How Much Freedom Does Burmese Media Enjoy?

Respected Burmese journalist Ludu Sein Win wrote a recent article—which the censorship board refused to publish inside Burma—which blasted those who attended the media conference for “helping to make the rope to hang themselves.” This article is now published in The Irrawaddy Burmese language online site here. He called for the participation of journalists and media figures in drafting the media law.

The media law does not include broadcast and online media and many in the industry remained cautious. It seems Naypyidaw will not easily provide broadcasting licenses to private media, but will only honor those who are allies of the government, crony tycoons or have ties to the military.

Family members of retired senior generals have shown a keen interest in applying for broadcasting licenses. I am sure nepotism seems to Naypyidaw as the safest way to honor broadcasting licenses rather than independent-minded broadcast journalists.

Who Controls the Press in Burma?

Many inside and outside Burma have dubbed Information Minister Kyaw Hsan as hawkish and a hardliner.

In a parliamentary debate last year, Kyaw Hsan said that media freedom would bring “more disadvantages than advantages,” before he went on to astonish MPs with a half-hour recital from the Buddhist tales of the Jataka.

“Media is like red ants,” he explained, saying that the country would face instability if restrictions on the press were relaxed.

But senior officials at the Ministry of Information told me during my visit that due credit should be given to the minister and the government for deciding to loosen its grip on the media. And it is true that, during this year and the last, the Burmese press under Kyaw Hsan has enjoyed more freedom.

Again, many editors I met remain insecure and feel uncertain. “The minister is too cautious to give us freedom… it is still a hopeless situation,” one renowned editor who is close to the minister and asked to remain anonymous told me during my visit.

Freedom may not be permanent, but I observed myself, and many in the media sector agree, that they currently enjoy greater liberty and a longer leash.

The print media censorship board now pass many more news articles, but degrees of censorship are employed and placed on certain journals. For instance, if a journal is deemed too critical of the government or in favor of covering the opposition movement and Aung San Suu Kyi, it can face extra scrutiny. I am told that officials are increasingly worried about the continuous coverage of Suu Kyi’s campaign trial, the 88 Generation Students and growing opposition movement in general.

In Burma, I also discovered it is possible to purchase certain freedom. Ironically, some media tycoons buy off censorship board officials to get more taboo political subjects printed—prompting international media watchdogs to unwittingly applaud publications inside Burma for daring to challenge the censorship board.

In reality, it is just a mixed bag—some are genuinely pushing the envelope for greater freedom (and punished at some point) but others have special connections so they can publish news and articles that are forbidden in other local journals.

Some editors confided that they feel deeply embedded and too close to the government so they can no longer write anything that is important to readers.

“We are compromised and have to practice self-censorship,” one renowned publisher who owns several journals told me in Rangoon. Other media tycoons just know that news sells and simply practice populist journalism.

One thing for sure is that restrictions on the media in Burma have been loosened, but censorship and control mechanism remain intact. I suspect this will continue to maintain its presence in a different form, so editors and journalists in Burma face many unanswered questions.

To me—aside from the cronies, tycoons and censorship board—skills and capacity are one of many problems facing the Burmese media sector.

Although there is space to publish news and articles that would not be permitted by the more repressive regime of the past, critical analysis, editorials, investigative reporting, good practices of ethics and professional standard of journalism are still missing from many publications.