Freedom of Expression – Page 367 – Pakistan Coalition on Media Safety

November 25, 2014January 26, 2015

Media in chains

By: Marvi Sirmed

In what appeared to be an extremely shocking piece to me, Neha Ansari, a former staffer of Daily Express Tribune, narrated how the modern censorship works in media. Her article appeared last week as a blog-post on South Asia section of the blogazine, Foreign Policy. Ms. Ansari revealed how the establishment (let me use this euphemism for you know who) had put pressure on different media houses and dictated the policy. The events in question were the sit-ins and the ‘container speeches’.

Not surprisingly though, her exposé went conveniently ignored by the entire media including those she had pointed to with their names. Except some voices here and there on social media, no one dared to even comment on it. Even lone voices from random journalists claimed “army didn’t do it”. We didn’t see a single tweet rebutting her claims from a “uniformed” twitter account that was once quick to refute the Prime Minister of this country. Surprised?

Anyone who calls the Pakistani media ‘free’, even after having a cursory view of how it behaved during the container crisis, needs to get their head examined. The vicious hounding of the democratic government was not the first in Pakistan’s history. Once upon a time, a “big” media group championed the cause of bringing down the government in collusion with the judiciary. Many among us were well aware of the stark conflict of interests there. Media owners were looking at saving taxes, but as they say, there are no free lunches under the light blue sky, so they had to oblige the judges who wanted positive media attention.

Leaving aside the bigwigs that own media houses as their side business to secure their main enterprises, the rest of the ‘working-class’ journalists have been largely disappointed on the choices made by their bosses. If you start counting the names of media houses that did not oblige the establishment over last many years, you would probably not go beyond naught. The tradition of controlling the media is an old one, dating back to the first few years of the last century when the Englishman tried every possible option to manipulate the indigenous and politically charged media of the time. By enacting appropriate laws they turned censorship onto law.

But then, that was imperialism at work. One was hoping it would change with the freedomour nation acquired in 1947.Things remained almost the same… under Mohammad AliBogra, Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (who invented the National Press Trust to control media), Zia ul Haq, throughout the decade of controlled democracy – and during Musharraf’s ‘enlightened moderation’ too. Contrary to the propaganda that Musharraf’s was an era of free media, he exercised ferocious control.

As opposed to the old tactics of closing down the newspapers (closure of Daily Kohistan as a case in point), under Musharraf, one saw a rather smart tactic of hounding individual journalists when they dissented and establishing a controllable tier of media industrialists.

It’s that very tier that is haunting us today. How difficult it would be for a sitting or retired colonel to call a media owner and dictate policy? How difficult would it be for the media industrialist to know how his refusal could affect his primary business? Why wouldn’t he ask his CEO to silently oblige or leave? Where is freedom?

After Ms. Ansari’s blogpost, I asked over a dozen senior journalists if they ever felt military’s pressure during the entire container saga? Almost all of them – the working journalists with credibility – had felt it. Many said on conditions of anonymity that they were witness to phone calls being made to CEOs etc., whereby policy was being dictated to them in favor of Imran Khan and Tahir ul Qadri and against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. When asked about the kind of coverage Khan and Qadri got, NusratJaveed, senior journalist and anchor on Aaj TV said that media in general, not specifically his network, provided more airtime to dharna connected activities than they really deserved in pure professional context.

Senior Journalist and anchor on Aaj TV, Syed Talat Hussain was more candid in sharing his disgust on the overall conduct of media during the crisis. TV coverage of PAT-PTI protest, in his view, was “unprecedented both in scope and favorable tilt to the point of becoming a mouthpiece. This is unprecedented in recent media history of the sub-continent”. When asked whether he, during this time, ever got a direct dictation from ISPR or any other institution within armed forces, he said he wasn’t told by anyone to do anything but “I certainly was kept out of the loop of all main transmissions practically shutting my voice out”.

Army, if it was, was not the only actor to dictate the policy. As per many senior colleagues in media, the ruling party, if not the government, also used their business connections as well as their unique position of advantage to lure a section of media into being pro-government. But, says Talat Hussain, “in terms of scale and volume of coverage Imran and Qadri had a dream run of projection”.

Mohammad Ziauddin, a senior editor who left Express Tribune during the crisis for reasons he would resist revealing, sounded very disappointed that the hard earned freedom of media had been lost unwittingly. Every media owner, Mr. Ziauddin said,with the exception of those having editorial experience, wants to be a Murdoch of Pakistan and idealizes Mir Shakil ur Rehman in achieving power and riches through the selling of ethics.

The mighty Jang group had been pandering to the line given by the military establishment since long, till it grew to levels beyond their control. It had to be cut to size. Gone are the days when laws were enacted or used to close down media houses. We now have blasphemy allegations, ambushing of problematic journalists, coercing cable operators into suspending channels, burning copies of newspapers and religious and political puppets to instigating public anger on media houses. Better still, a change-mongering, revolution seeing political leader is asked to deliver angry speeches against certain media channels.

How can we believe our Army chief, when he goes to western countries and gives sermons against terrorism? If dramas like these are not stopped and rent-an-anchor or rent-a-channel practice is not contained, how can we know you have changed Sir?

The writer is an Islamabad based freelance columnist. [email protected], @marvisirmed

The Nation

The post Media in chains appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 24, 2014January 26, 2015

CPNE resents Imran’s allegations

KARACHI: The Council of Pakistan Newspaper Editors (CPNE), while reiterating complete solidarity with the freedom of the media, expressed extreme annoyance over the ongoing campaign of criticising and levelling allegations against journalists and the media by Imran Khan, chief of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.

The CPNE vowed to resist, defend and counter the campaign with full strength. It condemned the direct and indirect pressure on journalists and the media. The CPNE announced this in its annual general meeting held recently. It was presided over by Mujeebur Rahman Shami.

A resolution was passed unanimously in the meeting. It mentioned that the media organisations and journalists were facing extreme pressure from state and non-state institutions, groups, different political parties, religious and non-religious extremists.

It mentioned that the government was not taking any action against these elements and appears to have failed in providing protection to journalists and media organisations. It is stated in the resolution that the struggle for media freedom is exemplary. The journalists and media bodies faced extreme physical and mental torture and monetary losses, while a number of journalists have even sacrificed their lives.

In spite of all these circumstances, certain political parties have started extreme and baseless criticism without any discrimination against journalists and the media, particularly Imran Khan, chief of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, is making hurtful criticism. The media and journalists have taken serious notice of this campaign.

The resolution said the CPNE deplores this unfair attitude of the PTI chief with all the media groups and journalists of levelling allegations. This attitude was an open assault on the freedom of media and will also harm the democratic values in the country.

The meeting stressed on Imran Khan to come forward with proof if he had any against any media group or journalist. The CPNE, being the representative body of editors of newspapers, is ready to investigate and play an effective role in this regard.

It has been stated in the resolution that the CPNE believes in free journalistic practices and discourages an irresponsible and unprofessional attitude. In the same manner, the CPNE reserves the right to resist and give an effective response to the assaults on freedom of media from any political or non-political body or any religious group.

The News

The post CPNE resents Imran’s allegations appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 22, 2014January 26, 2015

An Insider Account of Pakistani Censorship

Imran Khan, Tahir ul Qadri, and the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] are our best friends,” our weekly editorial meeting at Pakistan’s Express Tribune was (jokingly) told on Aug. 13, 2014, a day before the two political leaders began their separate long marches from Lahore to Islamabad, and plunged the country into crisis. “We know it’s not easy, but that’s the way it is — at least for now. I promise to make things better soon,” said the editor, who had called the meeting to inform us about the media group’s editorial policy during the sit-ins and protests that would eventually, momentarily paralyze the Pakistani government.

The senior editorial staff, myself included, reluctantly agreed to the orders, which came from the CEO, because our jobs were on the line. Media groups in Pakistan are family-owned and make all decisions unilaterally — regardless of whether they concern marketing and finance or editorial content and policy — advancing their personal agendas through the influential mainstream outlets at their disposal. A majority of the CEOs and media house owners are businessmen, with no background (or interest) in the ethics of journalism. The owners and publishers make it very clear to their newsrooms and staff — including the editor — that any tilt or gloss they proscribe is non-negotiable. As a result, serious concerns persist about violence against and the intimidation of members of the media. In fact, Pakistan ranks 158 out of 180 countries in the 2014 World Press Freedom Index.

Yet there is also a more elusive problem within the country’s press landscape: the collusion of Pakistan’s powerful military and the nation’s media outlets. I experienced this first-hand while I worked as a journalist at the Express Tribune during the recent protests led by Khan, the populist cricketer-turned-politician, and Qadri, a Pakistani-Canadian cleric and soapbox orator.

During this time, the owners of Pakistani media powerhouses — namely ARY News, the Express Media Group, and Dunya News — received instructions from the military establishment to support the “dissenting” leaders and their sit-ins. The military was using the media to add muscle and might to the anti-government movement in an attempt to cut Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif down to size.

The media obliged.

At the Express Media Group, anything related to Khan and Qadri were inexorably the lead stories on the front page or the hourly news bulletin. I witnessed polls showing support for Sharif being censored, while news stories on the misconduct of the protesters, along with any evidence that support among the protestors for Khan and Qadri was dwindling, were axed. While the BBC was publishing stories about how Qadri’s protesters were allegedly being paid and Dawn, the leading English-language Pakistani newspaper — and the Express Tribune’s main competitor — was writing powerful editorials about the military’s role in the political crisis, we were making sure nothing negative about them went to print.

Day after day, my national editor told me about how he received frantic telephone calls late in the evening about what the lead story should be for the next day and what angle the article should take. First, we were told to focus on Khan. “Take this as Imran’s top quote,” “This should be in the headline,” “Take a bigger picture of him” were the specific directives given by the CEO. Shortly after, the news group’s owner was agitated that the newspaper had not been focusing enough on Qadri. We later found out that the military establishment was supporting the two leaders equally and the media was expected to do the same.

In their professional capacities, the editor and desk editors tried to put up a fight: they allowed some columns against the protests slip through; they did not extend the restrictions to publish against Khan and Qadri to the Web version of the newspaper; and they encouraged reporters to focus on the paper’s strengths, such as investigative and research-based reports. However, it was difficult for the staff to keep its spirits high with the CEO’s interference and his readiness to abide by the establishment’s instructions. To be sure, the dictates were never given to the senior editorial staff, of which I was a part, directly. They were instead relayed to the editor or the national editor (who heads the main National Desk) via the CEO and then forwarded to us.

People often speculate about the media-military collusion in Pakistan, but in the instance of the current political standoff in the federal capital, as well as the Geo News controversy — where the establishment was seen resorting to extreme methods, such as forcing cable operators to suspend Geo’s transmission and impelling competing media houses to publish news stories against Geo, to curtail the broadcast of the largest and most-watched television channel for accusing then-ISI chief Zaheer-ul-Islam of being behind the gun attack on Hamid Mir, its most-popular anchor — the media and the military worked hand-in-hand.

In most cases, it is common knowledge that the heavyweight broadcast anchors have strong ties to members of the military establishment, and they personally take direct instructions that are then conveyed to the owners of their respective media groups. This bias is often reflected in their coverage.

The anchors not only indulge in inaccurate reporting, but also shape political discourse against the democratically elected government and even the efficacy of democracy itself. Former Pakistani government officials have corroborated this by narrating their experience. One senior official told me: “Television anchors receive funds from the military establishment, if not the civilian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Today, all the Pakistani intelligence agencies and the military have media departments that ostensibly only disseminate background information and press briefings, but are actually guiding and managing discourses and the national narrative.”

And this narrative is pro-army. Consider one example in particular.

On Aug. 31, when Khan’s and Qadri’s protesters had stormed the Parliament’s gates, Mubasher Lucman, a television anchor for ARY News — now the most-watched TV channel in Pakistan after Geo’s transmission was illegally suspended — saluted the army during a live broadcast and invited the military to take over “and save the protesters and the country.” Earlier on Aug. 25, he welcomed the “sound of boots” (a reference to the military), as he had no sympathy for corrupt politicians who looted the country.

As if this was not enough, Lucman and his fellow anchors at ARY, some of whom are known to have strong ties to the army and the ISI, also made unverified claims on live television that seven protesters had been killed by riot police in the ensuing clash. (It was reported by other news outlets that three people had died, one by accident.) Moreover, when Javed Hashmi, the estranged president of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) party, came out in public on Sep. 1 to reveal how Khan was banking on the military and the judiciary to end Sharif’s government, Lucman slammed Hashmi, while his fellow anchor, Fawad Chaudhry, insisted that Hashmi had been “planted in [the] PTI” by the prime minister’s closest aides.

Hashmi, who is known for his principled politics and who has been tortured and imprisoned by the military over the years, made the claims about Khan in a press conference where he revealed that: “Imran Khan said we cannot move forward without the army…He told us that he has settled all the matters; there will be elections in September.”

Soon after this, we at the Express Tribune were instructed by the military to highlight statements released by the army’s Inter-Services Public Relations office about how it was not a party to the crisis. When the military was on the defensive, issuing rebuttals to Hashmi’s “revelations,” we saw the instructions lessen and the powerful institution backing off. Yet media discourse throughout Pakistan’s history has been influenced by the military, the most powerful institution in the country, or, in a few cases, has been strong-armed and intimidated by civilian heads of state until they were ousted by the military. There is a structural bias against democratic institutions and elected officials in Pakistan, and such a discourse has the not-unintentional effect of making the military seem like a better alternative, thereby reinforcing the notion that democracy does not work.

Media owners seem to “choose” the military establishment as it has been the most potent force and the only constant in Pakistan’s polity. The institutional context of the country’s power structure and patronage politics compels organizations and individuals to be a part of the system, which begins and ends with the military and its premier intelligence agency, the ISI. Abiding by the system without asking questions is rewarded. But even in a country with a deeply problematic history, the intensity of the recent interference is shocking.

Before the current political standoff, the establishment was dictating headlines and editorial policies during Sharif’s trip to India for the inauguration of his counterpart, Narendra Modi, on May 26. While working at the Express Tribune, I was instructed to change the lead story on the Sharif-Modi meeting to give it a negative tint, concentrating on how the Indian prime minister was not welcoming as he focused on security issues. The phrase “show-cause” had to be inserted in the headline, which was a direct order from the CEO, who was getting instructions from the military.

To be sure, the Express Media Group and its staff have been attacked several times during the past year for raising sensitive issues. And here too it tried to balance the military-sponsored anti-government slant by giving room to other opinions in the form of editorials and separate stories. But it also had to survive in a system where the military dominates every aspect of public life. It is a tough choice as the military refuses to protect the country’s journalists, even as the media continues to safeguard the military’s image and ostensible apolitical status.

Neha Ansari worked as a senior sub-editor and shift-in-charge at the Express Tribune’s national desk in Karachi, Pakistan from 2013 to 2014. She is now a visiting researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C.

Foreign Policy

The post An Insider Account of Pakistani Censorship appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 22, 2014January 26, 2015

Published Photographs Lead to Death Threats in Pakistan

With the rise of extremist movements around the world, journalists have become prime targets in a war of communication both in the field and back at home, once their images have been published, as photographer Alixandra Fazzina learned this week.

After five years of working in Pakistan documenting the intimate daily lives of women and children, the London-based NOOR photographer has now become the target of death threats after her work was published in a national British newspaper. “This weekend, some of these stories were published for the first time in The Guardian magazine and online. I received a lot of hate mail and I’ve seen a lot of people erode my credibility on social media. They were intent on trying to destroy me.”

Fazzina was due to travel to Pakistan on Nov. 20, but she has since received warnings from diplomatic sources about “a credible and direct threat against my life,” she says. “I’ve taken risks in Pakistan, but they were very weighted up risks,” she says. “I don’t want to kill myself for a story.” Now, she feels, fear has caught up to her in London.

Fazzina started her career as a frontline photographer covering under reported conflicts in Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Northern Uganda. “Over the years, my work has changed” she says, “It’s gone on instead to look at the consequences and fallout of wars.”

In 2008, after working on a long-term project in Somalia, she moved to Pakistan. “When I arrived, the effects of extremism were really starting to hit home,” she says. “One of the first things I did was to cover what was essentially Pakistan’s first frontline in the tribal areas. It was the first time that Pakistan’s military had engaged and began an operation against the Taliban there.”

Pakistan has been facing conflicts on multiple fronts – from separatist movements in Balochistan to homegrown Pakistani Taliban factions spreading violence across the country and all the way to Karachi – in June, 28 people were killed in a coordinated attack at Jinnah International Airport in the country’s economic capital.

Fazzina’s ambition was to document the consequences of these conflicts. “What I want to get across is how much civilians suffer and to try and tell their stories, to show what the real effects of war are away from the frontlines,” she says. “Millions of people in Pakistan are still suffering now, and they’re not getting any assistance.”

In her photographs, Fazzina has tried to avoid pointing the finger at one particular culprit, instead putting the blame on all participants. “I’ve covered victims of collateral damage, victims of airstrikes, victims of drone strikes. I covered people suffering from the military, from foreign intervention in region and also from the Taliban. I’ve tried to cover victims of war from all sides because I believe that in any theater of war, all players are responsible.”

After diplomatic sources in Islamabad warned her of the threat on her life from local extremist groups, Fazzina has been forced to cancel a planned trip to Pakistan where she was to report on maternal health. “I take this threat very seriously. There is a strong possibility if I return I will be killed simply for having documented what are realities on the ground” she says. “But, I won’t be silenced by this threat.”

Fazzina’s situation isn’t unique, she explains, as Pakistani journalists and photographers constantly risk their lives to document their country. “It’s extremely difficult for journalists to report without facing some kind of a risk – be it threats, harassment, or even expulsion from the country by the state,” says Mustafa Qadri, a researcher at Amnesty International. “We’ve certainly seen this year a number of high-profile attacks on journalists, which seems to be in response to their work being critical of the government, Taliban, or political parties. What brings all of these cases together is the fact that there’s no justice, there’s no accountability. That basically sends a signal that if you’re not happy with what journalists are reporting, you can literally get away with murder.”

Since 2008, Amnesty International has documented 36 cases of journalists who were killed in response to their work, with many more cases of harassment remaining undocumented. The Committee to Protect Journalists has been trying to fight this problem, says Bob Dietz, the Asian program coordinator at the Committee to Protect Journalists. “Everyone feels that they have total impunity to direct a threat towards a journalist. Foreign journalists aren’t the largest targets for these things; it’s really the local Pakistani journalists who bear the brunt of it. A Pakistani journalist awakes in the morning, opens his phone and check for messages and there might well be a string of threats in there. It’s a way of life. It’s a reality that people are dealing with.”

“We’ve tried to combat it,” Dietz adds. “[We’ve asked] journalists not to hide these threats, and instead to bring them out in public as a way to disarm them.” Yet, the CPJ and Amnesty International don’t expect such menaces to subside, including those against Fazzina. “We really welcome the work that she did,” says Qadri. “We feel that not enough is done to expose the condition of women and girls in Pakistan; what ordinary life is for them. It’s really sad that in trying to do that, she’s now facing these kinds of threats.”

For the 40-year-old photographer, these threats are indicative of a massive shift in war reporting. “The landscape has really changed from fundamentalist groups wanting to tell their stories to journalists becoming actual targets of these groups,” says Fazzina. “In some way, the voices that can speak out against human rights abuses are slowly being silenced. And people would rather shoot the messenger than acknowledged the actual state of [affairs].”

Alixandra Fazzina is a London-based photographer represented by NOOR.

Olivier Laurent is the editor of TIME LightBox. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram @olivierclaurent

Source: TIME

The post Published Photographs Lead to Death Threats in Pakistan appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 21, 2014January 26, 2015

Govt tried to buy journalists but they refused: Imran

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan has said journalists are not for sale and media workers have played an important role in restoration of democracy and sustainability in the country.

Talking to a delegation of Pakistan Federation of Union of Journalists (PFUJ) at his residence in Bani Gala, he said the government tried to offer hefty amounts to journalists but the journalists turned down the offer and expressed impartiality.

He said that media is the fourth pillar of the state. He appreciated role of PFUJ in the struggle for sustainability of democracy in the country. PFUJ President Afzal Butt led the delegation comprising Syed Bukhar Shah, National Press Club Secretary Tariq Chaudhry, PFUJ members Ryaz Khan, Qurban Satti, RIUJ General Secreatry Bilal Dar and others.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Shafqat Mehmood, Dr Sheeren Mazari and others accompanied Imran during the talks. Afzal Butt made it clear to PTI central leadership that allegations like journalists are salable commodity in public gatherings hurt journalists and are baseless. He said if the PTI has proof, it should come up in public and names of salable journalists should be exposed.

The News

The post Govt tried to buy journalists but they refused: Imran appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 20, 2014January 26, 2015

Journalists boycott Qureshi’s talks over Imran’s charges

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Vice Chairman and ex-foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Wednesday had to face an awkward situation, when the media persons resorted to a token boycott of his news briefing over party Chairman Imran Khan’s allegations that the government had paid billions to buy journalists, anchorpersons and media houses.

In a bid to pacify the journalists, the PTI vice-chairman promised to talk to his party chairman within 24 hours.PFUJ President Afzal Butt on Tuesday called on Imran to either reveal the names of the beneficiaries (journalists) or protest camps would be set up at press clubs across Pakistan and in front of the container of Imran Khan at the Parade Ground.The journalist fraternity demanded of the PTI chairman to name those journalists who had received funds from the government.

The News

The post Journalists boycott Qureshi’s talks over Imran’s charges appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).

November 20, 2014January 26, 2015

Special fund for families of martyred journalists sought

ISLAMABAD: Participants of a seminar on Wednesday demanded of the federal and provincial governments to arrest culprits involved in killing of 112 journalists across the country and establish special fund to provide financial assistance to the families of all of them who sacrificed their lives in pursuance of their professional duties.

The seminar was held by Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ) in coordination with Rawalpindi Islamabad Union of Journalists (RIUJ) and National Press Club (NPC) to mark International Journalists Martyrs Day.

In all, 112 journalists have so far been killed in Pakistan out of which 72 lost lives in targeted killings, 22 were killed in suicide attacks, 14 got killed after their kidnapping, bodies of two journalists were found in the open and throats of two journalists were slit by murderers.

Speaking on the occasion, Minister for Religious Affairs Sardar Muhammad Yousaf said he would raise the issue of security of the journalists in the cabinet meeting because it is responsibility of the government to protect life and property of all the citizens of Pakistan.

“Journalists always rendered sacrifices for the cause of freedom of expression and the government and people of Pakistan acknowledge their role in protecting national interests,” he said.Deputy Speaker National Assembly Murtaza Javed Abbasi said many journalists have so far sacrificed their lives in ongoing war against terrorism and the nation would always remember their role in protecting and promoting national interests.

“Those who are involved in killing of journalists want to push Pakistan into the state of chaos and turmoil and they are enemies of this country. I would raise the issue of killing of journalists in the National Assembly and also approach the government to establish funds for families of the martyred journalists,” he said.

The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Senator Farhatullah Babar said he would point out the issue of non-issuance of funds announced by former prime minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani to disabled journalists in the upcoming meeting of the standing committee.

He said: “A bill would be drafted in coordination with the PFUJ that would be presented in the Parliament to ensure security and protection of the journalists and their families.”

Secretary Information of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) Hafiz Hussain Ahmad said his party would coordinate with other political parties in the Parliament to ensure that the respective governments take serious steps to arrest those involved in killing of the journalists.

The PFUJ president Afzal Butt said it is really unfortunate that the federal and provincial governments have so far done nothing to arrest people involved in killing of the journalists that would ultimately encourage other segments who want to mute the voice of media.

The NPC president Shaharyar Khan said the families of martyred journalists are facing financial constraints but the government is yet to take any step to provide them any kind of relief.

“The government neither arrested killers nor provided relief to the families of the martyred journalists that shows its insensitivity towards the profession that is considered fourth pillar of the state,” he said.

The RIUJ secretary general Bilal Dar said journalists would continue to raise the voice of the people and put in their best efforts to help protect rights of the downtrodden segments of the society.

Social activist Julius Salik said media acts like eyes and ears of the society and if it comes under attack then the society may become blind and deaf so it is necessary to take immediate measures to provide security to the journalists and media houses.

Those who also spoke on the occasion included representative of Freedom Network Adnan Rehmat, senior journalist Iqbal Khattak and family members of the martyred journalists.

The News

The post Special fund for families of martyred journalists sought appeared first on Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF).