When media flopped as kingmaker

The hyper-activity of the pro-UNP media during the last week in the run-up to the vote on the Second Reading of the Budget on Monday, had much in common with the behind the scenes activity towards the end of the Sixth Parliament in 1964, when 14 members of the SLFP-led by CP de Silva crossed over to the Opposition and brought down the government of Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike.

That was a time when the media played a major role in bringing about the downfall of a government, with Lake House which was supporting the UNP being among the key institutions involved in the manipulations that saw the defeat of a Government after four years into its term of five. There were two important names in the machinations of that time to defeat the Government of the day.

They were JL Fernando, the Political Correspondent of Lake House who has been more of a strategist for the UNP since its inception in 1947, and Esmond Wickremesinghe, son-in-law of D.R. Wijewardena, the Founder-Chairman of Lake House and father of Ranil Wickremesinghe, who with his connections to politics in the left and right, as well as big business, was known as a suave operator in wielding the influence of Lake House in the governance of Sri Lanka.

Those in the know of what took place at that time know how the king makers of that day, JL Fernando and Esmond Wickremesinghe went about plotting the downfall of the Government that was seen as a threat to Lake House.

There was much money that exchanged hands at the time, and it is hardly a secret that the smallest sum on offer, which went to a prominent politician from the Matara District who joined the political long-jumpers, was Rs. 50,000, quite a princely sum at that time.

Most of the activity that resulted in successful manipulations to bring down the Government in 1964 took place behind closed doors, and the single vote defeat had to do with the MP from Passara, Amarananda Ratnayake, who could not make it for the vote due to a flat tyre on his car. In contrast, the manipulations from the time the debate on the Second Reading began last week were played out in the media.

Far from being the important pillar of democracy that keeps the public informed, large segments of the media in Sri Lanka played a direct role in promoting the strategies of the UNP to defeat the Government.

If JL Fernando and Esmond Wickremesinghe had a direct vested interest in seeing the defeat of the United Front Government in 1964, with the threat to Lake House from the pro-left Government; one did not see such a vested interest in the role of the media houses that went all-out to create the scenario for the defeat of the UPFA in Parliament last Monday, other than the interest they had in seeing that Ranil Wickremesinghe and the UNP had another go at forming a Government, after the many defeats that party had suffered under the same leader.

The result of the UNP-Lake House strategy in defeating the elected Government in 1964 was that when the opportunity came in 1970 the people gave a huge mandate to the SLFP-led left alliance that had to act against Lake House, and it did so in 1973. Both the cause of media freedom and democracy are not best served when the public ire is raised any media institution.

There is a considerable debate on in the country about Media Freedom in Sri Lanka, and such debates are necessary in a democracy.

Watch List

We are told that the International Press Institute (IPI) has once again put Sri Lanka on its Watch List for threats to Media Freedom here. Such developments cannot be avoided in these days of globalisation, and in a country, that despite what all its critics say, is liberal enough to allow criticism of the government, its general policies and many aspects of its defence policy and operations, to be debated in the open, and even taken outside national borders.

Knowing the influence that some of these international organisations wield, it is judicious for proper note be taken of such Watch Lists and other moves that can be aimed at threatening the sovereignty of the country.

For the record, this is not the first time that Sri Lanka was placed on such a Watch List, we saw it in 2000 too, and I recall having to successfully oppose lumping Sri Lanka together with an African country with a much worse record on Media Freedom, at an IPI conference in New Delhi, while some Sri Lankan delegates there were glad to see such a damnable categorisation, as they are gleeful when we are lumped together with Somalia today.

But with the media and its freedom getting such prominence in Sri Lanka today, it is also necessary to raise some questions about the role of the media in politics, or rather its involvement in political manipulation.

When newspaper editors become the willing instruments of political chicanery, and are ready to do all the dirty work of politicians, even to the extent of creating a mood in the country that may favour those plotting the defeat of a Government, with no relevance to the public mood, one has to ask where the ethics and the principles of good media have gone.

This is not to deny the media and its right to support any political party or movement it wishes to. But such support must go with the proper reportage of political reality, and give the necessary space for the public to come to the own informed decisions about current politics and related matters.

What many sections of the media did from the time that Budget 2008 was presented in Parliament was to create a completely false impression in then minds of readers, viewers or listeners that everything was under way for the imminent defeat of the Government.

A cross over like that which took place in 1964 was never on the cards, and every discerning journalist knew that all along. But, there was no room for such realism in the media spin that was put on, in complete disregard for the right of the public to be properly informed by the media.

Media institutions that claim the “national” prefix to their publications or broadcasts must be more circumspect in what they present to their audiences.

Pushing the political agenda of the publisher down the throats of an unsuspecting public cannot be equated with the best standards of the media in any democracy.

Making big news items of the pipe dreams of publishers, the machinations of editors, the flawed calculations of journalists in sync with their favourite politicians, and organising comment and illustration to suit such hollow and fancy news is hardly the stuff of good journalism or media expression.

What happened at the end of this huge media hype about the imminent defeat of the Government through mass defections at the Second Reading vote was to create considerable suspicion and scepticism about what these media houses will say in the future.

To have a public that is showing increased scepticism about the media performance can never be in the best interest of democracy.

A careful study of all the imagined, fabricated and manipulated news and related comment or “athey roll” as it is described so pithily in Sinhala, will show that the media lost much more in credibility than the UNP did, in the vote on the Budget.

The results of that defeat will take time to show, but it certainly will out, and that does not spell well for Media Freedom in Sri Lanka.

RsF

The arson attack on the printing press of the Leader Group of newspapers is very much is the news today and rightly so. Many are the comments that have been made in condemnation of it, which is not surprising, and it is gratifying to note that such feelings have crossed the usual borders of politics.

It is unfortunate that there are persons and organisations that are rushing to apportion blame for this contemptible act of criminality on the security forces, based purely on convenient conjecture. It is not surprising that the UNP and its leader do so, with their complete lack of concern for principle.

But when organisations having international reputation for their claims to be watchdogs of media freedom too succumb to such temptations at name calling with no evidence to back them, it can give credence to the allegations of them being the instruments of both local and international manipulators with a sinister agenda.

This is what the Paris-based Reporters sans Frontieres (RsF) said of the attack on the press of Leader Publications.

“Security Forces Accused of complicity in Arson Attack on Leader Publications Reporters Without Borders condemns an arson attack early today on the printing press of the Sunday Leader media group, which is located in a high security area outside Colombo. About 15 gunmen that staged the attack must have had support within the security forces, the press freedom organisation said.

“Armed men have once again attacked a independent news media in a high security area of the capital,” Reporters Without Borders said. “It unfortunately shows that the press freedom enemies have accomplices within the Security Forces. By attacking the Leader Publications group, this gang wanted to silence one of the main sources of incisive criticism of the current Government. We urge foreign diplomats to publicly express their solidarity with the group.”

Within hours of the incident RsF has behaved just like any other irresponsible local political party by rushing in with its highly questionable claims about the complicity of the Security Forces in this attack.

It goes even further and seeks to embroil foreign diplomats resident here too, in what appears to be its campaign against Sri Lanka and the present Government.

Not surprisingly, this leaves room for genuine concern whether RsF’s real interest is in media freedom here or regime change. Hardly the stuff one expects from a watchdog of media freedom.