Teardrops in Sri Lanka

Research Problem

Analyse how the media has treated the ensuing challenges in Sri Lanka, of internal conflict, political instability and post-tsunami development. Examine contemporary journalistic practices in this “partially free” media landscape.

Introduction

Six months after the 2004 tsunami hit Sri Lanka, I found myself privileged to be a ‘tsunami tourist’. The title felt appropriate, as the smell of death had passed, the grieving had quietened, and the silent faces were living in sight of their destroyed homes. The immediate surroundings were not difficult to ‘deal with,’ it was the remaining questions which were troublesome. I was assigned to a group of Griffith University representatives investigating the feasibility of a series of scholarships designed to provide educational opportunities for young people whose studies were disrupted by the tsunami. I was the photographer.

Train wreckage, Seenigama, 28 June 2005

From Colombo, we ventured south where international media reported from the iconic stage of an over-loaded train tumbling its passengers and hangers-on to their next lives. Standing in the community centre of Seenigama the questions reeled; why are the watermarks up to the ceiling here yet 500 meters down the road appears unscathed? Perhaps the dirt and strewn bricks were here before the tsunami? The media spectacular did not reveal everything.

Driving south from Colombo, 28 June 2005

Travelling to the East coast was a long and repetitive journey. Heavily fortified Sri Lankan military bases, demanding perimeter detours, regularly interrupted the 8-hour long drive. The bases drew an unofficial border into the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) dominion. The Hindu temples and Muslim Mosques began to appear. The skin shades darkened and the voices were harder to interpret for our Sinhalese guides. In Batticaloa the tsunami scars were even harder to distinguish from the 30 years of violent conflict. The task for finding ‘suitable’ tsunami victims was a real problem. If this orphan had lost their parents to the war, and then lost their caregivers to the wave, should their case be treated as a lesser incident to the next orphan who only recently lost their whole family?

In Sri Lanka, the tsunami took the lives of over 30,000 people, however over the last few decades the conflict has killed over 60,000 people and displaced over a million. If it were a cricket match, the war ran-out out the tsunami innings with ease. The then President Chandrika Kumaratunga complimented the tsunami for dealing a uniform blow regardless of ethnicity. If only the reconstruction process and reconstruction compassion were as impartial. Nevertheless, the recent disaster was why we were there; it was why the NGO Four-wheel drives were competing for roads and their drivers the hotel rooms; it was also why we received ‘live’ media coverage from those shores late December 2004.

Rubble and sea, Galle, 28 June 2005

Response

It is difficult to grasp the complexity and historical roots of conflict in Sri Lanka. Similarly, the consequences and contributors to the current conflict are complex and uncertain. There are no Weapons of Mass Destruction involved, or large Oil reserves, and the Empire departed in 1948. Parallel to current war fronts, however, is fear, power, deceit and misinformation. It is a conflict over identity and the identity of a nation. Amid the consciousness to be considered is that Sinhalese is only spoken in Sri Lanka, and the Sinhalese are the custodians and preservers of the ‘purest’ form of Buddhism; that Tamils are as indigenous as the Sinhalese, and are the inheritors of an independent Tamil Kingdom with a unique caste structure and heritage (Disanayaka 1999, p.256-257). The influence of continuing violence and political instability has only raised barriers of understanding.

The height of violent conflict occurred from 1985 until 2001. Both sides freely attacked civilians and it was not until international pressure in the mid-1990s that the attacks were reduced (Oberst 2006, p. 1).  In the 1970s, violent insurrections by Janata Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), a Sinhalese youth Maoist group, and the insurgence of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), initiated the bloodshed across Sri Lanka (Gunaratne 2000, p.183). The youth movements grew out of rising unemployment and failure on the government’s behalf to resolve economic and social problems. Recent conflict is readily split between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan military. However, it is uncertain how many factional militias exist, and violence frequently occurs within and between factions in the form of power struggles or suppression.

As Michael Ignatieff, human rights professor, explains that “to reward a secessionist claim with independence now would be to reward a terrorist movement with a great deal of blood on its hands” (2000, p. 31). The clearest direction towards an end to the ongoing ethnic conflict is through a re-evaluation of the unitary state in which minority populations are represented within an efficacious democracy.

What divides the two sides in the fratricidal war in Sri Lanka is not a varying view of human rights but a chasm between their respective views of the state; and what is needed to affect a cessation of atrocities is probably the general acceptance not of a theory of rights but a common view of power and its exercise (Laqueur 2000, p. 137).

The tsunami pummelled the Sri Lankan media with additional challenges. Many important stories needed to be told as the reconstruction process necessitated and the official authorities needed to be held accountable. The added stress emphasised the need for access to truthful information in order for individuals to participate and make clear judgements in chronic life altering decisions.

Two men at Seenigama train station, 28 June 2005

In a speech titled ‘Journalists for Journalism’, presented in September 2006 by Jacqueline Park, Director of the Asia-Pacific International Federation of Journalists Colombo, Park emphasised that journalism promoting public service values “encourages democracy, pluralism and tolerance [… and] ensures the citizens are well informed on the actions of the government” (www.freemediasrilanka.org). The role media plays in shaping public opinion is crucial to the unification process. It is worth mentioning that in contrast to other developing countries, Sri Lanka has an exceptional literacy rate exceeding 90 per cent (Gunaratne 2000, p182). In ‘Ethnic Perceptions and Media Behaviour in Sri Lanka’, a study by J.B. Disanayaka, he reveals that even at the rural village level media exposure is high. However, “almost everyone in the village disbelieves what is said by the media regarding ethnic conflict”, and the mass media is utilised more for entertainment purposes than information gathering (Disanayaka 1999, p. 259).

Bus stop, 1 July 2005

Nevertheless a high level of media is consumed on a daily basis in Sri Lanka. In the same research by Disanayaka, analysis of 400 questionnaires revealed, “96 per cent read daily newspapers, 44 per cent read magazines, 93 per cent listened to radio daily, and 98 per cent watch television daily” (1999, p. 274). Even though the public is aware of bias and censorship within mainstream reporting there is still a high rate of media consumption that can potentially frame a unified society. Disanayaka concludes that media practices are “facilitating polarization rather than harmonizing ethnic relations” and suggests that even though the audience is aware of bias, the reality of bombs exploding and continuing bloody warfare with the attributed trauma, contribute to the polarization of the Tamil and Sinhalese divide (1999, p. 278). The consumption of media occurs amongst a mass of influencing factors and social life. Therefore, “the media is part of a circuit […] in a multiethnic society where traditions, customs, institutions and ideologies differ, audiences become more complex” (Disanayaka 1999, p. 281). The democratically elected Sri Lankan government, at any one time, appears to wield unprecedented power within the ‘circuit’ of society, and they need to be held more accountable for infringements of press freedom.

Class photograph, Kanewala School, 5 July 2005

In the decades following independence in 1948 the then United National Party (UNP) government increasingly dominated the media landscape. At independence the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd, also known as Lake House, was the most dominant of the two most successful private newspaper groups. In 1973, the then Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) coalition passed a law requiring “broad basing” of the ownership of Lake House, which had previously been a UNP supporter. Lake House has since continued to be criticised as being a “mouthpiece” of any party that is in power (Gunaratne 2000, p. 186). Similarly the two competing private newspaper groups, the Upali Newspapers Ltd, and the Wijeya Newspapers Ltd, although privately owned, hold close family connections to the leadership within both the UNP and the SLFP (Gunaratne 2000, p. 187).

The elected government also controls television and radio broadcasting by means of the Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation (SLRC), and the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation (SLBC), respectively. The SLBC Act of 1966 and the SLBC act of 1982 contain ambiguous provisions regarding programming. They must “maintain good taste and decency”, not cause offence on religious or public grounds, with a balance in subject matter and regional focus. They require news programming to be accurate and impartial. In contradiction, however, regulations issued by the minister can control and supervise the programs of private broadcasting services (Gunaratne 2000, p. 198).

There are no community radio stations independent of state control in Sri Lanka. The International Federation of Journalists observed, “for two decades civil society organizations have asked for licences to start community radio stations but no government has conceded to their request” (Deshapriya, 2006, p. 36). In the same way, to produce and market a television program it must first be registered with the SLRC, who can simply refuse registration. Foreign export and import of television productions is also controlled by government supervision. On May 25 2006, the President banned the popular film titled ‘The DaVinci Code’ from Sri Lankan cinema houses (Media Freedom, www.freemediasrilanka.org). Hence, although there has been some liberalization of electronic media since the mid-1990s, the established state owned radio and television institutions maintain the foundations for broadcasting.

Article 14 (1)(a) of the Sri Lankan Constitution’s 1978 Bill of Rights, guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, including in publication. But broad restrictions and ambiguous wording in adjacent articles renders the nation’s constitutional guarantees “virtually nugatory” (Gunaratne p. 189). For example, Article 15 (7) declares that the

Right to equality; freedom from arbitrary arrest; freedom from arbitrary detention; and freedom of speech, assembly, association, occupation, and movement – shall be subject to restrictions as may be presented by law, including the pertinent regulations, in the interest of national security, public order, and the protection of public health or morality… or of meeting the just requirements of the general welfare of a democratic society (Gunaratne 2000, p. 189).

A recent revival of emergency state regulations of media on June 23, 2006, amounts to the Sri Lanka Press council being restored. The interpretive wording within the Bill of Rights is also riddled throughout the Press Council Act. For example, the Sri Lanka Press Council Act No. 5 of 1973, empowers the council to hold inquiries if it believes that “what is published is untrue, distorted, or improper” (Disanayaka 1999, p264). Improper in this instance is the word of discretion.

Emergency regulations are currently re-invoked, although not applied and continue to threaten the media landscape (Nolan in Funnell, www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport). States of Emergency, declared under the Public Security Ordinance, have frequently been instigated during times of military conflict. Under a state of emergency in November 2003, the then President Kumaratunga deployed troops outside government-run media outlets, sacked the chairman of the Lake House media group, and replaced the editors of state-run print and broadcast outlets with her own supporters (Freedom of the Press, www.freedomhouse.org). Emergency regulations are also criticised as seeming to provide a licence to harass and intimidate journalists. Added to this is the lack of adequate investigations into complaints of assaults and murder of media workers (Media Freedom, www.freemediasrilanka.org).

On World Press Freedom Day, 3rd of May 2006, unidentified men attacked the offices of a Tamil newspaper in Jaffna and murdered two of the workers (Nolan in Funnell, www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport). In the meantime celebrations of press freedom were being embraced in Colombo. Eight media workers have been killed in the last 12 months, the majority Tamil. International Federation of Journalist representative, Jim Nolan, points out that a key concern is that some of the militias responsible for the attacks are really “cats paws of the government security services, and so they don’t really act without effectively getting the blessing of, or at least the acquiescence of the security services” (in Furnell, www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport). And on the Tamil side, there is “a complete lockdown” of any free press in the LTTE areas. The majority of journalists subject to intimidation and violence have been Tamil. Of the media institutions that have been attacked, the majority are publishers in the Tamil language. While amongst both language groups, journalists who support peaceful negotiations are labelled as ‘traitors’ and subject to hate speech. During August and September this year a public campaign of Hate e-mails was widely circulated urging readers to rid the world of supposed ‘traitors’ who simply supported negotiated settlement with the LTTE (Media Freedom, www.freemediasrilanka.org).

Road to the east coast, 1 July 2005

A further disturbing factor of murders of media workers is that few incidents have resulted in arrests or even been investigated. The deprivation of human security, anxiety of further outbreaks of violence, constant government opposition and legal threats to critical news reports, has ultimately resulted in a culture of self-censorship. Disanayaka observed that in reporting on any matter relating to ethnicity, “it is almost as if polite social niceties are being maintained due to lack of democratic traditions or skills to discuss and debate difficult and sensitive national issues openly” (1999, p. 281).

Numerous media monitoring reports have demonstrated that coverage of the conflict, peace process, and the recent tsunami have been one sided, with the majority only quoting one source (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 8). The different language groups also draw information from exclusive sources, hence, propagate opposing portrayals of similar events. Unnamed police and military have been the main sources for the English and Sinhalese news, while the LTTE was the main source for the Tamil media (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 8).

Military Checkpoint, Batticaloa, 1 July 2005

‘Sri Lanka – Acting Together of Journalist Safety and Media Reform’ in the Fourth Annual IFJ Press Freedom Report for South Asia 2005-2006 was developed as a training resource for journalists and journalism institutes. Subsequent to research conducted among working journalists and editors the report illustrates insightful and practical steps for individual journalists working in Sri Lanka. Seeking objectivity, particularly in conflict, is stressed throughout the report because it “urges journalists not to accept an official statement at face value”(Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 6) and allows for an acknowledgement of personal bias. However, listed problems in the working environment include, “lack of access to resources, biased and unreliable sources of information, particularly from the state sector, and language as a barrier to information gathering” (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 8), consequently these factors have damaged accuracy in representation.

“In any situation, and especially in times of conflict, there are an infinite number of narratives,” the report goes on to encourage journalists to leave the office and pursue their own investigations; relay the voices of the women, children and families affected, rather than the government line (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 16). Particularly in regard to the post-tsunami, IFJ warns against “developmental journalism,” which compromises the necessary watchdog role and hinders journalistic independence. Furthermore, analysis of tsunami reporting by the Centre for Policy Alternatives concluded that there was a failure in conveying the needs and day-to-day impacts of the disaster on civilians. Instead the SLRC endorsed the government image, whereas adequate coverage of the worse hit northern and eastern coast was lacking (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 16). In fact, IFJ reported that in Colombo-based Sinhala-papers stories of Tamil victims were non-existent (Deshapriya 2006, p. 35). The Fourth Annual IFJ Press Freedom Report states that,

After 16 months a sizable number of tsunami victims remain in temporary shelters but the news media still return to its regular priorities of politics, war, crime and accidents. No media institutions appointed tsunami beat reporters which has resulted in issue-by-issues coverage if the tsunami rather than the larger ongoing process (Deshapriya 2006, p. 35).

In many ways the IFJ report implies journalists should set a precedent for understanding the conflict, not just in the words they write, but also in the physical interaction with the direct community, by confronting differences without prejudice. As stated, “being part of a multi-lingual, multi-ethnic community means you need reliable sources in other communities […] the best reporters have the most extensive network of diverse sources” (Deshapriya 2006, p. 20).

Jacqueline Park sees positive progression in the media landscape through the collective action among journalists, which is evident in the variety of reports and their ease of access drawn upon in my investigations. In 2005, the Federation of Media Employees Trade Unions, Free Media Movement, plus Tamil and Muslim organizations unified under a single Media Charter to which Parks responded that it “was a truly historic moment in Sri Lankan journalism” (Deshapriya & Park 2006, pp. 8-9).

Child at Seenigama Community Centre, 28 June 2005

The current President Mahinda Rajapksha promised for a depoliticised state-owned media. However once president, he changed all the boards of directors, editors and director generals of state media houses to political appointments (Deshapriya & Park 2006, p. 36). Unfortunately the scenario of political control and propaganda remains the unchanged.

‘Going up’ in the hotel lift in Colombo, alongside me were three men, one whose profession was to instruct safe landmine clearing operations, plus two Red Crescent aid workers. Although I am sure the services they were providing aided many more people than my few images, however I cannot help but thinking that they also deserved the label of ‘tsunami tourists’. Because just as the current media challenges in Sri Lanka illustrate, if you are not amidst the community, participating and listening to all the different voices, especially when the spotlight has turned away, then you are also hiding behind the lens. 

References

Deshapriya, Sunanda 2006, ‘Journalism in troubled times: The struggle for press freedom in South Asia 2005-2006’ in Fourth Annual IFJ Press Freedom Report for South Asia 2005-2006, International Federation of Journalists, UNESCO, pp. 3-9, 34-38, accessed http://www.ifj-asia.org/ 15 September 2006

Deshapriya, Sunanda & Park, Jacqueline 2006, ‘Sri Lanka – Acting Together for Journalist Safety and Media Reform’ in Fourth Annual IFJ Press Freedom Report for South Asia 2005-2006, International Federation of Journalists, UNESCO, pp. 4-20, accessed http://www.ifj-asia.org/ 5 September 2006

Disanayaka, J.B. 1999, ‘Ethnic Perceptions and Media Behaviour in Sri Lanka’, in Anura Goonasekera & Youichi Ito (eds) Mass Media and Cultural Identity: Ethnic Reporting in Asia, London, Pluto Press, pp. 256-283

Funnell, Antony 2006, Media dangers in Sri Lanka, Media Report, ABC Radio National, accessed www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport 26 October 2006

Gunaratne, Shelton A, 2000, ‘South Asia’ in Shelton A. Gunaratne (ed) Handbook of the Media in Asia, New Delhi, Sage Publications, pp.33-37

Ignatieff, Michael 2000, 'Human Rights as Politics', in Amy Gutmann (ed) Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 31-32

Laqueur, Thomas 2000, 'The Moral Imagination and Human Rights', in Amy Gutmann (ed) Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Princeton University Press, Princeton, p. 137

Oberst, Robert C. 2006, ‘Country Report – Sri Lanka’ in Countries at the Crossroads 2006, Freedom House, accessed http://freedomhouse.org/modules/publications 5 September 2006

Park, Jacqueline 2006, Journalists for Journalism, Free Media Sri Lanka, accessed www.freemediasrilanka.org 15 September 2006

Media Freedom and Freedom of Expression: Heading for a crisis in Sri Lanka, Free Media Sri Lanka, accessed www.freemediasrilanka.org 24 September 2006-11-12

Freedom of the Press – Sri Lanka 2005, Freedom House, accessed http://freedomhouse.org/inc/content/pubs/pfs/ 5 September 2006