-
The need for broader discourse
By Yumiko Perera
Mass media has always played an important role in the sociopolitical lives of people the world over – its influence on both society and culture is undeniable, especially in a multicultural democracy like ours. With modern technology opening up new avenues of media and boosting its influence, the potential for its misuse has highlighted the need for regulation.
Although regulation by its very nature sets limits to freedom – the most basic principle of democratic society – it is important to note that these exist to protect audiences from the adverse influence of the media.
[caption id="attachment_123068" align="alignright" width="206"]
Centre for Policy Alternatives Executive Director Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu[/caption]
Why does media – electronic, print and social – require regulation?
Concerns over media regulation are often tied to the freedom of expression, which forms part of the fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen under article 14(1)(a) of Sri Lanka’s Constitution.
The Sunday Morning approached multiple individuals renowned for their work in media and the information sector for their expertise on the matter.
Speaking with The Sunday Morning, LIRNEasia Chairperson Prof. Rohan Samarajiva, whose firm is an ICT policy and regulation think-tank, shed light on the topic.
[caption id="attachment_123069" align="alignright" width="205"]
Professional Web Journalists Association Chairman Freddy Gamage [/caption]
“Given what we have seen following the incident in Digana and so many other similar incidents in recent history, there is undoubtedly a need to look at different forms of regulation when it comes to the media in Sri Lanka, preferably content-based, especially when it comes to social media. If we were to look at the world around us and what's going on in it, the whole idea that ‘sticks and stones may break your bones but mere words do not’, can no longer be accepted,” added Prof. Samarajiva.
Media regulation requires control by the Government or another institution apart from the content creators themselves. These guidelines should not only dictate terms of ownership of the content and who has access to it, but also what type of content is allowed to be published. There are some limits placed on the content that can be distributed to the public – typically content that is extreme and grossly contradicts fundamental societal standards.
Sharing his views on the importance of regulating media, digital media analyst Nalaka Gunawardene stated: “It is important to understand what regulation is and isn’t. Regulation is not the same as control, because regulation provides a framework within which different interests can be balanced. The objectives of any regulation system are to safeguard the public interest, to ensure a level playing field among multiple players in a given sector, and to provide a process for investigating and redressing grievances. Underlying all this is the core value of accountability.
“Media regulation aims to provide an overall framework of guidance to the mass media industry, so that media content stays firmly committed to the public interest and does not harm society or individuals.”
[caption id="attachment_123070" align="alignright" width="192"]
Digital media analyst Nalaka Gunawardene [/caption]
Will media regulation impact freedom of expression?
Centre for Policy Alternatives Executive Director Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, speaking of the impact media regulation would have on freedom of expression, said: “The main question we should ask when it comes to regulating the media is who does the regulation, and my preference would be for self-regulation rather than regulation by the State. I feel that it is much better to have self-regulation as far as media institutions are concerned, and it can be done by consensus.”
[caption id="attachment_123071" align="alignright" width="208"]
LIRNEasia Chairperson Prof. Rohan Samarajiva [/caption]
Speaking on regulation’s impact on the freedom of expression, Nalaka Gunawardene added: “How media regulation affects freedom of expression depends entirely on the kind of regulatory framework or mechanism in a country. It is also shaped by the level of maturity of the mass media and the political culture. Media regulation is not just about content, but also ownership.
“When media ownership is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals or companies, private interests can dominate over the public interests that all media – irrespective of ownership – is expected to serve. Such private interest can range from those of political parties, individual companies, or various advocacy or lobby groups.”
Should media laws be amended?
Gunawardena further pointed out: “The Ministry of Mass Media has recently been mandated by the Cabinet of Ministers to review the Sri Lanka Press Council (SLPC) Law No 5 of 1973 so that the SLPC it established be ‘structurally reformed and reorganised covering electronic, print, and new media as a tribunal for journalists and media institutions, and as a centre that promotes media education’. We have to accept that our media needs to be far more accountable, responsible and ethical. But it is highly debatable whether amending the Press Council law is the way forward.”
Prof Samarajiva shared similar views on the subject: “The amendment of media laws is something that shouldn’t be done in secret, they should not be done without the participation of the relevant parties either, and the parties concerned being the producers of media content itself. Even the end user must be able to have a say in it. That is where the code of conduct and ethics come in,” he noted.
“When it comes to ethics, it cannot be imposed by the State by definition, as ethics are not legislated into the law. Ethics are what one follows because they are a decent human being. What can be done however, is compromise – the professional bodies and journalistic bodies should have a code of ethics that they would live by.”
[caption id="attachment_123072" align="alignright" width="191"]
Free Media Movement Convener Seetha Ranjanee[/caption]
Self-regulation over censorship
Professional Web Journalists Association Chairman Freddy Gamage stated: “We acknowledge there should be a regulatory process for media in Sri Lanka. However, we also believe it should not be controlled, but self-regulated. To this end, we have also developed and published a code of ethics for web journalism. The Government needs to develop and promote some sort of self-regulatory mechanism with the support and acceptance of journalists and media professionals alike.
“Media organisations in the country have been campaigning for more than a decade to abolish the Press Council. While the Government is trying to convert that into a judiciary institution instead of its abolishment, it already has judiciary powers. For example, if they come up with certain decisions that prove unfavourable to the media community, we wouldn’t be able to appeal these, which we feel is downright unfair.”
- Sanjeewa from the Journalists for Rights organisation stated: “Given the state of the media right now, regulation is something of utmost importance; however, regulation doesn't necessarily have to be imposed by the Government. The regulatory mechanism should be something which media associations and the media community itself get to develop and that is what we, as journalists, stand by.
“When it comes to the topic of media laws in Sri Lanka, we have to talk about the Press Council. The Press Council was created back in 1973, by Act No. 5 of that year, and was used by the former administration to regulate the press. Journalists and various media associations have been campaigning to have it abolished ever since its inception. While we still stand by the idea that the Press Council should be abolished, we do acknowledge the need of a self-censored regulatory mechanism.”
Speaking on the amendment of media laws in the country, Free Media Movement Convener Seetha Ranjanee said: "As the Free Media Movement (FMM), we firmly believe that the Press Council should be abolished and that has always been our stance. The Press Council is a regulatory measure set up by the Government itself, there are a lot of underlying issues and legal shortcomings that come with it, and the practicality of it is questionable as well.
“Considering all of this, we are not ready to accept regulations by the Press Council. As an alternative, we propose a self-regulatory mechanism which the media fraternity would develop and implement according to a certain set of principles, which would also play into the accountability of journalists, as well the media fraternity as a whole."
