Lotus no.72 (Independent Media)

[Lotus]

LOTUS no.72 - Political and Social Commentary

Wednesday 2nd of April, 2003

IBA AND THE INDEPENDENT PRESS…HOW INDEPENDENT IS INDEPENDENT?

The recent statement in the National Assembly by the Prime Minister with regard to a tightening of libel controls for private radio stations, followed by a declaration of the head of the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) of a 24 hour watch on radio programmes, is of interest not so much because both personalities (lawyers to boot) seem to disregard the fact that the ultimate authority to decide what is defamatory or not is the judiciary, but rather because it opens to debate the increasing abuse of the word "independent" in the naming of our institutions and to describe our non-state run media.

In what respect is the IBA independent? The government appoints all of its members, including a few former politicians. What checks and balances are there to ensure it acts "independently"? A recent example of possible abuse is the way that the proposal of a cable TV company was processed: were any other possible competitors invited to submit plans?

In what way would the award of a SINGLE private TV station, obtained by withdrawing one channel from the MBC, be in the interest of the population? Where is the competition? How do you prevent economic power from wiping out social considerations?

The local press tend to get very annoyed if anyone ever casts doubts on their "independence". Yet all newspapers in Mauritius are private-owned. All are either politically inclined, or run by major corporations. We have free press and radio in this country; the word "independent", however, is very subjective.

In most parts of the world, moguls, having very definite political and economic agendas, run private media empires encompassing TV, radio and the press. Mauritius will be no exception.

The recent scandals have been excellent examples as to the "independence" of the press and the radio stations. It is common practice for the press abroad to declare any substantive interest with stories they cover (eg Time and Newsweek, CNN). In Mauritius, however, no mention is made of the implicit links between people in the news and the papers' owners, directors, publishers or shareholders (unless, of course, the matter is brought to public attention by a rival publication). Similarly, the coverage by the radio stations has become wildly erratic, depending once again on economic factors and political patronage.

Independent, independence…two words being used lightly. If abused, they will have no meaning at all.

Sanjit Teelock

IMPORTANT: Due to a mishap, I have lost the additions to the mailing list made between June and December, 2002. If you sent me an email to be added or removed from the list, please resend so that I may update my records.

Past issues of this newsletter can be found on:

(1) http://groups.google.com/groups?q=al...=Google+Search
(2) http://www.ile-maurice.com/forum.old/forum.cgi
(3) http://www.servihoo.com/ubbthreads/p...Board=politics
(4) alt.mauritius (USENET)

DISCLAIMER: The ideas expressed in this newsletter are those of the
author, solely. In view of the author being an executive member of the
Mauritius Labour Party, the comments included in this newsletter may
sometimes be viewed as subjective rather than objective. You are
welcome to respond by email or by posting on a forum. Your criticism
will be appreciated.

Those receiving this newsletter who wish to be removed from the email
mailing list are requested to send a blank email to mtd@bow.intnet.mu
with REMOVE LOTUS in the subject line. My apologies in advance if any
inconvenience was caused.

Those reading this newsletter on a forum who wish to be added to the
email mailing list are requested to send a blank email to
mtd@bow.intnet.mu with SUBSCRIBE LOTUS in the subject line.