Journalism Beyond Professionalism

The world is at the fingertips of every individual, allowing them to move from one corner to the other in seconds. The impact of journalism is no longer confined to specialized journalists but extends to everyone with a cell phone and a connection to a digital platform.

Access to the digital domain is no longer a luxury, enabling anyone to create and recreate an individual world in liberty, whether that world could be one for others, too. Efforts to promote real journalism falter under the weight of the liberty that some pursue for purposes unknown to themselves. Technology doesn’t recognize the difference between public and private values.

The more technology advances, the weaker information protection becomes. The cheaper it goes, the wider the reach and the larger the commercial sales. The producer benefits, and the chances of breaching security widen. Because of advances in the digital world, with small, affordable gadgets available to everyone, the demarcation between private and public affairs has become increasingly blurred.

The urge for everyone to practice journalism and the loss of public values that protect information for citizens and the government make it impossible to maintain the secrecy essential to the running of a state. The recent leak of a handwritten note by the Prime Minister, disapproving of a plan for a visit abroad by the Chittagong municipality, exposes twofold hype.

On a positive note, it serves as a warning to government officials to avoid similar ventures. On a negative note, it alerts to security breaches in which official documents fall into unauthorized hands. This indicates that not only has the practice of the Act of Official Secrecy grossly eroded in public places, but also extreme liberal journalism has gone that far to publicize information not released officially for the unnecessary urge of TRP or raise views.

If the handwritten notes of the Prime Minister can’t be protected from unintended leaks, how would the state protect classified information falling into the hands of the enemy of the state? It doesn’t necessarily mean that the government can act quietly and hide information from the public in the public interest.

There are rights for the public to find necessary information from the Right to Information Act. There are systems for publicizing information on websites when the government controls the event. Respect for the Official Secrets Act is not only for public officials but also for every citizen to protect the interests of the state.

The core of the problem stems from the widespread accessibility of the digital world and the existence of established systems and procedures for delivering official information to those who need it. The use of cell phones in public spaces further aggravates the situation, helping to breach official security. Every government official has access to a landline to carry out their daily duties and deliver messages or documents through the government-maintained postal system.

The most profitable government organization, the telecommunications and postal system, is dying from disuse; instead, cell phones and courier services are replacing it. The urgent communication method for delivering messages still exists, but is not used by the concerned authority or the ministry itself. Instead, the practice has continued to conduct government communication through social media services that are not under the government's security control.

There is no war situation in the country that requires the prime minister's instructions on ordinary issues to be relayed within minutes. There is no major crisis in the country that the Prime Minister needs to call about on his cell phone to pass down instructions. Not only defiance of the ‘Official Secrets Act’, but also the failure of government agencies to follow standard operating procedures, forcing the involvement of the Prime Minister in ordinary issues.

The government must have a procedure to inform the media daily, from an organized venue and by the competent authority, to curb the overenthusiasm of others to carry messages like this, whether intended for journalism, for unnecessary pleasure, or as a conduit to leak state information into evil hands.

The citizens have liberty but also responsibilities to fulfill their duties within legal boundaries. One who is acting in the office of the government in any capacity is not an individual but a responsible citizen. The role of the telecommunications and postal ministries is to ensure the secrecy and urgency of delivering governmental instructions.

For the most urgent communication necessary between the highest officials, there are options for a red telephone, and land communication among all staff at all officer levels.

Why should there be practices of using cell phones in the office to give scope for passing of information to those not intended? Why doesn’t the ministry issue instructions to all government staff working under any capacity to refrain from passing information to any kind of social media platform as a breach of the Official Secrets Act?

The cell phone provides enormous opportunities for abuse; therefore, it is time to put a hold on it in official services, except for the highest authority. In the days of faster social media growth and its impact in spreading issues, significant or otherwise, the indiscriminate use of cell phones has more bans than benefits.

It endangers the domains of journalists because others encroach on it with unlimited access to the digital domain. Information concerning the communication issued by none other than the Prime Minister could cross national boundaries and be reported as news from abroad. It is in the interest of journalist communities to protect journalism, not only to support their profession but also to safeguard the state's interests.

However critical we may be, the role of the Indian media is noteworthy in the recent remarks of the ex-Chief Minister of West Bengal made on the case of Hadi killings. They collectively refrained, through mainstream and social media, from broadcasting the news publicly to preserve their national interests.

The parallels are incomparable yet offer many lessons for journalism of the future, for the protection of the profession itself and of information, too. Unless the whole of the journalist communities of mainstream media approach the receipt and release of information institutionally and professionally, the unprofessional will replace them.

Brigadier General AF Jaglul Ahmed (Retd) is a regular contributor to national dailies. He can be reached at [email protected].