Nepal Monitor :: The National Online Journal

Dixit answers questions by Nepal Monitor, in light of the recent attacks by Maoist unionists on Himalmedia and other news outlets in Nepal. The following is the text of the electronic interview:

Photo courtesy of NepalVista.

In a sense, it does give us a sense of having seen it all before. The king sent his army into the newsrooms to directly censor content in 2005. But that civilised in comparison to sending goons to beat up journalists. The big difference is that the king was in charge during the post-coup dictatorship, so there was no pretense about anyone trying to be friendly about press freedom. Now, we have a ruling party that was elected to government, a party that used democracy and the free press to come to power is attacking the very institutions that propelled them into government. This is much more insidious: it means we have to be more careful about democratically-elected totalitarians than dictators. In fact, past dictators were probably more honest about their intentions.

You have described the attacks on media as politically-motivated and systematic. How would you characterize the attack on your publication house? What is the extent of danger faced by media owners and journalists at the moment?

It does seem like a deliberate and systematic when media gets attacked across the country, we just happened to be the latest, but in the past two years Kantipur, The Himalayan Times, Nepal Samacharpatra all have been through it. The modus operandi is the same, and the intention is the same: to control or influence media content through political pressure. But here in Kathmandu we are sheltered by our profile, in the districts journalists and reporters are much more vulnerable. Many reporters have to self-censor to survive. It is now much more dangerous to be a journalist in Nepal than during the war.

How would you describe the internal working conditions, professional benefits and rights of journalists and other staff members in your organization and in general in Nepal's media industry? Have the publications houses done enough to address the grievances of labor unions?

Like in all sectors of the economy, there are problems. But the publishers have all said they are willing to abide by all relevant laws of the country. So let's have no illusions about it: labour issues in most cases have been only an excuse to control the press. If there are genuine grievances, there are legal and accepted ways to go about it. Disrupting the media and beating up journalists is an attack on the people's right to know, plain and simple.

Professional solidarity among journalists for press freedom now seems to be growing strong. But if the past is any indication, don't you think that journalists' alliances in Nepal are fleeting at the least and there is a need for a permanent institutional approach to press freedom, on a professional level, not in terms of political factionalism?

I think the Alliance for Press Freedom, the Federation of Nepalese Journalists, Media Society and the Editors' Alliance is very concerned about the threats to press freedom. They know that without an independent media we may as well all close shop. And because the attacks have been so systematic, we have to suspect that is the unspoken intention of the party leading the government.

How have political poralizations within the media themselves contributed to the quality of press freedom in Nepal and the professional freedom of journalists? Now we have revolutionary journalists' associations as we had royalist journalists' associations in the past.

I know, it's tragic journalists form associations that are defined by their political preference. They should know it hurts their credibility, and credibility is our most precious possession. But I think the Nepali media has made huge strides in professionalism in the past 15 years, it is much less biased, it upholds press freedom by its maximum application. And we have decentralised communications through FM radio like no other country in the region. We are far ahead of South Asian countries in making media being the fourth pillar of democracy. Which is why it is so shameful that the present attacks are taking place.

Do you approve of political activism by journalists? How do you assess your own publications' role in that? Weren't you part of the 'sahakarya' with political parties during the Janaandolan of 2006.

Then, as now, we were fighting for media freedom. In that sense the struggle for press freedom is a fight for our very survival, it has to be a fight to the finish. On issues like press freedom and democracy, we can't be fence sitters, you have to take the side of the truth. It is the kind of activism that journalists should be proud of. But even at that time, we didn't blank out the royalist point of view, just as now we publish the Maoist side of issues. After all, we are just the medium, our role in a democracy is to foster public debate so that the public can make informed choice.

Despite the seemingly worsening security environment (including that of the press), Nepal is about to see some major investment in the sector. There are reports that at least four large daily newspapers will be launched in Kathmandu shortly. How do you see the prospects for Nepal's media industry and press freedom?

More the merrier. My only worry is that economic stagnation means that the advertising pie isn't growing so everyone has to survive on a shrinking slice of the ad market.

The transition in Nepal once again seems messy. How has the country's media, under so many stresses, contributed to the peace process?

You have to take a perspective on things. We all knew it would be messy. After all this is a huge transition we have just been through. It will take time to sort itself out. The media has to be much more solution oriented and less obsessed with the political quarrels of the day.

Any comments on online media? How have they helped in the process?

Part of the problem has been that the media fans the flames of discord by focusing on the minor points of disagreement and not enough on the broader consensus. This spreads cynicism and a sense of hopelessness in the public. I don't mean the media should be only goody goody, but there has to be a certain balance. The competition among radio, TV and print media has made this worse as reporters go for the most sensational headlines.

Relevant link: Nepali Times.

###