First things first: apologies to all for the disappearing act. (For those who actually noticed, a silent note of appreciation.) Had been away for a rather long stretch of time and while I was able to follow developments back home in an irregular fashion, simply did not have the time or access to all the information to put a post up (the perils of work work). And much has happened in the media while I have been away, which I hope to get round to in a one-by-one fashion. In particular, there are some interesting developments brewing on the electronic media front.
However, I first want to take up the issue which apparently threatens the very survival of humanity itself. Yes, I am referring to the shut down of Geo's sports channel Geo Super and it's music and entertainment channel Aag. To hear Geo talk about it, it is nothing less than the rule of tyranny, the deprivation of Pakistanis of all that is good and worth living for, and the wiping out from people's lives of all information, healthy physical activity and freedom of expression. They now have a 'count-up' on Geo News, ala the 2007 'Emergency', of the exact number of days, hours, minutes and seconds that Pakistanis have been flung into darkness, and even have begun a campaign to get the citizens of Pakistan to grant them a "public license" to resume broadcast (whatever that may be). Geo Super and Aag logos with a cross across them are now regular fixtures on their other two channels (Geo News and Geo Entertainment) and a sidebar regularly updates with the latest maulvi, sportsman, politician, actor, singer or other celebrity to condemn the snatching away of the people's rights.
But before this came to pass the Jang Group (which owns Geo) also used its newspapers - the widely read Jang and the not-so-widely-read The News - to try and browbeat the authorities by running regular front-page stories about the malafide intentions of the government and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA). On the day - April 7 - that Dawn's lead story was about a US Congressional report severely critical of Pakistan and the Express Tribune's and Pakistan Today's lead stories were about the removal from his ministership of Sindh Home Minister Zulfiqar Mirza (the PPP apparently giving in to its ally the MQM's demands), Jang and The News' main leads were about the government having shut Geo Super down. So much for unbiased handling of news priorities. This was, of course, in addition to the wall-to-wall coverage that Geo News had begun to provide on the 'event' from a day before, with the news taking pride of place as the top news headline.
Messages of condemnation have come pouring in from as far afield as Reporters Without Borders and as close to home as the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists - which bizarrely dubbed the issue one of "human rights" - even as the Jang Group has tried to paint the issue as one of governmental victimization. To make matters worse, PEMRA has until yesterday (when it finally placed ads in some papers) been unable to present a clear defence of its actions or explain the exact realities from its point of view.
There is so much rhetorical chaff involved from both sides that it is important to separate out the facts of the case, which I will attempt to do here.
Let us first examine the claims of Geo itself. The Jang Group claims (if one goes by the news stories on its news channel and print publications) that Geo Super and Aag have been shut down because:
1) It was promoting sports and healthy entertainment in Pakistan
2) It was doing so selflessly with no thought to losses incurred
3) The government wants to hit the Jang Group financially because of its relentless criticism of the government
In addition, the Jang Group claims:
4) Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel
5) Aag was shut down as an act of further vengeance on the part of the government
6) Pakistani's have been deprived of sports, sports news and healthy entertainment because of these shut-downs
Let us first look at the latter claims (4-6).
With respect to 4):
The claim that Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel is technically patently false. It is registered in Dubai and is as Pakistani under that criteria as e.g. Ten Sports or Star Sports or Star ESPN, all of which broadcast also to Pakistan under legally obtained "landing rights" or permission to distribute. In fact, it is because Geo Super is registered as a foreign channel that it obtained local landing rights for distribution within Pakistan when it began broadcasting. The reason it is registered in Dubai could well be in order to prevent Pakistani authorities from having a look at its revenues and to avoid tax/ license fee obligations here, though there is another reason which I will just come to. Yes, it does employ more Pakistanis than the other channels and has covered Pakistani domestic sports more than the other sports channels but nothing more than that. It has no local license.
Furthermore, under PEMRA's current rules to prevent monopolies (Clause 13, PEMRA Rules 2009), no corporate entity can hold more than four channel licenses. The Jang Group already has four channel licenses - for Geo News, Geo Entertainment, Aag and Geo English (which was never launched). Unless those rules are changed, the Jang Group must give up one of their licenses to apply for one for Geo Super, which it apparently seems unwilling to do. Also under PEMRA rules, any local licensee for a satellite channel must declare its revenues and give a percentage of them to PEMRA as annual license fees. In the case of a sports channel such as Geo Super the annual fee would come to Rs. 700,000/- + 7.5% of the annual gross advertisement revenue as per audited accounts. (See Schedule A, Table-1). (As an aside, let me just also point out that from my understanding, PEMRA has no system in place to verify if the revenue claims of any channel are actually correct or not, or to challenge an audit. It simply takes the channel's word on this, which given the way most businesses operate in Pakistan and advertising receipts and expenses are juggled, almost surely means that revenues are under-reported in all cases.)
Incidentally, Geo Super had been in default of even the landing rights fees (Rs. 300,000 + 5% of gross advertising revenues as per audited accounts) for the past four years, a matter which may have been sorted out after the intervention of the courts prior to the ICC Cricket World Cup (CWC), when Geo asked the courts to stop PEMRA from taking it off air during the CWC even though its 5-year license was expiring. I will deal with this further on in this post.
With respect to 5):
According to PEMRA, Aag was ordered shut down because after the stoppage of Geo Super broadcasts (we will come to this too), the Jang Group began to show the Indian Premier League cricket fixtures on Aag, which was a violation of its licensing terms. Aag TV has a license for entertainment programming, not sports. Under the licensing rules, no channel can switch its programming genre without a fresh application for a new license. The Jang Group had also violated this provision during the CWC by showing cricket matches on Aag, for which it had already been issued show-cause notices. However, partly out of deference to the Supreme Court's orders allowing the CWC to proceed without hindrance and partly out of the fear of a public backlash, PEMRA had not taken any drastic action in the matter then. In effect, however, Aag had violated the PEMRA Ordinance of 2002.
With respect to 6):
This claim is also demonstrably false since neither has sports news been affected on news channels, nor has sporting or entertainment activity come to a halt because of a sports channel shutting down and Aag being taken off air. In addition, there are still other sports channels and entertainment and music channels being broadcast.
Now let's come to the Jang Group's claims 1)-3) about why Geo Super has shut down. First of all, no sane individual would be willing to accept claim 1), that the government's reasons for stopping Geo Super were because of its antipathy for either sports or entertainment activities. That the Jang Group would even make such a claim says more about its idea of the intelligence and gullibility of its viewers / readers than anything else.
As for claim 2), no one who has endured the infuriating barrage of advertising on Geo Super during a cricket match (a minimum of three ads between each over, more during fall of wickets) could possibly ever believe that the Jang Group's motivations for running a sports channel were selfless. Indeed, nobody could ever believe that any commercial broadcaster would be in the business to only serve viewers interests and not to make money. Let's not be absurd. Yes, Geo Super would not have made the killing it makes broadcasting cricket in other sports, but its revenues from cricket broadcasts (which form the majority of its programming in any case) easily outweigh the costs of non-cricket broadcasts. Despite the hefty price of obtaining exclusive rights for the CWC for example, Geo Super was in the game because it made money not because it lost money. Keep in mind also that the way the Jang Group (and other media houses with multiple channels and publications) marketing operates, advertisers often are lured with bundled packages of advertising across all their channels and publications, which also subsidizes programming with lesser viewership. If the Jang Group really wants to insist on its loss-making claims, perhaps it should be asked to open its Dubai-based account books for public scrutiny. Somehow I don't think this will ever come to pass.
We can thus safely dismiss the Jang Group's claims 1), 2), 4), 5) and 6) as being patently false. The only claim that may have merit is claim 3), i.e. that PEMRA's actions constitute an attempt by the government to hit the Jang Group financially for its hard line against the government. In fact, this is almost surely true. But before we come to this, one final critical point needs to be cleared up:
Has the government through PEMRA actually shut Geo Super down?
Almost everyone would have seen this image where Geo Super used to be. Does this mean PEMRA has pulled Geo Super off air? That's what the Jang Group would have you believe. But think about something: if the channel were actually blocked, why would you be able to see this image? Remember when Geo and other news channels were pulled off air during the 2007 'Emergency'? The screens actually went blank. In fact, what this constant image indicates is that Geo Super is still broadcasting and being distributed on cable and satellite dishes. It is just that the channel itself is not running any programming.
Now let me share with you what has actually happened, which Geo will never tell you and which PEMRA is too idiotic to explain properly. Basically, in contravention of its status as a foreign channel with landing rights in Pakistan, Geo Super had been secretively uplinking from Pakistan. Under the law, Geo Super could only regularly uplink to satellite from abroad (Dubai or wherever it chose). When this uplink facility violation was discovered, PEMRA basically shut that operation down. This does not mean that Geo Super cannot broadcast its programmes by uplinking from abroad, as it was supposed to be doing in the first place. PEMRA has pointed out in its ad yesterday that Geo Super still has landing rights and is free to distribute its programmes via cable. In effect, therefore it is Geo Super that has shut itself off.
This is also why Geo Super had scrambled to apply for a "temporary uplinking license" from PEMRA on April 4, a facility that is allowed under the rules for specific events such as a major sporting competition taking place within the country. PEMRA, in perfectly legally defensible fashion, asked Geo Super to specify the event it wanted to cover. Since Geo Super could not name any, PEMRA was within its rights to refuse, which they apparently have still not technically done. The Jang Group's claims of unfair victimization, at least on the basis of this alleged refusal, are merely attempts at a smokescreen.
It is also important to recall exactly what happened during the court case that the Jang Group brought against PEMRA before the CWC since Geo has claimed on numerous occasions that PEMRA and the government are in violation of the court's orders. Basically, just before the CWC, PEMRA had reminded Geo Super that its landing rights permission for 5 years was about to expire at the end of February and that it had not, as per PEMRA Rules, reapplied for permissions six months earlier. This would have meant that Geo Super would have had to go off air within Pakistan during the CWC. It approached the courts and pleaded with them for a stay on PEMRA taking any action against it as well as to ensure that PEMRA forbade cable operators from running any channel showing the CWC that did not have the rights to show the matches in Pakistan.
This is how the official wire agency APP reported the conclusion of the case (read in particular the bold bits):
So basically, Geo itself had its case disposed of and there is no longer a case of any violation of the court's orders.
Given all these lies, half-truths and fabrications on the part of Geo, why do I then still say that the Jang Group is almost surely also being victimized by the government? Simply because PEMRA's hands are not clean either. Although PEMRA has responded angrily to the Jang Group's claims involving one of its former officers (who alleged to The News that he was issued verbal instructions to cause problems for Geo Super), even leaving the veracity of this particular incident aside, there is little doubt - from background and off-the-record interviews - that PEMRA did undertake a policy of using cable operators to make things difficult for Geo. This involved cable operators arbitrarily switching Geo Super's position in their channel bouquets and degrading its signals. It all culminated in the so-called strike by cable operators during the CWC, ostensibly against PEMRA's high-handedness but which actually targeted Geo Super in particular by leaving the field open only for Pakistan Television to show that day's match. This of course impacted Geo Super's advertising revenues significantly at least on that day. It may all be legally difficult to prove but the thinking behind it was the same that General Musharraf employed after his Emergency regulations failed to curb the hostility of private news channels like Geo. And this thinking is to hit them where it really hurts: in the pocket.
In addition, one has only to look at PEMRA's past record of taking to task other violations of its Rules. As the large number of illegal cable channels showing pirated films all over Pakistan with immunity - in total violation of the PEMRA Ordinance - demonstrates, there are violations, and then there are violations. Had the Jang Group not been on a warpath against the government, it is more than likely that PEMRA would have taken a lenient view of the group's violations, as it has done with many before.
Where the Jang Group's stupidity lies is that it has allowed PEMRA and the government a handy legal excuse to go after it. Already PEMRA is threatening to go to court in response to the fabrication of allegations against it and to pray for Geo Super to be permanently blacklisted for its violations. If you must take on the government politically, it usually is a good idea to keep your nose clean in other ways. But then, the Jang Group has hardly been known to pay all its taxes and has never shied away from using media clout to get what it wants, whether justified or not. Recall that the Jang Group is also alleged to be a defaulter of over 90 crores in back-taxes over many years, a case that continues to remain pending and is dredged up only when the government wants to exert pressure on the group. If only the average taxpayer had that kind of luxury.
What this brouhaha also shows is how neither the government nor the media hold the moral high ground in Pakistan. It's a sordid, sordid business in which lies and damned lies are the norm and the poor unsuspecting public are merely emotional pawns one way or the other. Once a compromise is reached - and it will be one way or another since the stakes are too high for both parties to take it over the edge - the public who think they are bringing about popular change by affixing their names to silly petitions, will be left by the wayside.
: : : UPDATES : : :
Update I (12 April 2011):
Trust politicians to jump into the fray with loud rhetoric but little in the way of information or understanding of the issues. This was the main story in The News today, which I saw only after I had posted the above piece.
We have also been made aware that PEMRA has today issued "show cause notices" to both Geo Super and Geo News. Geo Super has been issued the notice for "illegally blocking transmission without any cogent or lawful reason in violation of Section 28 of the PEMRA Act 2007" (Amended PEMRA Ordinance 2002). The following is Section 28 of the Act:
Geo News has been issued a notice "under Section 20 for propagating false and baseless news maligning PEMRA and deceiving the public." Section 20 of the PEMRA Act 2007 deals basically with the 'Terms and Conditions of the License' and its clause (d) specifies that licensee must "comply with the rules made under this ordinance." Section 1-(d) in the Schedule-A of the PEMRA Rules states that "No programme shall be aired which..."
Finally, our friend @mirza9 has also pointed out that the satellite licenses Geo News and Geo Entertainment are registered under the name of Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. while the licenses for Aag and Geo English are registered under the name of Independent Newspapers Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. which may mean that both separately registered companies could yet claim a further two licenses under the law to prevent monopolies (see main post). However, while we are not aware of their directors / CEOs / ownership details, both companies are registered at the same address and share the same telephone and fax numbers.
We have asked PEMRA for clarification on this issue - whether two companies that ostensibly share ownership can be issued licenses as separate entities, and are waiting to hear back from them.
However, I first want to take up the issue which apparently threatens the very survival of humanity itself. Yes, I am referring to the shut down of Geo's sports channel Geo Super and it's music and entertainment channel Aag. To hear Geo talk about it, it is nothing less than the rule of tyranny, the deprivation of Pakistanis of all that is good and worth living for, and the wiping out from people's lives of all information, healthy physical activity and freedom of expression. They now have a 'count-up' on Geo News, ala the 2007 'Emergency', of the exact number of days, hours, minutes and seconds that Pakistanis have been flung into darkness, and even have begun a campaign to get the citizens of Pakistan to grant them a "public license" to resume broadcast (whatever that may be). Geo Super and Aag logos with a cross across them are now regular fixtures on their other two channels (Geo News and Geo Entertainment) and a sidebar regularly updates with the latest maulvi, sportsman, politician, actor, singer or other celebrity to condemn the snatching away of the people's rights.
But before this came to pass the Jang Group (which owns Geo) also used its newspapers - the widely read Jang and the not-so-widely-read The News - to try and browbeat the authorities by running regular front-page stories about the malafide intentions of the government and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA). On the day - April 7 - that Dawn's lead story was about a US Congressional report severely critical of Pakistan and the Express Tribune's and Pakistan Today's lead stories were about the removal from his ministership of Sindh Home Minister Zulfiqar Mirza (the PPP apparently giving in to its ally the MQM's demands), Jang and The News' main leads were about the government having shut Geo Super down. So much for unbiased handling of news priorities. This was, of course, in addition to the wall-to-wall coverage that Geo News had begun to provide on the 'event' from a day before, with the news taking pride of place as the top news headline.
Messages of condemnation have come pouring in from as far afield as Reporters Without Borders and as close to home as the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists - which bizarrely dubbed the issue one of "human rights" - even as the Jang Group has tried to paint the issue as one of governmental victimization. To make matters worse, PEMRA has until yesterday (when it finally placed ads in some papers) been unable to present a clear defence of its actions or explain the exact realities from its point of view.
The PEMRA ad in Express Tribune and other papers on April 11
There is so much rhetorical chaff involved from both sides that it is important to separate out the facts of the case, which I will attempt to do here.
Let us first examine the claims of Geo itself. The Jang Group claims (if one goes by the news stories on its news channel and print publications) that Geo Super and Aag have been shut down because:
1) It was promoting sports and healthy entertainment in Pakistan
2) It was doing so selflessly with no thought to losses incurred
3) The government wants to hit the Jang Group financially because of its relentless criticism of the government
In addition, the Jang Group claims:
4) Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel
5) Aag was shut down as an act of further vengeance on the part of the government
6) Pakistani's have been deprived of sports, sports news and healthy entertainment because of these shut-downs
Let us first look at the latter claims (4-6).
With respect to 4):
The claim that Geo Super was/is Pakistan's first and only sports channel is technically patently false. It is registered in Dubai and is as Pakistani under that criteria as e.g. Ten Sports or Star Sports or Star ESPN, all of which broadcast also to Pakistan under legally obtained "landing rights" or permission to distribute. In fact, it is because Geo Super is registered as a foreign channel that it obtained local landing rights for distribution within Pakistan when it began broadcasting. The reason it is registered in Dubai could well be in order to prevent Pakistani authorities from having a look at its revenues and to avoid tax/ license fee obligations here, though there is another reason which I will just come to. Yes, it does employ more Pakistanis than the other channels and has covered Pakistani domestic sports more than the other sports channels but nothing more than that. It has no local license.
Furthermore, under PEMRA's current rules to prevent monopolies (Clause 13, PEMRA Rules 2009), no corporate entity can hold more than four channel licenses. The Jang Group already has four channel licenses - for Geo News, Geo Entertainment, Aag and Geo English (which was never launched). Unless those rules are changed, the Jang Group must give up one of their licenses to apply for one for Geo Super, which it apparently seems unwilling to do. Also under PEMRA rules, any local licensee for a satellite channel must declare its revenues and give a percentage of them to PEMRA as annual license fees. In the case of a sports channel such as Geo Super the annual fee would come to Rs. 700,000/- + 7.5% of the annual gross advertisement revenue as per audited accounts. (See Schedule A, Table-1). (As an aside, let me just also point out that from my understanding, PEMRA has no system in place to verify if the revenue claims of any channel are actually correct or not, or to challenge an audit. It simply takes the channel's word on this, which given the way most businesses operate in Pakistan and advertising receipts and expenses are juggled, almost surely means that revenues are under-reported in all cases.)
Incidentally, Geo Super had been in default of even the landing rights fees (Rs. 300,000 + 5% of gross advertising revenues as per audited accounts) for the past four years, a matter which may have been sorted out after the intervention of the courts prior to the ICC Cricket World Cup (CWC), when Geo asked the courts to stop PEMRA from taking it off air during the CWC even though its 5-year license was expiring. I will deal with this further on in this post.
With respect to 5):
According to PEMRA, Aag was ordered shut down because after the stoppage of Geo Super broadcasts (we will come to this too), the Jang Group began to show the Indian Premier League cricket fixtures on Aag, which was a violation of its licensing terms. Aag TV has a license for entertainment programming, not sports. Under the licensing rules, no channel can switch its programming genre without a fresh application for a new license. The Jang Group had also violated this provision during the CWC by showing cricket matches on Aag, for which it had already been issued show-cause notices. However, partly out of deference to the Supreme Court's orders allowing the CWC to proceed without hindrance and partly out of the fear of a public backlash, PEMRA had not taken any drastic action in the matter then. In effect, however, Aag had violated the PEMRA Ordinance of 2002.
With respect to 6):
This claim is also demonstrably false since neither has sports news been affected on news channels, nor has sporting or entertainment activity come to a halt because of a sports channel shutting down and Aag being taken off air. In addition, there are still other sports channels and entertainment and music channels being broadcast.
Now let's come to the Jang Group's claims 1)-3) about why Geo Super has shut down. First of all, no sane individual would be willing to accept claim 1), that the government's reasons for stopping Geo Super were because of its antipathy for either sports or entertainment activities. That the Jang Group would even make such a claim says more about its idea of the intelligence and gullibility of its viewers / readers than anything else.
As for claim 2), no one who has endured the infuriating barrage of advertising on Geo Super during a cricket match (a minimum of three ads between each over, more during fall of wickets) could possibly ever believe that the Jang Group's motivations for running a sports channel were selfless. Indeed, nobody could ever believe that any commercial broadcaster would be in the business to only serve viewers interests and not to make money. Let's not be absurd. Yes, Geo Super would not have made the killing it makes broadcasting cricket in other sports, but its revenues from cricket broadcasts (which form the majority of its programming in any case) easily outweigh the costs of non-cricket broadcasts. Despite the hefty price of obtaining exclusive rights for the CWC for example, Geo Super was in the game because it made money not because it lost money. Keep in mind also that the way the Jang Group (and other media houses with multiple channels and publications) marketing operates, advertisers often are lured with bundled packages of advertising across all their channels and publications, which also subsidizes programming with lesser viewership. If the Jang Group really wants to insist on its loss-making claims, perhaps it should be asked to open its Dubai-based account books for public scrutiny. Somehow I don't think this will ever come to pass.
We can thus safely dismiss the Jang Group's claims 1), 2), 4), 5) and 6) as being patently false. The only claim that may have merit is claim 3), i.e. that PEMRA's actions constitute an attempt by the government to hit the Jang Group financially for its hard line against the government. In fact, this is almost surely true. But before we come to this, one final critical point needs to be cleared up:
Has the government through PEMRA actually shut Geo Super down?
Screen shot of Geo Super channel on cable
Almost everyone would have seen this image where Geo Super used to be. Does this mean PEMRA has pulled Geo Super off air? That's what the Jang Group would have you believe. But think about something: if the channel were actually blocked, why would you be able to see this image? Remember when Geo and other news channels were pulled off air during the 2007 'Emergency'? The screens actually went blank. In fact, what this constant image indicates is that Geo Super is still broadcasting and being distributed on cable and satellite dishes. It is just that the channel itself is not running any programming.
Now let me share with you what has actually happened, which Geo will never tell you and which PEMRA is too idiotic to explain properly. Basically, in contravention of its status as a foreign channel with landing rights in Pakistan, Geo Super had been secretively uplinking from Pakistan. Under the law, Geo Super could only regularly uplink to satellite from abroad (Dubai or wherever it chose). When this uplink facility violation was discovered, PEMRA basically shut that operation down. This does not mean that Geo Super cannot broadcast its programmes by uplinking from abroad, as it was supposed to be doing in the first place. PEMRA has pointed out in its ad yesterday that Geo Super still has landing rights and is free to distribute its programmes via cable. In effect, therefore it is Geo Super that has shut itself off.
This is also why Geo Super had scrambled to apply for a "temporary uplinking license" from PEMRA on April 4, a facility that is allowed under the rules for specific events such as a major sporting competition taking place within the country. PEMRA, in perfectly legally defensible fashion, asked Geo Super to specify the event it wanted to cover. Since Geo Super could not name any, PEMRA was within its rights to refuse, which they apparently have still not technically done. The Jang Group's claims of unfair victimization, at least on the basis of this alleged refusal, are merely attempts at a smokescreen.
It is also important to recall exactly what happened during the court case that the Jang Group brought against PEMRA before the CWC since Geo has claimed on numerous occasions that PEMRA and the government are in violation of the court's orders. Basically, just before the CWC, PEMRA had reminded Geo Super that its landing rights permission for 5 years was about to expire at the end of February and that it had not, as per PEMRA Rules, reapplied for permissions six months earlier. This would have meant that Geo Super would have had to go off air within Pakistan during the CWC. It approached the courts and pleaded with them for a stay on PEMRA taking any action against it as well as to ensure that PEMRA forbade cable operators from running any channel showing the CWC that did not have the rights to show the matches in Pakistan.
This is how the official wire agency APP reported the conclusion of the case (read in particular the bold bits):
"ISLAMABAD, Feb 1 (APP): Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday disposed of Geo Super landing rights case on the assurance of counsel of the petitioner and the respondent to resolve the issue with mutual consent within a week. A single member bench comprising Justice Tariq Anwar Kasi resumed hearing regarding the landing rights case of Geo Super.
Counsel for Geo Super Akram Sheikh apprised the court that Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) is not implementing the Supreme Court orders in letter and spirit. He contended that in case of landing rights expired on February 28 Geo Super would not be able to telecast ICC cricket World Cup matches to be played after that date. Afnan Karim Kundi, counsel for PTV apprised the court that the petitioner did not present the law and rules of landing rights in front of the Court. He said that the PEMRA ordinance was promulgated in 2002 and that nobody was being victimized.
Shahid Mehmood Khokhar, another counsel for PTV, informed the court that GEO is warying [sic] to overcome its losses through the courts.
Salman Akram Raja, Counsel for PEMRA, told the court that the authority was not going to “off air” Geo Super transmission despite that they are defaulter of PEMRA for the last four years. He said,”We are implementing the court orders and PEMRA has circulated a copy of court orders on landing rights to all cable operators in this regard.”
Later when counsel of Geo Super Tariq Hassan prayed the court for more relief, the learned Justice remarked, “If you are not satisfied then the court will decide the case on the merit.” However, the counsel for Geo said that his client was ready to sort out matters with PEMRA within one week.
Both the counsel of the petitioner and respondents prayed the court that they would solve the matter with mutual consent within one week so kindly dispose of the case.
After hearing the arguments, the court disposed of the case by passing following orders: “The counsel for PEMRA informed the court that they do not intend to off air the transmission of petitioner channel in connection with PEMRA press release of January 28 providing base for filing the petition.”
“The above undertaking that they would settle issue of annual fee payment within one week time, learned counsel placed on record a letter where by the orders of Supreme Court has been acted upon and a copy has been circulated to all cable operators, since the grievances are no more now, therefore, counsel for the petitioner wants withdrawal of the petition , the case is disposed off.”"
So basically, Geo itself had its case disposed of and there is no longer a case of any violation of the court's orders.
Given all these lies, half-truths and fabrications on the part of Geo, why do I then still say that the Jang Group is almost surely also being victimized by the government? Simply because PEMRA's hands are not clean either. Although PEMRA has responded angrily to the Jang Group's claims involving one of its former officers (who alleged to The News that he was issued verbal instructions to cause problems for Geo Super), even leaving the veracity of this particular incident aside, there is little doubt - from background and off-the-record interviews - that PEMRA did undertake a policy of using cable operators to make things difficult for Geo. This involved cable operators arbitrarily switching Geo Super's position in their channel bouquets and degrading its signals. It all culminated in the so-called strike by cable operators during the CWC, ostensibly against PEMRA's high-handedness but which actually targeted Geo Super in particular by leaving the field open only for Pakistan Television to show that day's match. This of course impacted Geo Super's advertising revenues significantly at least on that day. It may all be legally difficult to prove but the thinking behind it was the same that General Musharraf employed after his Emergency regulations failed to curb the hostility of private news channels like Geo. And this thinking is to hit them where it really hurts: in the pocket.
In addition, one has only to look at PEMRA's past record of taking to task other violations of its Rules. As the large number of illegal cable channels showing pirated films all over Pakistan with immunity - in total violation of the PEMRA Ordinance - demonstrates, there are violations, and then there are violations. Had the Jang Group not been on a warpath against the government, it is more than likely that PEMRA would have taken a lenient view of the group's violations, as it has done with many before.
Where the Jang Group's stupidity lies is that it has allowed PEMRA and the government a handy legal excuse to go after it. Already PEMRA is threatening to go to court in response to the fabrication of allegations against it and to pray for Geo Super to be permanently blacklisted for its violations. If you must take on the government politically, it usually is a good idea to keep your nose clean in other ways. But then, the Jang Group has hardly been known to pay all its taxes and has never shied away from using media clout to get what it wants, whether justified or not. Recall that the Jang Group is also alleged to be a defaulter of over 90 crores in back-taxes over many years, a case that continues to remain pending and is dredged up only when the government wants to exert pressure on the group. If only the average taxpayer had that kind of luxury.
What this brouhaha also shows is how neither the government nor the media hold the moral high ground in Pakistan. It's a sordid, sordid business in which lies and damned lies are the norm and the poor unsuspecting public are merely emotional pawns one way or the other. Once a compromise is reached - and it will be one way or another since the stakes are too high for both parties to take it over the edge - the public who think they are bringing about popular change by affixing their names to silly petitions, will be left by the wayside.
: : : UPDATES : : :
Update I (12 April 2011):
Trust politicians to jump into the fray with loud rhetoric but little in the way of information or understanding of the issues. This was the main story in The News today, which I saw only after I had posted the above piece.
We have also been made aware that PEMRA has today issued "show cause notices" to both Geo Super and Geo News. Geo Super has been issued the notice for "illegally blocking transmission without any cogent or lawful reason in violation of Section 28 of the PEMRA Act 2007" (Amended PEMRA Ordinance 2002). The following is Section 28 of the Act:
"28. Suspension of broadcast media or distribution service.- A broadcast media or distribution service operator shall not cease or suspend broadcasting except on account of force majeure or with the prior approval of the Authority."
Geo News has been issued a notice "under Section 20 for propagating false and baseless news maligning PEMRA and deceiving the public." Section 20 of the PEMRA Act 2007 deals basically with the 'Terms and Conditions of the License' and its clause (d) specifies that licensee must "comply with the rules made under this ordinance." Section 1-(d) in the Schedule-A of the PEMRA Rules states that "No programme shall be aired which..."
"(d) contains anything defamatory or knowingly false;"
Finally, our friend @mirza9 has also pointed out that the satellite licenses Geo News and Geo Entertainment are registered under the name of Independent Media Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. while the licenses for Aag and Geo English are registered under the name of Independent Newspapers Corporation (Pvt) Ltd. which may mean that both separately registered companies could yet claim a further two licenses under the law to prevent monopolies (see main post). However, while we are not aware of their directors / CEOs / ownership details, both companies are registered at the same address and share the same telephone and fax numbers.
Screen shot of PEMRA licensee list courtesy @mirza9
We have asked PEMRA for clarification on this issue - whether two companies that ostensibly share ownership can be issued licenses as separate entities, and are waiting to hear back from them.
Comments
Post a Comment