The Media Reform Commission’s proposed recommendations for Bangladesh’s press and media landscape can certainly help the needle move in the right direction, and it is heartening to see that the recommendations are cognizant of the rights of journalists -- a profession that is not only precarious in nature but, given recent economic realities, is also one that is rife for abuse.
At the heart of Bangladesh’s media landscape woes lies press freedom, which, under the previous government, suffered greatly due to draconian laws and farcical legal cases meant to instill fear in journalists. The repeal of the more restrictive provisions within our anti-defamation law and the Cyber Security Act -- which replaces the draconian Digital Security Law (DSA) -- are absolutely welcome, to that end.
However, it is the proposed establishment of an independent regulatory body which would oversee media which stands to have a transformative effect. In addition to possessing the authority to monitor content and enforce ethics-based guidelines, it is also implied that defamation-related cases against journalists would be handled by this body rather than through conventional legal channels -- a method which has, in the past, resulted in legal loopholes being exploited to further victimize journalists who are simply trying to do their job.
Of course, there are recommendations which are worth taking umbrage at. The proposal of a publicly available “black list” for outlets which fail to adhere to ethical guidelines and regulations leaves a lot of room for impropriety. News is often delivered in real time, which in itself leaves a lot of room for error, a fact that ethical media organizations contend with by way of offering corrigenda admitting to any given mistake. Were this recommendation to be accepted, where exactly would the line of acceptability be?
Furthermore, while Bangladesh can absolutely stand to have a more diversified media landscape that harbours a broader representation of viewpoints, how exactly would that be achieved by limiting any given private owner to one media outlet? Why limit free enterprise by not allowing the owner of a television channel to also own a newspaper or a web portal as well?
While not all the recommendations made hit the mark, enough of them do for us to conclude that the industry could indeed benefit greatly, especially the many journalists who work day and night to keep the general public informed and speak truth to power.
