Pakistan's New Extreme Censorship Policy

Here in the United States we often take the media for granted because there are countless new channels, newspapers, political radio shows, etc. but across the world circumstances are different. Many nations have limited access to news stations and those that exist are unreliable at best. For example, in Pakistan during Gen Zia-ul-Haq’s dictatorship, the only source of correct, uncensored information was the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC.) Many Pakistani’s still rely on BBC for their international news because the Urdu-speaking stations within Pakistan are often sensationalistic (Waraich).

Recent events have caused the Pakistani government to drastically change their opinion of BBC. On November 27th a NATO airstrike along the Pakistani-Afghan border killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and it sparked outrage across the nation. Pakistani cable television operators blocked numerous international news channels in protest at their coverage of the atrocity. What the media viewed as unbiased international news, the Pakistani government viewed as offensive.

The Pakistani government was already upset with BBC over a documentary that they aired entitled “Secret Pakistan.” The program questioned the nation’s commitment to combatting Taliban militancy and parliamentarians like Palwasha Khan were outraged by the accusations.The US and other Western nations have been criticizing Pakistan for refusing to target Afghan insurgents in their territory and the documentary highlighted those views. According to CIA officials and western diplomats, Pakistan isn’t living up to its commitment against the war on terror (Associated Press). Khan was quoted saying “International channels as reputable as the BBC should not distort facts. It was an insult to the feelings of 180 million people who have sacrificed so much in the fight against terrorism.” (Waraich).

The All Pakistan Cable Operators Association (APOCA) held a press conference in which they demanded that BBC World be taken off the air in Pakistan and just hours after the meeting their demands were met (Tribune). BBC issued a statement saying “We condemn any action that threatens our editorial independence and prevents audiences from accessing our impartial international news service” (Associated Press).

Even though BBC was clearly singled out by APOCA, I’d like to make it clear that they were not the only channel targeted. Television operators have vowed to blocked all foreign TV channels that air “anti-Pakistani” content. Just recently Pakistan’s only English language news channel, Express 24/7, was taken off the air. Citizens are now forced to rely on the biased Urdu language equivalents (Waraich). Understandably, English-speaking Pakistani citizens are infuriated by these blockages because it is a clear denial of their right to unbiased, international news coverage.

Khalid Arain, Cable Operators Association spokesman, said that no foreign anti-Pakistan channel would “ever” be broadcast in the country. He said, “We want to send them a strong message to stop this. If they don’t stop this, then it is our right to stop them” (Tribune).

It is hard for most Westerners to imagine a world in which the government blocks all information that portrays them in an unfavorable light. In the US, the government is constantly criticized on some news networks while being praised by others; this gives American citizens a well-rounded perspective on how effective their government is. When states such as Pakistan block all critical information from the public, their news organizations are no longer trustworthy. Not only will people stop watching the local channels but they will go out of their way to find the information they are looking for (Sakr).

In some cases censorship can be a positive tool used by the government to protect its citizens. For example, sensitive military information isn’t broadcast on the news to protect it from enemy states. But when oppressive governments use censorship it generally has a negative connotation. It is used as propaganda, an enabler of ignorance, a force against globalization, a shield of human rights abuses, and a way to control people (Pillai). Pakistan clearly is acting in self-interest rather than in the interests of the masses because its citizens are denied a clear picture of current events. My question while studying these events became, “At what point does censorship become unacceptable and what can we do to prevent that?” Most would agree that censoring obscenities from children is an acceptable practice but what about when a government decides that fallen soldiers can’t be depicted on the news? Here we run into a grey area because some agree that the general public should be protected from tragedy while others feel that is our right to know how wars are progressing (Lester).

No actor has the right or the ability to impose on a nation’s sovereignty and reverse censorship so how do we get around it? One way I found was to use the internet as a resource because it is much more difficult to censor, but even that can prove ineffective. In many cases it is frustratingly difficult to get information out to a group of people when their government is actively trying to prevent it.

Works Cited

Waraich , Omar. "Pakistani cable TV blocks BBC over Nato air strike coverage." Independent [London] 30 11 2011, n. pag. Web. 2 Dec. 2011. <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/pakistani-cable-tv-blocks-bbc-over-nato-air-strike-coverage-6269977.html>.

"BBC taken off air in Pakistan by cable operators."Express Tribune 30 11 2011, n. pag. Web. 2 Dec. 2011. <http://tribune.com.pk/story/299928/bbc-taken-off-air-in-pakistan-by-cable-operators/>.

Associated Press, . "Pakistani cable TV operators block BBC because of critical documentary."Washington Post 29 11 2011, n. pag. Web. 2 Dec. 2011. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/pakistani-cable-tv-operators-block-bbc-because-of-critical-documentary/2011/11/29/gIQApVPB9N_story.html>.

Sakr, Naomi. TBS Archives. Transnational Broadcasting Studies, 05/11/2000. Web. 1 Dec 2011. <http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall00/sakr1.htm>.

Pillai, Prabhakar. "Pros and Cons of Censorship. Censorship is prevalent in the modern society. It is a highly divisive issue. Here's a look at its pros and cons.." Buzzle.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Dec 2011. <http://www.buzzle.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-censorship.html>.

Lester, Paul Martin. "Military Censorship of Photographs." Diss. California State University, Fullerton, 1999. Print. <http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/military.html>.