Like the political, constitutional, industrial and social structures of the country, the media sector also needs a deep review, introspection and reform. The flood of ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ has made the sensitive role of credible, responsible and accountable journalism even more necessary. In this context, Kantipur has started a debate series to give special place to criticism, critique, review and suggestions. We look forward to the participation of stakeholders and experts in an objective and responsible debate.

On Kartik 4, 2062, at 11 pm, security personnel reached the studio of 'Kantipur' FM as per the orders of the then government. The security forces seized eight pieces of equipment including the satellite link encoder, satellite modem, digital audio receiver, and stopped the eastern broadcast of 'Kantipur'. At that time, the morale of the organization and outside journalists and operators had not dropped, but rather there was amazing fearlessness. Because, until then, the viewers, listeners, or readers of the media stood in the forefront in defense of the free press.  

The very next day after the incident, people went to sit in the same place to sit in protest. Civil society joined the struggle. In many subsequent situations, consumers themselves took to the streets to defend 'Kantipur' media, including the entire Nepali mass media world. Even in many violent protests, simply sticking a piece of paper with 'journalist' or 'press' written on it did not result in harsh attacks. Sometimes, if such incidents occurred, the organizers would apologize.

After the end of the Panchayat system on Chaitra 26, 2046, the lifting of the ban on parties, and the restoration of the multi-party system, it was natural for a new wave to arise in the Nepali mass media world. Seven months later, on Kartik 23, the ‘Constitutional Reforms and Suggestions Commission’ promulgated the constitution. Article 13 of it stated that ‘under no circumstances shall the printing press be closed or confiscated, and the registration of a newspaper or any magazine shall not be cancelled, and no prior ban shall be imposed on any material’, Nepali mass media duly entered a new era.

Why was such a provision needed in the constitution? Journalists of that time used to say that the provisions of the harsh laws of the Panchayat era could have been overcome with a new law. But what will happen in the future, what will happen? 

The Nepali mass media world entered the phase of a pluralistic environment from that time on. It entered the era of newspapers with expanded reach. With the success of the people's movement, political enthusiasm, constitutional and legal guarantees of rights, and the expansion of modern printing technology, the newspaper publishing industry was established within the next few years.

The short-lived newspapers that were printed by binding the pages after each letter was cut out of small lead-metal letters and covered in ink for thirty years were replaced by large, clean, colorful daily newspapers printed using offset technology. Not only were offices organized, but permanent addresses also began to be established. The field of journalism also began to be considered for employment. Editors, correspondents, and photojournalists began to receive regular salaries.

Journalism began to be considered a profession or business, not a political undertaking. Within a few years, this process gained momentum, and the daily sales of newspapers began to increase significantly. The advertising market was clearly growing. After the entry of the private sector into radio and television broadcasting, the group of professional journalists became even more excited.

In particular, the two decades after 2046 in the history of Nepali journalism, which began after the change in 2007, were the golden era of print journalism. In the following days, due to some obvious analogies and the ambiguity of the philosophical basis of the mass media system, Nepali journalism has simultaneously suffered from problems related to a crisis of trust, untrained and unsophisticated manpower, and financial shortages. 

The mass media system of any country is subordinate to its political system and philosophy. This was the essence of the four most famous press theories put forward by American scholars like Siewert, Peterson, and Schram during the Cold War, in which they concluded that the mass media is based on four types of values ​​and norms after analyzing politics around the world.

They divided the ‘normative theory’ of the mass media into authoritarian, Soviet communist, libertarian as promoted by the First Amendment of the US Constitution, and the theory of responsible press as recommended by the ‘Hutchins’ Commission. The ‘normative theory’ of the press is understood as the idea of ​​the role and responsibilities that any society expects from the mass media, based on philosophical, political and moral values, and the determining idea of ​​the rights and obligations of the mass media. 

With the end of the Cold War, Nepal also entered the era of press freedom. However, the political parties of Nepal never took the notable aspects such as the constitutional and legal provisions regarding the uninterrupted publication of newspapers, broadcasting permits to the private sector, and the constitutional provisions regarding the right to information seriously, and did not pave the way for institutional development. Instead, the Congress initiated polarization in the name of the press union, after which journalists close to the Communist Party including the UML began to build their own poles.

The most notable aspect after 2046 was the emergence of the commercial potential of Nepali journalism. At that time, commercial values ​​and norms had to be promoted to provide opportunities such as investment, market expansion, and consumer enthusiasm to flourish.

A plurality of capable and independent mass media should be maintained to rise above any vested interests and advance political or public dialogue in an objective manner with responsibility. The sustainability of a vibrant mass media system is required for the uninterrupted flow of verified information and interactive communication.

Therefore, it has been said that the parties should have paid attention to preparing a blueprint for the overall mass media system of Nepal within a few years after 2046. In the meantime, whatever policy or legal reforms were made in the mass media sector, they came under the force of global waves or came with the rough form of the parliamentary system. There was no serious discussion during the period of infant democracy, i.e. from 046 to 051-52, on the issue of how to build a mass media system in a smooth manner or how to strengthen the foundation of values ​​and norms of Nepali mass media.

In the past three decades, three commissions were formed to formulate policies related to the overall mass media system. There were extensive discussions on various issues related to mass media, including foreign investment and centralized ownership, but none of the issues were finalized. The latest example of how immature all governments have been in formulating policies and laws related to communication is the ban on social media and the lack of preparedness and audacity to lift it after widespread outrage. In fact, that government should have made the issue of the smooth operation of digital platforms a matter of national interest or public interest, not a dispute between the platform companies and itself, but a matter of consultation and coordination with all stakeholders.

Expectations of meaningful mass media: Three wasted decades

Why has a meaningful mass media system that operates on professional values ​​and norms that disseminate professional, organized, and edited content in the country in times of disaster and confusion, from political dialogue, to moments of disaster and confusion, not been built in the past 30 years?

First of all, with the change of 2046 BS, the bearers of that change should have understood that the paths of journalism and parties were diverging. When fighting against a dictatorial regime, it was natural for the worshipers of freedom of expression to join hands with the supporters of political freedom. However, after the agitators came to power-sharing, journalists were divided into factions of parties as the division between journalism and politics could not be resolved.

Political polarization began in Nepali journalism in parallel with professional initiatives shortly after the change. Over time, the practice of exploiting state coffers to support activists by separating parties and pretending that the poles were closer and farther apart according to the alliances took root in the name of voicing the voices of professionals or those dedicated to their profession.

Divided groups of party devotees began to emerge in the name of journalism. The national mass media system did not receive priority in state investment and expenditure for the public good. The proportion of expenditure in the name of journalism development began to be unproductive and excessively distributed.

Secondly, whatever changes occurred in the Nepali media world after 2046, they were largely part of the package of democracy. There was no fine-grained reform for the sustainability and pro-people nature of pluralistic media. Even though it was adopted, the three-tier broadcasting system has not been recognized by law to this day. It was said that the government should not run newspapers, and over time, everyone started to think that playing the drums was fun. The right to information, which became a global campaign to show the outside world, was included in the 2047 constitution.

It was only after the republic came that the law was made and the commission could be formed. The effectiveness of this commission has not become a priority for any party. Public service broadcasting has been announced in name only to show the outside world. The implementation side is lax. The Press Council has basically been made a tool for sharing between the government or major parties. The awards given to small sample journalists are a good example of how much the council's sharing policy has become an obstacle to the development of healthy journalism.

During the Cold War, media experts like Wilbur Schram believed that a sovereign nation must not only have a flag and a chair in the United Nations, but also have its own mouthpiece, according to which a news committee should have been established in Nepal at that time. Today, the state has no ‘vision’ on how to make Nepal’s government news agency relevant to the times and move it on the path of reform, only faltering efforts have been made. All government media outlets in Nepal suffer from the governments’ ad hoc or long-term thinking behavior.

Third, initially, newspapers with large investments gained popularity by pretending to adopt a policy of commercialism and equality with parties. However, due to the failure to firmly establish the values ​​and norms of the Nepali mass media system, the political economy of the media flourished over time, and investors began to emerge as brokers of state power. In the past three decades, good standards of political reporting should have been established on a large scale. However, many notable examples also fell into obscurity due to ‘bad media personnel’.

Entrepreneurs were leading the country to transition from the era of temporary newspapers that could fit in one or two rooms in alleys and alleyways of Lagan, Asan, Bagbazar or Naya Sadak to the newspaper industry by making relatively large financial investments. However, in the absence of a practice that emphasized professional values, over time they embarked on the path of excessive commercialization and power-grabbing.

There was no good practice of institutional development in newsrooms, no professional corporate practice was seen. At one time, investment took the mass media world to new heights, at another stage, entrepreneurs began to dedicate the ‘discursive power’ of the media to the service of ‘resource power’ and ‘access power’. Due to intense political polarization, the editorial spirit of journalists, who were generally far from professional conscience, became very weak.

It was inevitable that journalism would be brought to where it is today by the process of making it a ‘public relations tool’ that is devoid of values, partisan political interests, and more clearly, corrupt and immoral. In order to promote the flow of credible political dialogue in the country, the foundation of the situation, common national aspirations and public interest, there should have been a practice of respecting and adhering to the ‘normative theory’ and giving it priority in policies, laws and implementation. Otherwise, this is the destination that the overly polarized factions will lead to.

Today, the earnings of the Nepali media world for thirty years are like this—the unemployed, underemployed and unconscientious people have to be counted in the list of journalists in the name of media workers or journalists. Many who become journalists are not enterprising and creative, they have not stood on their own feet. They introduce journalism by linking it to the name of some organization, they have no introduction to writing or presentation. 

If there were no Facebook, there would be no place to write. Facebook or other social networks have empowered citizens, everyone has got an unhindered opportunity to express themselves. However, it is wrong to call the legitimate or illegitimate expression of the common citizen's mind citizen journalism. In today's times, journalism is a profession or business, it should have its values ​​and norms or 'normative theory', it should have professional responsibility.

The sad thing is that even in thirty years, Nepal's democratic governance system has not been able to make honest arrangements for the promotion of professional values ​​and norms of the mass media world. Meanwhile, there was no policy debate among political forces on the issue of the mass media system. However, complete unanimity was maintained on the issue of looting government coffers in the name of advertisements, facilities and awards or recruiting cadres in government media or involving cadres in the name of journalists' associations, federations or other organizations. The king's Panchayat-era mentality and expectations of rising above the world could not be fulfilled.

The polarization of the mass media is a situation that makes it easy for political players to organize themselves by placing a garland of journalists around the necks of the uneducated, poorly educated or unemployed for the sake of power.

It provides an opportunity to hijack the sacred power of journalism, the ‘discursive power’, i.e. the power generated by discussion, thereby creating a curtain to cover up their irregularities, policies, thoughts and actions that are against the public interest. This trend is also included in the models of mass media systems presented by Hallin and Mancini in 2004, almost five decades after the publication of the Four Principles of the Press.

The conclusions drawn initially based on the study of mass media systems in 18 countries have been continuously updated to this day. The first of the polarized pluralist, democratic commercial and liberal models they put forward is a situation that arises in the absence of reforms that should be carried out with the establishment of democracy.

Nepal's facts such as low newspaper circulation, powerful or politically oriented mass media, intense political parallelism, existence of government broadcasters, weak commercial mass media, basically using media as a political tool, and strong state intervention show the presence of polarized pluralism. In a country like ours with a short democratic history, pluralism is more of an opportunity for the media to express critical views and a strong presence of organized political groups and subgroups than a situation where it is possible.

When the idea of ​​starting a political party came up, K.I. Singh also knew this - a newspaper is needed along with the party. In 2013-14, he brought an educated person from Dehradun, Shivhar Singh went crazy and started - Samyukta Prayas Weekly. The awareness at that time that the media is just a tool of politics is so strong in all parties in Nepal that they want to trap Nepali journalism in the whirlpool of protectionism and serfdom.

Even today, Nepal's political players have not been able to grasp the reality that political dialogue can be meaningful and beneficial to themselves if the contemporary media is allowed to develop as a common and credible platform. Therefore, the dynamics of Nepal's political and mass media systems can be measured based on the comparative study of mass media systems conducted by Hallin and Mancini. The patterns used by the communication systems in different countries at different times, their trends and variations are related to the politics and systems of the time.

Therefore, the operating conditions of the mass media system and the media in any country affect the process of forming public opinion in that country. In addition, the nature and credibility of the mass media system also determine the quality of democracy. The interaction of the mass media system with the political and social spheres not only indicates the state of the media's influence, but also the level of democracy and citizen participation. And on the contrary, the rapid polarization blinds people so much that devotees lose the power to think about why the media is needed in a democratic system.

A politician expresses his anger by naming the commercial media of Nepal as ‘Twelve Brothers’, and devotees chant the same term like a mantra. Political players who prepare their own brigades to perform aarti when in power or not, say that they have been subjected to a ‘media trial’. The term ‘media trial’, which became more popular in the late twentieth century or early twenty-first century, refers to a problematic practice. Those who say that such a trial took place in the context of Nepal are its users.

Now the responsibility of journalists

In such an environment, prudent media persons who have assimilated journalism as a profession or business should emphasize more on ethical practice, legitimate arguments, and the worship and observance of truth. Fearlessness seems to be weakening in Nepali journalism. In this context, journalists in particular should intensify the discussion.

In Nepal, others run organizations in the name of journalists, and people outside the newsroom talk more about journalism. Now, those who are dedicated to the profession should take the lead in making the profession relevant, dignified, and empowered. The Hutchins Commission was not set up by the government. Time Incorporated, the publisher of Time magazine, bore the entire cost of this commission, which was formed in the course of finding a way to improve the credibility of the media.

Eighty years ago, Professor Hutchins gave a clear warning that a similar situation could arise in the United States. The commission was formed in the 1940s amid numerous challenges facing the American print media. At that time, newspapers were under intense criticism and a broad public consensus was emerging on the need for reform in the press world. The report published by the Hutchins Commission, or the Commission on Freedom of the Press, published less than two years after the end of World War II, “A Free and Responsible Press,” has absorbed that sentiment.

It mentions in the opening sentence of the report that ‘America’s press freedom is in danger’ and raises the question of what could be the reason for this. The commission concluded that such a situation occurs when the press freedom that should be used for the public is abused. Therefore, it is not just a constitution or law, but the responsible behavior of the mass media is equally important. In our context, even though constitutional rights have been established, communication and mass media policies and laws have yet to be updated in a participatory manner and based on expertise.

The easiest thing is to blame technology. However, today’s mass media carriers have not failed to understand that technology-related practices and relevant messages are the soul of journalism. Has the human aspiration for official, reliable or credible information and ideas been eroded due to the impact of technology or the changes brought about by technology in user behavior? Can society always continue to enjoy hysteria, anger and misleading propaganda? This is a matter for professional journalists to think about. 

In the past three decades, Nepali politics has ignored repeated warnings and missed the opportunity for infinite possibilities. Even after the 15-month eclipse of press freedom following the king's authoritarian misadventure on Magh 19, 2061, political parties did not pay attention to this direction. The mass media also failed to pay enough attention. The forces that led the movement in 2046 and 2062-63 have reached a defensive state today for the same reason. And, basically because of those political players, a clear and public-interest blueprint for the Nepali mass media system has yet to be prepared.