Media sector needs restructuring

It is said that the pen is mightier than the sword. Today we can also say that the image is mightier than the pen. The fact is that power's mightiest tool is the media. The media have therefore become the strategic prize that power-mongers fight for.

Technology has had the pervasive effect of diffusing information at a speed and quantities that none of us can absorb. We are compelled to consume information that has been selected, filtered and processed by journalists and cleared by their editors. The more we find it difficult to get information from the source because of its sheer volume , the more we are vulnerable to the bias, subjectivity and ethics of the journalists - the media processors.

We may wish to believe that we are living in an information society. In fact we are really living in a media society, a society fed on processed information.

Over the past years we have seen the power of the media manifesting itself in the overthrow of regimes, the glorification or demonisation of politicians, entrepreneurs, artists, authors, priests or social workers. But are the media giving the public a fair deal? Is what we are being fed information, or is it propaganda? Is it factual and relevant information or is it in fact repetitive and controlled information that is safe to the powers that control the media?

Subservience

In Malta the media are largely directly and indirectly controlled by the political parties. Most "independent" media are in fact a subsidiary of the political organisations. Does this situation foster the democratic environment for which we fought so hard and which we verbally dedicate ourselves to promote? This subservience has now become so insidious that any semblance of decorum is being disregarded by some journalists and contributors.

If I am writing this column under my name everyone who is reading it knows where I am coming from. I am a politician giving a political opinion and the reader can easily apply his gauge of bias. But contributors who hide their names do not give this facility to their readers.

Conflict of interest

I am a politician who writes about political issues. Today I am also a consultant to business and I do not try to sell myself as a financial analyst, and limit myself to comment on macro economic issues.

In Malta, we have journalists sitting on boards of organisations, relying for their positions on people who are supposed to be the subject of their journalistic reporting.

We have journalists running public relations businesses.

This is an obvious conflict of interest as it is very difficult to believe that journalistic objectivity is not dulled by the multi thousand public relations packages that they negotiate with clients. One must ask:

• Are clients compelled to enter into these contracts with these "journalists" as payment for media protection?

• Is journalistic clout being used against these clients' competitors?

This problem has been accentuated by our public broadcaster who should be the guarantor of impartial information reaching the public (not that it ever was), farming out its airtime for most of its schedule, journalistic, sports or otherwise to such businesses or the individuals who have to rely on the financial support of powerful sponsors.

How objective can these "journalists" be? How can the public consuming the information processed by these "journalists" be assured that the information is not being withheld from them, or selected to suit the clients' or sponsors' agenda?

Regulation

I wonder whether the local Institute of Journalists has ever delved into these matters to ensure that a proper code of ethics as endorsed by similar organisations in other countries is being adhered to. It is also worthwhile knowing what degree of self-regulation exists within the journalism class actually exists.

The Broadcasting Authority (BA) is the people's watchdog in this sector and is duty bound to investigate these issues and ensure that the people are being protected from abuse by the power-mongers who are constantly pulling the strings to push their own agendas.

The BA is not there to investigate complaints but it should be pro-active and analyse the prevailing practices in the whole broadcasting spectrum.

A wrong decision

Some years ago it was conveniently decided by the Authority that balance should be measured across all broadcasting media. This gave a licence to the political stations to be as unbalanced and unethical as they wished with the excuse that balance is achieved by netting the imbalance in one and the imbalance in the other.

The fallacy of this decision is obvious. In the meantime the interests of the power-mongers were served, even though the interests of the public were flouted.

This decision has to be reversed and if we are to respect the people, all journalists and all media houses must be made to adhere to strict ethics of balance and objectivity.

If democracy rests on the forming of intelligent opinions by the public on which they can pass an objective judgment, then let us start the restructuring process in our media sector.

jd@dbms.com.mt, SMS: 7942-2964