A Decade in Power, part 5 : Syrian Media should follow “the maestro’s stick”

Before 2000, the regime had total control over what was being published and broadcast in Syria. With the spread of satellite channels and later the Internet,  journalists and ordinary citizens found a limited  space of free expression. At the same time though, the crackdown on reporters continues. Many private media outlets have been shut or subjected to intimidation in recent years.

In his first presidential statement after he took power a decade ago, President Bashar al-Assad briefly touched upon the subject of the media, mentioning the importance of reforming the sector.

In his address to the people of Syria on July 17, 2000, he said that reforming the media along other cultural and educational state institutions was a step towards “the condemnation of the mentality of isolationism and negativism” and essential for “setting straight negative social tendencies that impinge on the unity and safety of society”.

These few words inspired a wave of optimism, especially among those working in the media field.

But what many did not foresee back then was how limited the scope of the “reform” would be; that the authorities would pursue the same pattern of governance adopted since the 1960s when the ruling Baath party was declared “the leader of the society and the state”, which set national priorities and stifled liberties in the name of “protecting” those priorities.

The maintenance of a 1963 emergency law and series of other pieces of repressive legislation made sure the media was kept in check and would not carry any criticism of the state.

Media like a “symphonic orchestra”

A former information minister once told a group of journalists that the government wanted the media  to act like a “symphonic orchestra led by a maestro, who is the minister of information, and where all musicians follow the maestro’s stick and play their instruments according to his directions”. This expectation was laid down three decades ago and has never been questioned.

In 2001, new media legislation, which appeared to signal a new direction, allowed for the creation of private media  after decades of complete state control over everything that was being broadcast and published.

But the law did not guarantee real independence.  New media outlets emerged, but were not in any way allowed to perform the role of the Fourth Estate, such as uncovering corruption and holding the government to account.

New television and radio stations, for instance, were only allowed to broadcast cultural and entertainment programmes. But soon even this was stopped. In 2006, the authorities closed Sham, a private TV station owned by Mohamad Akram al-Jundi, a Syrian legislator. The decision to shut the station down came on the very same day Sham was planning to air the first political news bulletin.

More recently, in 2009,  the Al-Mashrek channel was taken off the air after security officials stormed its offices. Today, the only private television still broadcasting from Syria is Dunya. Many believe that it is only allowed to function  because its owners have very close ties to the regime.

Legal restraints

A number of explicit articles in the 2001 law undermined the freedom of journalists.  The council of ministers was able to revoke licences granted to media operators without giving any reason nor allowing the parties concerned to challenged the decision in court. In any case, most of the licenses were given to a new breed of businessmen close to the government.

In addition, heavy fines (up to one million Syrian pounds) and jail sentences (up to three years) were introduced for vaguely-defined offences, like publishing “false information”, causing “a disturbance in the international relations” of the state or working against “national morale” and “national unity”. These accusations were repeatedly used against journalists to keep them from criticising the government or exposing corruption.

In addition, a system of strict censorship, coupled with a high degree of self-censorship, ensured that journalists do not cross the line set by the government.

The government has also kept a tight hold over official information. So, for instance, when the authorities sensed that information was “leaking” to the media from various ministries, the latter  were ordered to release information only through the state agency SANA.

Even the journalists union, which should normally protect the interests of the press, is dominated by the government and has tacitly approved the imprisonment of tens of journalists over the last ten years and the closing down of many media outlets.

Despite the gloomy climate created by the government, some media sought to defy the authorities by broaching sensitive social and political issues.  The best example of this was Al-Doumari, a weekly satirical newspaper established in 2001 by Ali Farzat, a prominent caricaturist. The popular title published more than 100 issues before being forced to close in 2003 because of its critical content.

One editor-in-chief of a private magazine expressed his dismay at the state of the media in the country today. “The press in Syria is in terminal decline and the government is trying to kill it off,”  he said.

A Ray Of Hope

The internet now is the only ray of hope for the Syrian media. It has prospered over the last decade with new websites, blogs and Facebook groups becoming the only sources of information that cannot be fully controlled by the government.

The online environment is exposing corruption and realistically reflecting Syria’s economic, social and political condition , despite official efforts to block hundreds of websites as well as intimidate and jail bloggers and online journalists and commentators.

Currently, the government is working on an electronic communications law that civil society believes will thwart free expression over the internet.

Moreover, Syria has a history of jailing bloggers and online commentators, like Karim Arbaji who was convicted in September 2009 for “publishing mendacious information liable to weaken the nation’s morale” and sentenced to three years imprisonment. Arbaji ran an online forum called Akhawia, where netizens discussed Syrian current affairs.

Another poignant example of the repression of bloggers is the case of Tal al-Mallohi, a 19-year-old who has been held by security officials since December 2009. The reason is that she reportedly wrote a series of bold poems on her personal blog inn which she discusses the duty of oppressed citizens to reject the life of subjugation and fight for their rights. Mallohi’s fate remains unknown until today.

In a 2009 report, the international media watchdog Reporters Without Borders said that at least four cyber-activists were behind bars in Syria and declared the country to be one of the world’s 12 worst “Internet Enemies”.

The last blatant attack on journalists came in June this year when Ali al-Abdallah, an intellectual, was kept in custody after completing his three-year sentence. He was accused of writing a political article deemed “nefarious” to Syrian-Iranian relations while in jail. He is currently being prosecuted in a separate trial.

But despite the government’s attempts to curb the one outlet for freedom of expression open to its citizens, this has not stopped many writers, journalists, bloggers and even ordinary Syrians from venting their opinions online.

So while traditional media have failed to shed light on the issues that really matter to the population, new media have taken on the task, increasingly shaping critical public opinions, and becoming the last remaining hope fro Syrian society.