Nalaka Gunawardene speaks on media freedom and media professionalism in Sri Lanka at Germany’s Reporters without Borders (RSF, or Reporter ohne Grenzen) in Berlin, 17 Nov 2017
On a brief visit to Berlin, Germany, to speak at a media research and academic symposium, I was invited by Germany’s Reporters without Borders (RSF, or Reporter ohne Grenzen) to address a side event at their office that looked at media freedom status and media development needs of Sri Lanka.
It was a small gathering that involved some media rights activists, researchers and journalists in Germany who take an interest in media freedom and media development issues in Asia. I engaged in a conversation first with Anne Renzenbrink of RSF Germany (who covers Asia) and then with my audience.
I said the media freedoms have significantly improved since the change of government in Jan 2015 – journalists and activists are no longer living in fear of white vans and government goon squads when they criticise political leaders.
But the pre-2015 benchmarks were abysmally low and we should never be complacent with progress so far, as much more needs to be done. We need to institutionalise media freedoms AND media responsibilities. So our media reforms agenda is both wide ranging and urgent, I said (and provided some details).
I used my favourite metaphor: the media freedom glass in Sri Lanka is less than half full today, and we need to gradually fill it up. But never forget: there was no water, and not even a glass, before Jan 2015!
Sri Lanka has risen 24 points in the World Press Freedom Index that RSF compiles every year: 2016, we jumped up from 165th rank (in 2015, which reflected the previous year’s conditions) to 141st rank out of 180 countries assessed. The new ranking remained the same between 2016 and 2017. Sri Lanka is still marked as red on the world map of the Index, indicating ‘Difficult situation’. We still have a long way to go…
When asked how European partners can help, I said: please keep monitoring media freedom in Sri Lanka, provide international solidarity when needed, and support the journalists’ organisations and trade unions to advocate for both media rights and media professionalism.
I was also asked about slow progress in investigating past atrocities against journalists and media organisations; recent resumption of web censorship after a lull of two years; how journalists are benefitting from Sri Lanka’s new Right to Information law; the particular challenges faced by journalists in the North and East of Sri Lanka (former war areas); and the status of media regulation by state and self-regulation by the media industry.
I also touched on how the mainstream media’s monopoly over news gathering and analysis has been ended by social media becoming a place where individuals are sharing news, updates – as well as misinformation, thereby raising new challenges.
I gave candid and measured answers, all of which are on the record but too detailed to be captured here. My answers were consistent with what I have been saying in public forums (within and outside Sri Lanka), and publicly on Twitter and Facebook.
And, of course, I was speaking my personal views and not the views of any entity that I am working with.
Nalaka Gunawardene at RSF Germany office in Berlin, next to World Press Freedom Index 2017 map
Sri Lanka’s mainstream media – especially in the Sinhala language (and perhaps in Tamil too?) – lacks sensitivity and restraint when reporting and/or commenting on incidents of violence – covering suicide, homicide, rape and child abuse – as well as on topics like mental illness and HIV/AIDS.
This is my cumulative impression having closely watched different print and broadcast media outlets for over a quarter century. It is good that some younger professionals recognise the need to improve in this respect – to correct the ways of industry seniors who have set bad precedents for long.
I was thus happy to speak at a recent public forum on sensitive media reporting, organised by Sri Lanka Young Journalists Association and held in Colombo on 9 June 2015. In my remarks, I tried to understand why large sections of Lankan media so lacks sensitivity, respect for privacy and respect for societal diversity. This is a complex sociological situation that I cannot fully explain, but among the reasons I cited are: cultural orthodoxy, gender insensitivity, heightened competition among media groups for market share; and an overall lack of professionalism.
I sum up my remarks, and some discussion points, in this week’s Ravaya column (published on 28 June 2015).
Ravaya Chief Editor K W Janaranjana speaks at Public Forum
Edwin Ariyadasa photographed by Nalaka Gunawardene in 1986 during their first interview
Edwin Ariyadasa, who completed 91 years on 3 December 2013, is one of two grand old men of Lankan journalism still practising their craft (the other being D F Kariyakarawana, also 91).
The veteran journalist has been active in his profession for nearly all of Sri Lanka’s post-independence years. During that time, he has played a variety of complementary roles: feature writer, newspaper editor, columnist, radio and TV host, journalist trainer, author and translator among others. He continues to juggle many of these and has no retirement plans.
In October 2012, I filmed a wide ranging interview with Ariyadasa as he was heading to his 90th birthday. Having grown up reading his output in Lankan newspapers in Sinhala and English, and then having collaborated with him in various public media activities for much of my own media career, I was keen to capture his memories and reflections.
It took me over a year to get the long interview edited into three video segments, and also to have it transcribed, but it’s finally done. Groundviews.org has just published it:
Nalaka Gunawardene in conversation with Edwin Ariyadasa
As I note in my introduction:
In this interview, the nonagenarian looks back at journalism and broadcasting in Sri Lanka for over half a century. His reminiscences are significant for several reasons. He recalls a time, only a generation ago, when newspapers produced by highly committed editors and journalists commanded readers’ respect as a trusted source of public information and commentary. Having played a central role in pioneering mass media education and television broadcasting in Sri Lanka, he wonders what went wrong along the way to arrive at the banality and superficiality that dominates much of the Lankan media today despite advanced technologies for production and distribution.
In that sense, this is more than mere nostalgia of an individual or the simple bewilderment of an earlier generation. Introspection from a media guru like Ariyadasa can provide the impetus for much-needed reflection for the media industry which often hesitates to turn the spotlight upon itself.