How One Channel Could Shake Up Pakistan's Media Scene

We don't usually write about entertainment channels of the sitcom / soaps / serials variety (as opposed to entertainment channels of the news / current affairs variety) but there's a new channel airing across Pakistan for about the last two months causing all sorts of waves that is interesting to us for a number of reasons.

 Urdu1's advertising blitz can be seen in magazines and on billboards

For one, Urdu1, as the channel is named, seems to have hooked a substantial number of viewers, which seems to be giving its big-name rivals in the television entertainment business all sorts of palpitations. No doubt a major part of the reason for its sudden popularity is the fact that it is broadcasting some of the most popular Indian soaps, whose ratings on the illegally (but widely) broadcast Indian entertainment channels such as Star Plus and Colors, put to shame ratings of all other Pakistani channels. It is technically able to do this because it is actually not a Pakistani channel (which are subject to far more restrictions regarding Indian content) but a 'foreign channel', based out of Dubai and only having 'landing rights' in Pakistan.

But it is also benefiting from the fact that it still broadcasts most of its programming without the massive commercial breaks that have become the characteristic of Pakistani entertainment channels and which have become the bane of viewers. Unlike Pakistani entertainment channels which offer up their programming in blocks of, often, seven minutes or less, and where an hour of programming can include 22 minutes or more of commercials (also violative of the terms of their licenses, which stipulate no more than three minutes of advertising after every 15 minutes of programming - this stipulation has been challenged by the Pakistan Broadcasters Association in the Sindh High Court where the case is pending), Urdu1 so far has been getting by with running ads mostly at the beginning and end of their content. Viewers, fed up with the extended and excessive commercial breaks on Pakistani channels, seem to have given their approval.

By far the most fascinating part of the programming on this new channel from a sociological point of view, however, is the inclusion of - and unexpected popularity of - some of its dubbed offerings. Urdu1 is also offering Latin American and Turkish soaps which, despite the fact that they contain non-desi actors whose voices have obviously been dubbed into Urdu, seem to have found wide acceptance among the usual female population that comprises the bulk of the viewers of such programming. So far, Pakistani channels have rarely ventured into the dubbing territory (although Geo Entertainment has shown a couple of dubbed films in the past) because it was generally believed that audiences did not like watching such dubs and could not identify with non-desi actors and that the viewership could not justify the costs of dubbing. It would be interesting to see when rival channels also begin to add similar programming. And we can bet it won't be long.

 'Forbidden Love': Turkish soap seems to be doing well with viewers

But Urdu1 is also making waves for other reasons. A conglomerate of its rivals, including Hum TV, Geo Entertainment, ARY Digital and Express Entertainment have filed a case in the Lahore High Court against the granting of 'landing rights' to the new channel (which basically allow it to be distributed legally within Pakistan), which was launched in Pakistan only in the second week of June. They have challenged the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) to justify the grant of the license, which they claim is against PEMRA's own criteria for such licenses.

For one, these rivals argue that any foreign satellite channel must have been operative for at least three years before it can be considered for a 'landing rights' license , and that Urdu1 did not fulfill this criteria, having been launched (even by its own admission) "in the Middle East" only in June 2010. They also claim that foreign channels are, allegedly, not allowed to have more than 10-15% of their programming in Pakistani languages under PEMRA rules and thus Urdu1 falls afoul of this criteria as well. Urdu1's rivals may be technically right (we tried but could not locate these stipulations on the PEMRA site) but it should be fairly obvious from this petition that the big Pakistani entertainment channels are very apprehensive of what Urdu1's popularity could mean for their revenues. And let's be clear about one thing: their loud cries about 'foreign cultural content' and 'subversion of Pakistani culture' are only smokescreens for the real issue of revenue and profits.

There are a few points to consider here. A) I am no fan of the mind-numbing histrionics of Indian soaps, but is the "trade protection" being sought by Pakistani channels against Indian television content legitimate, especially when one considers that all of these same channels vie to run - and go out of their way to promote - Indian content such as awards shows and films when they can? B) Is Indian content the only issue? It was considered the main issue because of the supposed easy identification of Pakistani viewers with Indian storylines and actors, and the reason that nobody bothered that much about Western content, assuming it catered only to a small niche of viewers. How will that point-of-view fare with the popularity of dubbed non-Indian content as shown by Urdu1? To take the point further, is isolationism something to aspire towards? C) One can make legitimate arguments about the need for smaller trade / production entities to have benefits that level the playing field somewhat against larger entities that have the advantage of scale. But does that argument really hold for 'cultural products' in an increasingly globalized world where technology makes the cultural products of other nations easily accessible? After all, the 'protection' offered to the Pakistani film industry for over 40 years did not really help it to survive or become better did it? D) There is a fundamental issue at stake also about who benefits from such protection: does it actually benefit people it claims to serve or just a few corporates such as television channels, some big local production companies and their owners and investors? After all, all viewership surveys in Pakistan attest to the continuing popularity of Indian soaps despite their official prohibition and despite the rantings of the moral brigade. If viewers insist on watching shoddy melodramas and continue to find ways to do it, is it the job of government to deny them legitimate avenues to do so?

Finally, there is another significant aspect to Urdu1 which has piqued our interest. Its Pakistan license holder is a company called Horizon Media (Pvt) Ltd. which is fairly untraceable on the web. For a channel that supposedly launched "in the Middle East" (out of Dubai) in 2010, Urdu1 also has no website that we can locate. Its CEO is a man called Faraz Ansari, who used to be the former General Manager of Ten Sports and apparently worked for other media companies earlier as well.

However, we have learnt from very reliable sources that the real people behind the channel are three "heavyweight" legislators of the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party. In fact, we have been able to identify one of them: Ms Shazia Marri, now elected as a member of the National Assembly and former/ current minister for Information and Electric Power in Sindh province. Another may be current Sindh minorities minister Dr Mohan Lal, whose brother Mr Jai Prakash, a Shikarpur-based trader, is alleged to be the main financier of the venture.

 Shazia Marri: new media mogul?

What makes the whole venture more curious is that, according to our sources, Ms Marri has also been in long-running talks to buy an FM channel called Josh 99FM which operates out of Karachi, Lahore and Hyderabad and is "affiliated" with three other unnamed FM stations, claiming a total "potential" listenership of over 60 million people. Josh FM99's Chief Executive is Mr Sarmad Palijo, the younger brother of the sitting Sindh Culture and Tourism Minister Ms Sassui Palijo. Adding to the intrigue is the fact that those in the know claim the purchase negotiations have dragged on because of the involvement of Ms Faryal Talpur, another sitting PPP MNA and the sister of President Asif Zardari. Our sources claim they do not know what Ms Talpur's stakes are in the matter but that on more than one occasion, she intervened once the price had been tentatively agreed, to ask the parties to reconsider the price. According to our sources, one intervention was to urge a lowering of the price, another was to raise it, which may indicate that Ms Talpur had been requested to intervene by both sides at various times.

Is there a new media empire in the offing?

Lessons from Maya Khan

I thought about simply updating the previous post but decided that this deserved a separate entry.

So, after much pressure from social media, activists, oped writers and blogs as well as the odd well-deserved editorial in mainstream papers, it seems the message did finally get through to Samaa TV's management. Maya Khan and her team have been fired by Samaa and her programme stopped. The following is the letter from Samaa CEO Zafar Siddiqi which was shared with the media:

Dear All
Your feedback is appreciated. As a responsible corporate citizen, Samaa TV did what was required under the circumstances. We do not and have not in the past or intend to in the future to take our viewership or reporting requirements without the seriousness that they deserve. 

You would appreciate that as an organisation with a functioning management team, we had to conduct certain legal requirements over the past week and internal review processes (which are operational in nature) before procedding further. 

As a result of which I can inform you: 

We asked Maya to apologise unconditionally which she did not.
The CEO asked her to do that on Friday which she refused. 

As a result of which the following will be put in place on Monday, Jan 30th: 

Maya and her team will receive termination notices.
Her show is being stopped from Monday morning. 

Our deeds and actions taken since this episode occured are there for the record and hope this will settle issues as far as the station is concerned. 

A lot has been written about the race for ratings. Well, we do [not] absolve such behaviour irrespective of ratings that the show was getting. 

With best regards and thank you for your understanding. 

Zafar Siddiqi
Chairman CNBC Arabiya
Chairman CNBC Africa
President CNBC Pakistan

There are a couple of things to gather from this unfortunate episode:

1. Social pressure works! While Mr Siddiqi must be fully appreciated for being willing to listen to and understand the voices of outrage and for taking swift action, none of this would have been possible without the pressure that built up over the issue. What made the pressure effective was the multi-pronged strategy which involved not just raising the issue with PEMRA, but also writing directly to the Samaa TV management, the petitions and threats of protest as well as the momentum that organizing a consensus provided via Twitter and Facebook and various oped pieces in mainstream papers. It was this momentum that forced the mainstream to raise the issue even in editorials. Let no one doubt the power of a group of people to change things.

2. The importance of thoughtful media management. Even as Samaa quickly issued a clear apology once the matter achieved notoriety, the issue might have been 'handled' with less drastic results had Ms Maya Khan not issued a half-hearted mea culpa (while grinning) at the same time which only made people question Samaa's seemingly sincere apology. On top of it all, her programme's producer, one Sohail Zaidi, was quoted by the BBC defiantly stating that he was "not responsible to anyone but himself." Ms Khan and Mr Zaidi ended up being responsible for making their own cases worse.

3. The importance of perspective and proportion. Some activists and social media types did get carried away in their anger. To be sure, Maya Khan and her unashamed cohorts did infringe on other peoples' privacy and harrass them. But posting details and pictures of Maya Khan's personal life or the personal cell phone numbers of Samaa TV management on public forums was certainly not the way to go. Thankfully, there were calmer heads within activists who immediately called out their fellow activists on the irony of responding to someone's egregious actions by acting in the same coin.

4. Need for ongoing media monitoring. One of the main reasons this blog was set up was because we felt the need for such monitoring at a time when media was booming in Pakistan and there were precious few willing to raise a voice against well-funded media houses. Obviously, however, we neither have the resources to monitor all of the media nor any official mandate to take action on issues we come across. All we can do is play a part in publicising issues as we see them. But what is really needed is for an independent body - hopefully comprising of civil society experts in the media - to oversee public complaints. PEMRA has the official authority to take action but is often criticised variously for being either overly bureaucratic, under the government's thumb (and thus partial), or too beholden to the large corporate media houses. It would be in PEMRA's interests to help set up an independent body, along the lines of the UK's Offcom, to help it monitor content and handle public complaints. This would not only reduce pressure on PEMRA but provide its decisions with the stamp of fairness and consensus it needs.

Hopefully, some of these lessons will be learnt.

Samaa Stoops to New Lows

What a fucking waste of a Sunday. Here I was minding my own business, trying to do some work, relax a little bit, surf the net and... I ended up watching 15 minutes of some five-day old desperate-for-ratings morning show on Samaa TV, hosted by an even more desperate-for-recognition C-grade actor called Maya Khan. I usually steer clear of vapid morning programming on all channels but I watched because so many people were feeling so outraged by what had gone on in the programme that I thought I might as well check.

And guess what? Everyone who was outraged by this show is perfectly right to be outraged. I am outraged. No, actually, outrage seems a small term for what I felt while watching the shenanigans of this miserable cow Maya Khan and her motley crew of rich Defence-type airheads and gossipy burqa-clad crusaders. I felt physically nauseous. This was a new low in sensationalist television crap.




Here were a bunch of television vigilantes serving as the television arm of the Jamia Hafsa crusaders in Islamabad, the cretinous sisters of the Taliban's moral police Amar bil Maaroof, nonsensically claiming to have a "picnic" in a park while harassing poor couples whose only crime seems to be exercising their right to privacy and consensually talking to a member of the opposite sex. (Note that NONE of the couples harassed by this bunch of airhead crusaders were indulging in any act of public indecency as claimed by one man towards the end of the clip.) This is total and utter bullshit. Not only does Samaa TV's goon squad invade the privacy of people, it blatantly ignores the consequences of putting these poor people's faces on air (who knows or cares what their domestic circumstances are) and lies to them about having their mikes and cameras switched off. This is unethical behaviour beyond all limits.

But there is a bigger social issue that the likes of Maya Khan and her rabid cohorts will never understand: the rapidly diminishing public space for the less affluent sections of society. The rich have a thousand options, proverbially speaking. Where are couples who cannot afford upmarket restaurants or have access to private house parties supposed to go to just sit and talk if not places such as parks or by the sea? And the addle-headed cow who argues about unmarried couples not being allowed to see each other? Who let her out of her house to go to a salon and get on television in the first place?

Is this what we have come to with the 'freedom' of the media? A blind rush for ratings at the expense of any civic, social or even common sense? Here is a wonderful Open Letter to Maya Khan from a far more restrained Mehreen Kasana. And there is also a petition that you can sign addressed to Samaa TV CEO Zafar Siddiqui, which I would urge you all to sign. Some people have also initiated letters to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) asking it to take notice of this content.

However, I think this is far too little for the likes of Maya Khan and her mongrels. This kind of socially destructive vigilantism should be nipped in the bud and taken note of by the government itself. The entire crew and aunty brigade should all be charged, perhaps for taking the law into their hands, for invasion of privacy and also for sexual harrassment. A message should be sent out to ratings-hungry television channels that there are limits to what they can do.

Incidentally, it may be recalled that Samaa has caused serious damage before. Thankfully, it had sacked Meher Bokhari after her sensationalist comments about Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer helped create the atmosphere that led to his assassination. One had hoped it had learnt its lesson. It looks like it needs a sharp reminder.

Channeling Anger

At certain points during a quick reading of these excerpts from Kim Barker’s new book, featuring the shenanigans of our very own friendly neighborhood Teletubby, I found myself laughing out loud. It wasn’t the ‘ oh god that’s funny’ laughter though, it was – again – the helium like hysteria of you just can’t make this shit up. The excerpts didn’t just entertain, they educated too. I learnt many important things. For example, that tigers are people too. That a certain kind of politician’s favorite tune continues to be ‘how much is that journo in the window’. And that it is only a matter of time before ‘What do you think, Kim?’ becomes a popular pick up line.

Then I watched the beginning of the Mubashir Lucman programme episode mentioned in that post and it wiped the smile right off my face. The story he covered before he got around to setting the stage for Tinky Winky’s public humiliation was the latest twist in Mukhtaran Mai’s tragically prolonged quest for justice. And when I say covered, I mean stripped, laughed at, and then paraded down the street naked, as sometimes happens to women in this our blessed country.

You should watch the clips and hear the language employed to understand what I mean:

Part 1: Relevant portions are from 00:00-01:18 and then from 02:56-12:10




Part 2: Relevant portion is up until 06:00





I’m not going to go into details of how and why Mubashir Lucman, who has never exactly been a poster boy for decorum, managed to find hitherto undiscovered levels of lowness to sink to in his treatment of the story and his hapless guest, Mukhtaran Mai. This piece by Sana Saleem on Dawn Blogs has already done so. I would like to add something though, and that is what exactly can we do about it?

I’m also not going to more than flirt with the visceral impact of this particular juxtaposition of fact and farce. A foreign ‘lady journalist’ detailing the loneliness of a man with power, insecure enough to get hair plugs and fret about his weight problem, yet clinging desperately to the belief that power alone is an irresistible aphrodisiac. A local male anchor following in the footsteps of others before him taking pleasure in reducing a heroic woman it has been conclusively proven was raped to an attention seeking media whore. A panel of corpulent scavengers echoing his position, just as happy to imply that there is justice in reminding women who have stepped out of line what their proper place is. Beneath them, presumably. But yes, do not dwell too long on the contrast between the soft handed flabbiness of men who should still be wearing diapers and the gaunt, haunted faces of the women who pay for their infantile natures. That way lies hell.

Mr Lucman is clearly the sort of person who, when he gets attention, does not care whether it is positive or negative but only congratulates himself on having gotten it. This is not surprising; it seems to be a part of the genetic coding of 99% of the world’s talk shows hosts. It is also not surprising that the channel in question gives this sorry sud a soapbox. The more incendiary the content, the better the ratings. So, considering the chances of a public apology by Mr Lucman as a result of an online petition are about as high as Nawaz United’s chances of scoring against Barkerlona, back then to what exactly can we do about it?

Here’s an idea: complain to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA).

Their Council of Complaints ostensibly comprises of "eminent citizens who have rich experience in their respective fields i.e. law, journalism, electronic media, public relations, etc. None of such Councils may have any official from PEMRA or any other government department as its member which vouch their complete autonomy. Each Council of Complaints is also required to have at least two female members." According to PEMRA's website, the PEMRA Regional General Manager only acts as a Secretary to the Council and also "[encourages] women to come forward to lodge their complaints without any reluctance." PEMRA also claims that “since their inception, Councils of Complaints have done commendable job in [the redressal] of complaints to [the] complete satisfaction of all stake-holders.”

Try it out, publicly. Get in touch with any of these listed Councils of Complaint and lodge a protest against that episode of the Lucman show for being in violation of various clauses of Rule 1 of PEMRA's Code of Conduct for Media Broadcasters and Cable TV Operators, for example…

(Rule) 1: No programme shall be aired which...

(c) contains an abusive comment that, when taken in context, tends to or is likely to expose an individual or a group or class of individuals to hatred or contempt on the basis of race or caste, national, ethnic or linguistic origin, colour or religion or sect, sex, sexual orientation, age or mental or physical disability;

(d) contains anything defamatory or knowingly false;

(f) contains anything amounting to contempt of court;

(h) maligns or slanders any individual in person or certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country;

(i) is against basic cultural values, morality and good manners;

(k) promotes, aids or abets any offence which is cognizable under the applicable laws;

(l) denigrates men or women through the depiction in any manner of the figure, in such a way as to have the effect of being indecent or derogatory;

(n) anything which tends to glorify crime or criminals

Keep a record of your phone/fax/email correspondence with PEMRA. Set up a coordinating body via website or list or group to share information and keep others posted on progress or lack thereof. The worst thing that can happen is nothing. The best thing that can happen is another small step towards letting the system know that you too are a stakeholder, you too believe you have the right to air your opinion, and you too are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.

Those of a PML(N)cholic disposition may, of course, replace Mukhtaran Mai with Nawaz Sharif at relevant parts of the complaint.

Super Bull Gives You Wings (Updated)

First things first: apologies to all for the disappearing act. (For those who actually noticed, a silent note of appreciation.) Had been away for a rather long stretch of time and while I was able to follow developments back home in an irregular fashion, simply did not have the time or access to all the information to put a post up (the perils of work work). And much has happened in the media while I have been away, which I hope to get round to in a one-by-one fashion. In particular, there are some interesting developments brewing on the electronic media front.

However, I first want to take up the issue which apparently threatens the very survival of humanity itself. Yes, I am referring to the shut down of Geo's sports channel Geo Super and it's music and entertainment channel Aag. To hear Geo talk about it, it is nothing less than the rule of tyranny, the deprivation of Pakistanis of all that is good and worth living for, and the wiping out from people's lives of all information, healthy physical activity and freedom of expression. They now have a 'count-up' on Geo News, ala the 2007 'Emergency', of the exact number of days, hours, minutes and seconds that Pakistanis have been flung into darkness, and even have begun a campaign to get the citizens of Pakistan to grant them a "public license" to resume broadcast (whatever that may be). Geo Super and Aag logos with a cross across them are now regular fixtures on their other two channels (Geo News and Geo Entertainment) and a sidebar regularly updates with the latest maulvi, sportsman, politician, actor, singer or other celebrity to condemn the snatching away of the people's rights.

But before this came to pass the Jang Group (which owns Geo) also used its newspapers - the widely read Jang and the not-so-widely-read The News - to try and browbeat the authorities by running regular front-page stories about the malafide intentions of the government and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA). On the day - April 7 - that Dawn's lead story was about a US Congressional report severely critical of Pakistan and the Express Tribune's and Pakistan Today's lead stories were about the removal from his ministership of Sindh Home Minister Zulfiqar Mirza (the PPP apparently giving in to its ally the MQM's demands), Jang and The News' main leads were about the government having shut Geo Super down. So much for unbiased handling of news priorities. This was, of course, in addition to the wall-to-wall coverage that Geo News had begun to provide on the 'event' from a day before, with the news taking pride of place as the top news headline.

Messages of condemnation have come pouring in from as far afield as Reporters Without Borders and as close to home as the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists - which bizarrely dubbed the issue one of "human rights" - even as the Jang Group has tried to paint the issue as one of governmental victimization. To make matters worse, PEMRA has until yesterday (when it finally placed ads in some papers) been unable to present a clear defence of its actions or explain the exact realities from its point of view.

 The PEMRA ad in Express Tribune and other papers on April 11

There is so much rhetorical chaff involved from both sides that it is important to separate out the facts of the case, which I will attempt to do here.

Let us first examine the claims of Geo itself. The Jang Group claims (if one goes by the news stories on its news channel and print publications) that Geo Super and Aag have been shut down because:

1) It was promoting sports and healthy entertainment in Pakistan
2) It was doing so selflessly with no thought to losses incurred
3) The government wants to hit the Jang Group financially because of its relentless criticism of the government

In addition, the Jang Group claims:

4) Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel
5) Aag was shut down as an act of further vengeance on the part of the government
6) Pakistani's have been deprived of sports, sports news and healthy entertainment because of these shut-downs

Let us first look at the latter claims (4-6).

With respect to 4):

The claim that Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel is technically patently false. It is registered in Dubai and is as Pakistani under that criteria as e.g. Ten Sports or Star Sports or Star ESPN, all of which broadcast also to Pakistan under legally obtained "landing rights" or permission to distribute. In fact, it is because Geo Super is registered as a foreign channel that it obtained local landing rights for distribution within Pakistan when it began broadcasting. The reason it is registered in Dubai could well be in order to prevent Pakistani authorities from having a look at its revenues and to avoid tax/ license fee obligations here, though there is another reason which I will just come to. Yes, it does employ more Pakistanis than the other channels and has covered Pakistani domestic sports more than the other sports channels but nothing more than that. It has no local license.

Furthermore, under PEMRA's current rules to prevent monopolies (Clause 13, PEMRA Rules 2009), no corporate entity can hold more than four channel licenses. The Jang Group already has four channel licenses - for Geo News, Geo Entertainment, Aag and Geo English (which was never launched). Unless those rules are changed, the Jang Group must give up one of their licenses to apply for one for Geo Super, which it apparently seems unwilling to do. Also under PEMRA rules, any local licensee for a satellite channel must declare its revenues and give a percentage of them to PEMRA as annual license fees. In the case of a sports channel such as Geo Super the annual fee would come to Rs. 700,000/- + 7.5% of the annual gross advertisement revenue as per audited accounts. (See Schedule A, Table-1). (As an aside, let me just also point out that from my understanding, PEMRA has no system in place to verify if the revenue claims of any channel are actually correct or not, or to challenge an audit. It simply takes the channel's word on this, which given the way most businesses operate in Pakistan and advertising receipts and expenses are juggled, almost surely means that revenues are under-reported in all cases.)

Incidentally, Geo Super had been in default of even the landing rights fees (Rs. 300,000 + 5% of gross advertising revenues as per audited accounts) for the past four years, a matter which may have been sorted out after the intervention of the courts prior to the ICC Cricket World Cup (CWC), when Geo asked the courts to stop PEMRA from taking it off air during the CWC even though its 5-year license was expiring. I will deal with this further on in this post.


With respect to 5):

According to PEMRA, Aag was ordered shut down because after the stoppage of Geo Super broadcasts (we will come to this too), the Jang Group began to show the Indian Premier League cricket fixtures on Aag, which was a violation of its licensing terms. Aag TV has a license for entertainment programming, not sports. Under the licensing rules, no channel can switch its programming genre without a fresh application for a new license. The Jang Group had also violated this provision during the CWC by showing cricket matches on Aag, for which it had already been issued show-cause notices. However, partly out of deference to the Supreme Court's orders allowing the CWC to proceed without hindrance and partly out of the fear of a public backlash, PEMRA had not taken any drastic action in the matter then. In effect, however, Aag had violated the PEMRA Ordinance of 2002.


With respect to 6):

This claim is also demonstrably false since neither has sports news been affected on news channels, nor has sporting or entertainment activity come to a halt because of a sports channel shutting down and Aag being taken off air. In addition, there are still other sports channels and entertainment and music channels being broadcast.

Now let's come to the Jang Group's claims 1)-3) about why Geo Super has shut down. First of all, no sane individual would be willing to accept claim 1), that the government's reasons for stopping Geo Super were because of its antipathy for either sports or entertainment activities. That the Jang Group would even make such a claim says more about its idea of the intelligence and gullibility of its viewers / readers than anything else.

As for claim 2), no one who has endured the infuriating barrage of advertising on Geo Super during a cricket match (a minimum of three ads between each over, more during fall of wickets) could possibly ever believe that the Jang Group's motivations for running a sports channel were selfless. Indeed, nobody could ever believe that any commercial broadcaster would be in the business to only serve viewers interests and not to make money. Let's not be absurd. Yes, Geo Super would not have made the killing it makes broadcasting cricket in other sports, but its revenues from cricket broadcasts (which form the majority of its programming in any case) easily outweigh the costs of non-cricket broadcasts. Despite the hefty price of obtaining exclusive rights for the CWC for example, Geo Super was in the game because it made money not because it lost money. Keep in mind also that the way the Jang Group (and other media houses with multiple channels and publications) marketing operates, advertisers often are lured with bundled packages of advertising across all their channels and publications, which also subsidizes programming with lesser viewership. If the Jang Group really wants to insist on its loss-making claims, perhaps it should be asked to open its Dubai-based account books for public scrutiny. Somehow I don't think this will ever come to pass.

We can thus safely dismiss the Jang Group's claims 1), 2), 4), 5) and 6) as being patently false. The only claim that may have merit is claim 3), i.e. that PEMRA's actions constitute an attempt by the government to hit the Jang Group financially for its hard line against the government. In fact, this is almost surely true. But before we come to this, one final critical point needs to be cleared up:

Has the government through PEMRA actually shut Geo Super down?

Screen shot of Geo Super channel on cable

Almost everyone would have seen this image where Geo Super used to be. Does this mean PEMRA has pulled Geo Super off air? That's what the Jang Group would have you believe. But think about something: if the channel were actually blocked, why would you be able to see this image? Remember when Geo and other news channels were pulled off air during the 2007 'Emergency'? The screens actually went blank. In fact, what this constant image indicates is that Geo Super is still broadcasting and being distributed on cable and satellite dishes. It is just that the channel itself is not running any programming.

Now let me share with you what has actually happened, which Geo will never tell you and which PEMRA is too idiotic to explain properly. Basically, in contravention of its status as a foreign channel with landing rights in Pakistan, Geo Super had been secretively uplinking from Pakistan. Under the law, Geo Super could only regularly uplink to satellite from abroad (Dubai or wherever it chose). When this uplink facility violation was discovered, PEMRA basically shut that operation down. This does not mean that Geo Super cannot broadcast its programmes by uplinking from abroad, as it was supposed to be doing in the first place. PEMRA has pointed out in its ad yesterday that Geo Super still has landing rights and is free to distribute its programmes via cable. In effect, therefore it is Geo Super that has shut itself off.

This is also why Geo Super had scrambled to apply for a "temporary uplinking license" from PEMRA on April 4, a facility that is allowed under the rules for specific events such as a major sporting competition taking place within the country. PEMRA, in perfectly legally defensible fashion, asked Geo Super to specify the event it wanted to cover. Since Geo Super could not name any, PEMRA was within its rights to refuse, which they apparently have still not technically done. The Jang Group's claims of unfair victimization, at least on the basis of this alleged refusal, are merely attempts at a smokescreen.

It is also important to recall exactly what happened during the court case that the Jang Group brought against PEMRA before the CWC since Geo has claimed on numerous occasions that PEMRA and the government are in violation of the court's orders. Basically, just before the CWC, PEMRA had reminded Geo Super that its landing rights permission for 5 years was about to expire at the end of February and that it had not, as per PEMRA Rules, reapplied for permissions six months earlier. This would have meant that Geo Super would have had to go off air within Pakistan during the CWC. It approached the courts and pleaded with them for a stay on PEMRA taking any action against it as well as to ensure that PEMRA forbade cable operators from running any channel showing the CWC that did not have the rights to show the matches in Pakistan.

This is how the official wire agency APP reported  the conclusion of the case (read in particular the bold bits):

"ISLAMABAD, Feb 1 (APP): Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday disposed of Geo Super landing rights case on the assurance of counsel of the petitioner and the respondent to resolve the issue with mutual consent within a week. A single member bench comprising Justice Tariq Anwar Kasi resumed hearing regarding the landing rights case of Geo Super.

Counsel for Geo Super Akram Sheikh apprised the court that Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) is not implementing the Supreme Court orders in letter and spirit. He contended that in case of landing rights expired on February 28 Geo Super would not be able to telecast ICC cricket World Cup matches to be played after that date. Afnan Karim Kundi, counsel for PTV apprised the court that the petitioner did not present the law and rules of landing rights in front of the Court. He said that the PEMRA ordinance was promulgated in 2002 and that nobody was being victimized.

Shahid Mehmood Khokhar, another counsel for PTV, informed the court that GEO is warying [sic] to overcome its losses through the courts.

Salman Akram Raja, Counsel for PEMRA, told the court that the authority was not going to “off air” Geo Super transmission despite that they are defaulter of PEMRA for the last four years. He said,”We are implementing the court orders and PEMRA has circulated a copy of court orders on landing rights to all cable operators in this regard.”

Later when counsel of Geo Super Tariq Hassan prayed the court for more relief, the learned Justice remarked, “If you are not satisfied then the court will decide the case on the merit.” However, the counsel for Geo said that his client was ready to sort out matters with PEMRA within one week.

Both the counsel of the petitioner and respondents prayed the court that they would solve the matter with mutual consent within one week so kindly dispose of the case.

After hearing the arguments, the court disposed of the case by passing following orders: “The counsel for PEMRA informed the court that they do not intend to off air the transmission of petitioner channel in connection with PEMRA press release of January 28 providing base for filing the petition.”

“The above undertaking that they would settle issue of annual fee payment within one week time, learned counsel placed on record a letter where by the orders of Supreme Court has been acted upon and a copy has been circulated to all cable operators, since the grievances are no more now, therefore, counsel for the petitioner wants withdrawal of the petition , the case is disposed off.”"

So basically, Geo itself had its case disposed of and there is no longer a case of any violation of the court's orders.

Given all these lies, half-truths and fabrications on the part of Geo, why do I then still say that the Jang Group is almost surely also being victimized by the government? Simply because PEMRA's hands are not clean either. Although PEMRA has responded angrily to the Jang Group's claims involving one of its former officers (who alleged to The News that he was issued verbal instructions to cause problems for Geo Super), even leaving the veracity of this particular incident aside, there is little doubt - from background and off-the-record interviews - that PEMRA did undertake a policy of using cable operators to make things difficult for Geo. This involved cable operators arbitrarily switching Geo Super's position in their channel bouquets and degrading its signals. It all culminated in the so-called strike by cable operators during the CWC, ostensibly against PEMRA's high-handedness but which actually targeted Geo Super in particular by leaving the field open only for Pakistan Television to show that day's match. This of course impacted Geo Super's advertising revenues significantly at least on that day. It may all be legally difficult to prove but the thinking behind it was the same that General Musharraf employed after his Emergency regulations failed to curb the hostility of private news channels like Geo. And this thinking is to hit them where it really hurts: in the pocket.

In addition, one has only to look at PEMRA's past record of taking to task other violations of its Rules. As the large number of illegal cable channels showing pirated films all over Pakistan with immunity - in total violation of the PEMRA Ordinance - demonstrates, there are violations, and then there are violations. Had the Jang Group not been on a warpath against the government, it is more than likely that PEMRA would have taken a lenient view of the group's violations, as it has done with many before.

Where the Jang Group's stupidity lies is that it has allowed PEMRA and the government a handy legal excuse to go after it. Already PEMRA is threatening to go to court in response to the fabrication of allegations against it and to pray for Geo Super to be permanently blacklisted for its violations. If you must take on the government politically, it usually is a good idea to keep your nose clean in other ways. But then, the Jang Group has hardly been known to pay all its taxes and has never shied away from using media clout to get what it wants, whether justified or not. Recall that the Jang Group is also alleged to be a defaulter of over 90 crores in back-taxes over many years, a case that continues to remain pending and is dredged up only when the government wants to exert pressure on the group. If only the average taxpayer had that kind of luxury.

What this brouhaha also shows is how neither the government nor the media hold the moral high ground in Pakistan. It's a sordid, sordid business in which lies and damned lies are the norm and the poor unsuspecting public are merely emotional pawns one way or the other. Once a compromise is reached - and it will be one way or another since the stakes are too high for both parties to take it over the edge - the public who think they are bringing about popular change by affixing their names to silly petitions, will be left by the wayside.


: : : UPDATES : : :

Update I (12 April 2011):

Trust politicians to jump into the fray with loud rhetoric but little in the way of information or understanding of the issues. This was the main story in The News today, which I saw only after I had posted the above piece.

We have also been made aware that PEMRA has today issued "show cause notices" to both Geo Super and Geo News. Geo Super has been issued the notice for "illegally blocking transmission without any cogent or lawful reason in violation of Section 28 of the PEMRA Act 2007" (Amended PEMRA Ordinance 2002). The following is Section 28 of the Act:

"28. Suspension of broadcast media or distribution service.- A broadcast media or distribution service operator shall not cease or suspend broadcasting except on account of force majeure or with the prior approval of the Authority."

Geo News has been issued a notice "under Section 20 for propagating false and baseless news maligning PEMRA and deceiving the public." Section 20 of the PEMRA Act 2007 deals basically with the 'Terms and Conditions of the License' and its clause (d) specifies that licensee must "comply with the rules made under this ordinance." Section 1-(d) in the Schedule-A of the PEMRA Rules states that "No programme shall be aired which..."

"(d) contains anything defamatory or knowingly false;"

Finally, our friend @mirza9 has also pointed out that the satellite licenses Geo News and Geo Entertainment are registered under the name of Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. while the licenses for Aag and Geo English are registered under the name of Independent Newspapers Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. which may mean that both separately registered companies could yet claim a further two licenses under the law to prevent monopolies (see main post). However, while we are not aware of their directors / CEOs / ownership details, both companies are registered at the same address and share the same telephone and fax numbers.

 Screen shot of PEMRA licensee list courtesy @mirza9

We have asked PEMRA for clarification on this issue - whether two companies that ostensibly share ownership can be issued licenses as separate entities, and are waiting to hear back from them.

A Problematic Appeal

* * * * * * * * * * * *
CLARIFICATION: We posted the following in good faith but seem to have misconstrued some of the facts. It has been brought to our attention, particularly by our friend Shahid Saeed, that the letter addressed to PEMRA's Council of Complaints has not, in fact, been submitted yet and was circulated to gather input from others, and as such is a draft internal document. Saeed feels it may have been unethical of us to lay the document open to critique by people who are not part of the process and we think he may have a very valid point. In addition, the conversation with Zafar Siddiqui referred to below occurred after the Lahore chapter of the CFD filed an earlier complaint with PEMRA against Samaa, not after this letter was submitted. Unfortunately, it would probably also be unethical of us to remove this post altogether now that it has already become public domain. But we would like of offer our sincerest apologies to the CFD for this inadvertent publicization of their draft internal document.
* * * * * * * * * * * *

The Citizens For Democracy (CFD), a loose "Pakistan-wide coalition of civil society, labour, student and religious organizations" as well as "intellectuals, academics and professionals" has sent is considering sending the following complaint to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA)'s Council of Complaints against the hiring of Meher Bokhari by Dunya TV after she was sacked from Samaa TV:

"The Chairperson

Council of Complaints, Islamabad

Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Headquarters

G-8/1, Mauve Area

Islamabad

Subject: Complaint against the recent hiring of Mehar Bukhari by Duniya channel

Dear Chairperson,

We, Citizens for Democracy (“CFD”), are a Pakistan-wide coalition of civil society, labour student and religious organizations, intellectuals, academics and professionals with branches in Karachi, Hyderabad, Quetta, Lahore and Islamabad.  CFD believes that the primary obligation of the State is to protect the lives and property of citizens and that no person or group of people should be permitted to hold the State and the people of Pakistan hostage through the threat or use of force.  A list of some of the organizations that form CFD is attached.

The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (“PEMRA”) was established by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 (the “PEMRA Ordinance”), inter alia, to “improve the standards of information, education and entertainment” in Pakistan.  Section 20(c) of the PEMRA Ordinance requires all PEMRA licencees authorized to broadcast electronic media to “ensure that all programs and advertisements do not contain violence, terrorism, ethnic or religious discrimination, sectarianism, extremism, militancy, hatred, pornography, obscenity, vulgarity or other material offensive to commonly accepted standards of decency” and to comply with any rules made under the PEMRA Ordinance.

Rule 15 of the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2009 (the “PEMRA Rules”) requires that the content of the programs which are broadcast by the broadcast media shall conform to the provisions of Section 20 of the PEMRA Ordinance and to the Code of Conduct set out in Schedule A thereof.  The Code of Conduct is set out below:

Programmes:-

(1) No programme shall be aired which:

(a)      Passes derogatory remarks about any religion or sect or community or uses visuals or words contemptuous of religious sects and ethnic groups or which promotes communal and sectarian attitudes or disharmony;

(b)      contains anything pornographic, obscene or indecent or is likely to deprave, corrupt or injure the public morality;

(c)      contains an abusive comment that, when taken in context, tends to or is likely to expose an individual or a group or class of individuals to hatred or contempt on the basis of race or caste, national, ethnic or linguistic origin, colour or religion or sect, sex, sexual orientation, age or mental or physical disability;

(d)     contains anything defamatory or knowingly false;

(e)      is likely to encourage and incite violence or contains anything against maintenance of law and order or which promotes anti-national or anti-state attitudes;

(f)       contains anything amounting to contempt of court;

(g)      contains aspersions against the Judiciary and integrity of the Armed Forces of Pakistan;

(h)      maligns or slanders any individual in person or certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country

(i)        is against basic cultural values, morality and good manners;

(j)        brings into contempt Pakistan or its people or tends to undermine its integrity or solidarity as an independent and sovereign country;

(k)      promotes, aids or abets any offence which is cognizable under the Pakistan Penal Code;

(l)        denigrates men or women through the depiction in any manner of the figure, in such a way as to have the effect of being indecent or derogatory;

(m)    denigrates children;

(n)      contains anything which tends to glorify crime or criminals;

(o)      contains material which may be detrimental to Pakistan’s relations with friendly countries; or

(p)      contains material which is against ideology of Pakistan or Islamic values.

(Emphasis added)

CFD demands that irresponsible journalists like Mehar Bukhari should not be allowed on air as they have a strong tendency to incite violence and promote a culture of hatred.  We are attaching with this mail  a link to two clips from Mehar Bukhari’s show on Samaa TV where she interviewed the late Governor Salman Taseer on the 25th of November 2010. Her demeanor and language was extraordinarily inflammatory and provocative and we believe that this broadcast was also partially responsible for the assassination.

http://pakteahouse.net/2011/01/11/meher-bukhari-has-salman-taseers-blood-on-her-hands-as-well/

The above cited Broadcast violates the Code of Conduct and is a violation of the PEMRA Rules and Ordinance in that the presenter of the Show, Ms. Mehr Bokhari, conducted an interview with Governor Punjab Salmaan Taseer on the issue of the Blasphemy Laws in which she (i) insisted that the Governor’s life was in danger for having inflamed the public’s religious passions, (ii) read out a Fatwa that declared the Governor Punjab a non-Muslim as a result of his pursuing a mercy petition on behalf of a Christian woman convicted of charges of blasphemy and, specifically, the following portion of the Fatwa: “that Munafiq and a Murtid cannot hold high office in this country.”  Ms. Bokhari insisted the Fatwa she read out had force.  This edition of News Beat was subsequently re-broadcast immediately after the assassination of Governor Salmaan Taseer.  The provisions of the Code of Conduct violated by the Impugned Broadcast have been emphasized above.

Ms Bukhari demonstrated that she is not responsible journalist or human being when she intentionally misinterpreted Goveernor Taseer’s marks about the blasphemy law. Our media personalities and anchor need to reminded of their social duties so that they do not blindly run ther shows in orderto score more points by gaining cheap attention. Mehar Bukhari should have to pay a penalty for her deplorable attitude and we recommend that she be banned from any news channel for at least a period of three years.

With best regards.

Very truly yours,

On behalf of CFD

Attachment:

-            List of organizations forming CFD

Copies to:

-  Chairman

PEMRA

G-8/1, Mauve Area

Islamabad

- Chairperson

Council of Complaints, Lahore

House No. 25, Abid Majeed Road

Bridge Colony

Lahore

- Mr. Qamar Zaman Kaira

Minister for Information and Broadcasting

Ministry of Information, Government of Pakistan

Islamabad

- Jaag Productions (Private) Limited

Technocity Corporate Towers

off I.I. Chundrigar Road,

Karachi 74000"

Personally, while we support CFD's aims of putting all such media personalities on notice that they cannot simply get away with spewing all sorts of irresponsible nonsense on television and even building pressure on PEMRA to do the job it has been tasked with, we're not so sure that singling out Ms. Bokhari for such stark punitive action is entirely appropriate. After all, the ultimate responsibility for such broadcasts must rest with the channel owners and their editorial heads, rather than simply with their public faces. In fact, PEMRA's earlier action of fining Samaa rightly focused on the channel rather than the presenter. Asking for a three year ban on any one particular person also seems particularly excessive especially given that there are far worse offenders on Pakistani screens (who should also be taken to task) and that the rest of those responsible for even these particular broadcasts escape any kind of censure by CFD.

Meher Bokhari: basking in notoriety (Source: GT Magazine)

Interestingly, one of the CFD members, Mahbina Wahid, also circulated an email to the group pointing out that after this an earlier complaint was filed with PEMRA against Samaa TV, Samaa TV owner Zafar Siddiqui himself called her. She wrote:

"He informed me that he had already sacked Meher Bokhari and her entire production team last week after seeing CDs of her show that were sent to him. He also said that he personally was very upset that it was his channel that had broadcast such a show. He lives in Dubai and is not involved in the day to day management of the channel, hence he was not aware of this show when it happened. He has also now ensured that certain other sensationalised items in Pakistan are not covered by his channel."

So at least we have clarity about the circumstances of Ms. Bokhari's departure from Samaa. If anything, CFD's ire should be focused more towards Dunya's unseemly haste and taste in signing on and relaunching Ms. Bokhari as a 'brave and fearless' "Pakistan's most dangerous journalist", as anyone who has seen their latest promos can attest.

Silencing the Airwaves

Those of you wondering whatever happened to the hourly BBC news bulletins on local FM channels and the local relay of the evening 8 o' clock Sairbeen since March 27, might be interested to read the report on BBC Urdu's website today.

Basically, it says that BBC Urdu has been effectively banned from 24 out of the 34 local FM channels after Information Minister Qamaruzzaman Kaira refused to issue written permissions for them to relay BBC's news content. The 10 FM channels still able to relay the content (I'm not sure which ones these are, certainly none in Karachi) are the ones that had received written permission last year after the PPP government came into power.

According to the report:

"These [earlier] permissions had been granted in line with the PPP government's policy of guaranteeing the complete freedom of the media. In addition, the BBC had been assured that all new partner FM channels would also be given written permissions, but that given the government's policy, this was merely a formality and that all partner FM channels were free to air BBC news content until the completion of the paperwork. Based on this government policy, BBC's Urdu Service began to supply a further 24 partner channels with five-minute news bulletins, which were widely praised by FM listeners.

On the instructions of the Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), all BBC partner channels had submitted the necessary paperwork at PEMRA offices last October. But whenever BBC representatives asked about the progress on these cases, they were told 'Your news is being aired, what difference does written permission make?'

Last month, on March 27, however, BBC's partner channels were suddenly instructed to stop airing BBC news immediately. When PEMRA was asked about the matter, BBC was told that from now on no channel could run BBC news without written permission. However, it was also added that as soon as the information minister found time, a decision would be taken on the issue.

For many days, the excuse that the information minister was busy was used to postpone any action on the matter. Finally, last Friday the BBC representative was called to Islamabad and informed on Tuesday afternoon that no further FM channels would be given permission to air BBC news. No reasons were given."

Very credible sources indicate that the sudden pulling of the plug on the BBC bulletins actually occurred at the behest of the military. Apparently, the BBC Urdu Service had relayed a controversial news report culled from Indian media that had claimed that Pakistan's intelligence agencies were involved directly with David Headley - the American of Pakistani origin accused of scouting locations in Bombay for the Lashkar-e-Taiba and currently in American custody.What apparently incensed the Pakistani military was that the BBC - in disregard of its own rules of journalistic fairness - failed to ask it for its point of view on the report.

The military establishment may be correct in pointing out the lapse on the part of the BBC. But is petulant vengefulness really the way to achieve sympathetic coverage? Do Pakistanis not have a right to choose their sources of information? In an age of easy access to all sorts of media on the net, one also wonders which world Pakistan's media managers are living in.

And the pressure exerted by the 'deep state' still does not explain the foot-dragging since October over the granting of permissions by the civilian government. Unfortunately the bureaucratic red-tape used to delay straight-forward matters and keep matters in limbo (usually to preserve power) has become an abiding characteristic of Pakistani governments. Their motives may vary from the corrupt to a lack of focus to misplaced sense of control to simple unwillingness to take decisions. But in the end they often find out that their hesitation and inefficiency becomes a noose around their own necks. After all, they too will need a free media at some point.