possible, is it? How many scholarships, visiting positions can you arrange for each of them, where then no longer makes policy decisions? But if you think you can arrange that, no problem. Everybody should be happy.
But there is a better long term solution, which is also stable. Give enough responsibility and resources to the young ones. Make sure they are not being side-stepped or being over-loaded so that they can not do the due diligence.
For example, if you give someone to produce a 10-minutes airtime, how much time and other resources are necessary? What is the international standard for a good quality news channel? Also, if some reporter is producing 100 column-inches of report, how much time is allocated for the reporter for it to produce.
In general, the information ministry, with help from Press Institute should establish two things:
1. Stanadard budget for producing one minutue of air time for tv channel or radio channel.
2. Standard budget for producing one column inch of print media.
Then the ministry should find out what is the total revenue of these three sectors, combined and separately.
Then the ministry should find out whether the current revenue streams can support the number of news outlets that is existing. If there is discrepency, what is the solution? What has been done in other countries - other stable democracies?
Just as a clue. Bangladesh currently has six mobile operator. Once there was only one operator. What was the situation then? If the government gives 10 more new mobile operator licenses, what would be the situation. Would that be better for the country? Three situation: one license, six license, sixteen license. What are the comparisons? Which option do you think is better?
Can the similar analysis for media sector would benefit Bangladesh? The policy makers will have to find figure that out.
If you thought some of the ideas are worth of your reading time, please forward it to others. If you have an ear to the columinsts in regular traditional media, please forward it to them. If you have an ear to the journalists and news editors of the electronic media, discuss it with them. Hope they would look at the suggestions and give due diligence.
Thanks for your time,
Innovation Line
==================================================================================================
Note: This is a freelance column, published mainly in different internet based forums. This column is open for contribution by the members of new generation, sometimes referred to as Gen 71. If you identify yourself as someone from that age-group and want to contribute to this column, please feel free to contact. Thanks to the group moderator for publishing the article.
Dear readers, also, if you thought the article was important enough so it should come under attention of the head of the government please forward the message to them. Email address for the Chief Advisor:
feeedback@pmo.gov.bd or at
http://www.cao.gov.bd/feedback/comments.php . The more of you forward it to them, the less will be the need to go back to street agitation. Use ICT to practice democracy. It is already proven that this government responds to the feedback.
==============================
=====================================================================
__._,_.___
__,_._,___
(739 ratings) 
Amrit Singh is a Staff Attorney at the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, where she has litigated cases relating to the torture and abuse of prisoners held in U.S. custody abroad, the government's use of diplomatic assurances to return individuals to countries known to employ torture, the indefinite and mandatory detention of immigrants, and post 9/11 discrimination against immigrants. She is counsel, among other cases, in ACLU v. Dep't of Defense, litigation under the Freedom of Information Act for records concerning the treatment and detention of prisoners held by the U.S. in Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantánamo Bay and other locations abroad; and Ali v. Rumsfeld, a lawsuit brought against senior U.S. government officials on behalf of Iraqi and Afghan prisoners who were tortured in U.S . custody. Prior to joining the Immigrants' Rights Project, Singh litigated a variety of racial justice issues as the Karpatkin Fellow at the National Legal Department of the ACLU, including post 9/11 airline discrimination against brown-skinned passengers and the failure of the state of Montana to provide adequate legal counsel to indigent criminal defendants. Prior to joining the ACLU, she served as a law clerk to the Hon. Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Singh is a graduate of Cambridge University, Oxford University, and Yale Law School.
On the day her dad had a memorable meeting with Cuban leader Fidel Castro in Havana, thousands of miles away in New York City, Amrit Singh, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's youngest daughter, was part of a discussion on 'Courtroom perspectives on the war on terror.' 
