Cross-media ownership prevents independent scrutiny by print media of the content, standards and policies of the electronic media owned by the same group. And vice versa while this is not a conventional “corrupt practice”, cross-media ownership deprives citizens from access to independent evaluation of the content of various media.
Allegations of media-related corruption in the context of elections due in 2013 as per the Commission’s formulation: 1. That, in the last quarter of 2012 in particular and in the period leading up to the commencement of the formal election phase, placement of ads in media about various development projects of the Federal Government and the four Provincial Governments have increased notably “so as to influence public opinion” in favour of one or more political parties or personalities. Note: The Supreme Court has already in 2012 taken notice of, and prohibited the further publication or broadcast of advertisements about Government
Allegations of media-related corruption in general as per the Commission’s formulation: 1. Bribes, inducements, perks, etc. to journalists and media personnel to obtain prominent or favorable coverage in media or to plant false or defamatory news against others. 2. Discriminatory, undue allocation of Government-controlled advertising to print media and electronic media. 3. Undue financial benefits obtained by/given to Government officials through direct payment in cash, or kind, or through kickbacks on award of advertising contracts to favored advertising agencies. 4. Unfair Selection/appointment of advertising agencies and media, using different method. 5. Non-media-related commercial interests of media proprietors (e.g. ownership of
News about Media CommissionLAHORE: The participants of a ‘Roundtable Consultations on Supreme Court Media Commission Report’ critically reviewed nine major issues of mass media in Pakistani society in