One proprietor of a major media house stated that Government misused its powers on control of advertising and of secret funds to conduct character assassination of individuals such as himself and of his media group because of the independent policies of his group and candid criticism of Governmental corruption, miss-governance and nepotism. He said that despite the fact that his media group paid the highest levels of tax to the public exchequer, unfounded and exaggerated claims were filed by Government entities against his media group in order to harass him and his associates and to defame names and reputations as alleged tax evaders. He reiterated the media group’s intention to abide by its independent polices regardless of the price that has to be paid and called for a policy on Government-controlled advertising which will be genuinely transparent and contain effective checks and balances in place of the existing arrangements and policies which merely appear to be transparent but which, in practice, are easily manipulated and misused.
Misuse of powers to control advertising and secret funds
Hostility against independent journalism and editorial policy
They ascribe the reason for such hostility against them by the Government to their independent journalism and editorial policy in both print media and broadcast media. They stated that their media was often deprived of their fair share of Government-controlled advertising due to their refusal to toe the line of the Government-of-the-day including particularly the […]
Read MoreMedia houses have been systematically discriminated
Senior representatives of major media houses conveyed to the Commission in person that, notwithstanding a written policy and procedure aiming for merit-based allocation of Government advertising and notwithstanding claims made in speeches and statements made by public office holders of the Government of the day at the Federal and the Provincial level, they have been […]
Read MoreComments are not identified by name in the Notes of Meetings
In most of such cases, the names and organizations were made part of either Part-One or Part-Two of this Report However, as in the case of some information and views conveyed in confidence to the Commission, on the request of the persons concerned, their comments are not identified by name in the Notes of Meetings […]
Read More