Submit your Article

 The conventional watchdog role of journalism is occupied more with the dark under­belly of human affairs than with positive stuff. This is also true of the meta-analysis of media writing, although the volume of media crit­icism is startlingly low in our jour­nalism. The few occasional pieces or commentaries are always replete with loud cries of despair over the current journalistic crisis.The crisis is real. With new tech­nologies, marketing automation and personalized advertisement, the traditional revenue model has bro­ken down. The profit logic reigns, leading to talent flight, loss of jour­nalistic autonomy, and credibility.

In our local context, critics fre­quently bemoan shady business practices, emerging monopolies, unabated exploitation of news workers, deterioration of content quality, digital vitriol, partisanship, bias and exclusion in news coverage and, intermittently, an intervention­ist state. Over the decade, I have often (but not always) joined the chorus of nitpickers, forecasting gloom in the media industry. Is the situation so hopeless?

Here, I try to do some mind map­ping to identify its encouraging fac­ets. Scholars Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini proposed an analysis framework, in which four media dimensions are crucial in the devel­opment of a national media system: growth of mass circulation press, links between the media and polit­ical parties, journalistic profession­alism, and state intervention. Within Nepal’s historical and cultural con­text, I see four more dimensions as equally important: the extent of commercialization and market forces, geographic reach, nature and extent of audience engagement, and cultural import.

My observations may appear a bit inflated. They help in going only so far as to play an optimist.

Press development: Measured in terms of quantity and speed of expansion, the growth of Nepal’s media is astonishing, and is com­parable with any developed media system of the world. Though quality remains a key concern, platform choices are wide today. Regionally, Nepal was one of the first countries to embrace online journalism and it has struggled steadily to keep pace with the digital revolution.

Provincial language media are now in the stage of expansion or revival. The mainline vernacular Nepali press has grown in its influ­ence and reach, so much so that many journalists who previously wrote only in English now compete to put their bylines in the vernacu­lar. Few capitals in the world publish more than two broadsheet English dailies but Kathmandu boasts of four. Our English language press is a promising sector to watch as Nepal is now among the countries with the fastest growth of English language speakers, with one study reporting that a quarter of our population already speaks this language.

Innovation is integral to press development. The FM radio revolu­tion was a transformative milestone. Overall, the industry has been a laggard in adopting new tech and approaches, but increasingly, it has woken up. It no longer has the luxury of ignoring innovations. Digital-first, data and analytics, multi-media content, and most recently, HD TV, have become familiar buzzwords. The online journalism wave is pro­pelled more by imitation than by innovation, but a few start-up news portals show promising signs of journalistic transformation.

The growth of a free and vibrant press within a brief span of time is a remarkable achievement

Vigilance on press freedom: The growth of a free and vibrant press within a brief period is anoth­er remarkable achievement. The for­midable custodial role of journalists and activists has repeatedly foiled state interventions, and provided impetus for self-regulation. In recent times, Nepal has served as a beacon of press freedom even for the more mature regional press systems, such as India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Political parallelism: The links between the media and political par­ties now run so deep and wide that the media have largely been cap­tured by political parties, elites and special interests. Minus partisanship and propaganda you get pluralism by party affiliations. A consoling feature is that the market logic is forcing pluralism by content, if not the gradual death of party press.

Market forces: Although today corporatization, ownership, financ­ing transparency and commercial­ization have become key issues, the emergence of “alternative” media and start-up digital press have helped democratize the medi­ascape. Financial strength of some media houses has created the condi­tions for institutional development and professionalization of the press.

Professionalization: With expan­sion, good journalism output has arguably increased over time, but it remains disproportionate to the glut of content in the information ecosystem. The shining spot is the extraordinary individual self-sac­rifice of news workers as well as solo online journalists who form the foot-soldiers of the industry, and who work mostly on volun­tary zeal. In-house self-improve­ment measures are scarce and many toil underpaid.

In no other time in our history have we seen so many self-educated and self-trained journalists, working for domestic or even international media outlets. Many study and even temporarily practice journalism for causes beyond journalism. The gen­erous byproduct of this individually driven journalistic phenomenon is the gradual socialization of the jour­nalistic methods of accuracy and verification, a tremendous contribu­tion in an age in which journalistic acts, if not journalists or journalism, are greatly prized.

Audience involvement: Increased literacy, and expanding digital and social media environ­ment have helped to dramatical­ly increase audience or consumer ‘prsosumer’ influence, thrusting them into the role of being their own gatekeepers and editors. The perceived “influence”, however, is overlaid with credible charges of abuse, vitriol, trolling, misogyny, disinformation and the like. The positive side is that the audience is highly engaged in form, if not in substance. At the same time, the self-correcting nature of the inter­active platforms has motivated and even enabled many users to volun­teer in fact-checking and verifica­tion, promoting media literacy.

Geographic reach: This is a cru­cial dimension for a land-locked Nepal with difficult geography, and the situation is further aggravated occasionally when our southern neighbor tries to muzzle the press by choking the supply of essential goods, including newsprint. With universal mobile coverage, increas­ing internet penetration, as well as regional editions of major news­papers, media reach is no longer a daunting issue, hence the charges of ‘Kathmandu-centrism’ are heard less often these days. Even in geographic content coverage Nepal is making strides—though more is desirable in terms of quality and breath of topics—with countless radio stations and hyperlocal newsportals, at a time when many local newsrooms in the west are dying fast.

Cultural considerations: Con­ventional focus on dominant reli­gions, ethnicities, gender-orienta­tions and culture still holds, but the media now appear increasingly open-minded in the coverage of minority groups and identities. Cul­tural representations, newsroom diversity, gender equity, and most recently, sexual harassment and abuse, have been the subjects of some of the most intense debates on Nepali media. A related positive example concerning our media’s cultural orientation is visible increase in the local programming and content, including advertise­ment on television. Not long ago, every channel relied heavily on for­eign programs and ads, in Hindi or English. And, remember those commercials dubbed in Hindpali, an awful blend of Hindi and Nepali?

The naysayer in me found it very hard to acknowledge these pos­itives! Can we identify more encour­aging trends ?

Dharma Adhikari is a veteran media commentator

With the formation of this government, we have embarked on a journey of political stability and economic prosperity. I do not want to com­ment on the performance of the government here. Rather, I want to highlight some issues that are essential to spur economic growth and development. First and foremost, we must cre­ate a robust legal framework in order to attract domestic and for­eign investment. Currently, we lack necessary laws to draw investment. Second, we must redress the poor implementation of law. We do have some good laws on paper, but they are not effectively implemented to create a conducive environment for business and industries.

Third, we need to efficiently resolve the myriad practical prob­lems investors face. If there are dis­turbances in development projects at the local level, our police adminis­tration and other government agen­cies should be able to tackle them smartly and promptly.

In this context, I would like to cite an example from the US. A house-owner signed a contract with a person to paint his home. The contract specified the payment date. But when the painter completed the task and approached the owner on that date, he couldn’t find him. He sued the owner for breach of contract and won the case. We need to have such a robust legal contractual system in Nepal if we want to attract more Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).

This government, with a two-thirds majority in the parliament, is trying to attract more FDI, but there has not been a substantial increase in FDI from previous years. For sig­nificant economic growth, we have to attract both domestic and foreign investment and focus on creating lots of jobs. We can ill afford to focus only on spending the annual budget.

We must create a robust legal framework in order to attract domestic and foreign investment

We are talking about attracting investment in the hydropower sec­tor, which is a good idea. But at the same time, we need to have big projects in place so as to make use of the electricity. In the absence of such projects, we cannot utilize the power generated.

Agriculture has always been regarded as a key engine for eco­nomic development. We have to formulate a clear policy on mod­ernizing agriculture. An enhanced agriculture sector would contribute tremendously to our prosperity. Similarly, the government should promote entrepreneurship. It should encourage investors who can create jobs. The media have a vital role to play here. They often bring big investors into the lime­light, without due consideration of how they got rich. As a result, even those who earn money by hook or by crook gain attention, while gen­uine investors go unnoticed. The media should highlight the work of bona fide investors, even if they may not have made it big yet.

Let’s talk about infrastruc­ture development. We obviously need roads and other physical infrastructures, but they should con­tribute to the country’s economic growth. Before we construct roads, we should consider whether and how farmers can use them to sell their products.

Nowadays there is plenty of investment in non-productive sec­tors like the share market and real estate. Neither can create jobs, nor contribute much to the country’s economic development. Increasing the nation’s capital base should be our top priority. The rule of eco­nomics is production and distribu­tion. But we lack clarity on our pro­duction sector. What is our priority? Agriculture? Energy? Or is it some other goods?

Official data show our trade deficit is going up, which does not bode well for the country’s eco­nomic development. To address the problem of our trade deficit, we need to focus on the production of goods. Without an increase in production, we cannot maintain a stable balance of trade.

Surendra Pandey is a federal lawmaker from the ruling NCP and former finance minister

Like most people, I thought monks were those who only meditated high up in the mountains from within the walls of their monasteries. That changed when I met some of them in the mon­asteries dotting the Great Himalayan Trail. My search for the Sherpa culture had taken me to Jun­besi, a Sherpa village in the Solukhumbu district. This is one of the oldest Sherpa vil­lages in Nepal. There I met a group of monks from Serlo Gumba who invited me to visit their monastery. Little did I know how much this experience would affect me.

The next day I went to the monastery where I got to have lunch with the Rinpoche, Fengmo, and all the other monks there. Apparently the Rinpoche also liked photography, and so we got along well and had something in com­mon to talk about. Fengmo was the high teacher there who helped me access information about Sherpa culture. Although uniquely knowledgeable, the men were down to earth and easy to approach.

So what’s it like to live in a monastery? What do the monks do there?

What I understood from the conversations with the monks is that living in a monastery is very much like living in school dorms. The young monks are there to study, and must under­take a rigorous course of Tibetan and ancient Tibetan scriptures. Their day typ­ically starts with morning classes, breaking for lunch at 11am before heading back to study. Puja takes place every day at 5pm, before the students have dinner at 6pm. Every monk is assigned a broad array of activities: cooking, clean­ing, chopping wood, taking care of the library, and even playing instruments during the puja.

To my surprise these monks were very much like those of us outside the monastery walls. They enjoyed playing football and other sports, they love art, and yes, they love social media too. The teachers didn’t have a similar opinion to social media, however. So disciples are allowed to use their phones only once a week. I was fortu­nate enough to be close to some monks during my time at the monastery, and yes, we are now ‘friends’ on social media.

What did I learn about the life of a monk in my short time at the monastery?

Well, the life of a monk consists of much more than meditation. They are just as human and multi­faceted as everyone else. They love having fun, mak­ing new friends, and travel­ling to new places. Basically everything that you or I love doing! The only difference is that they do all of that, and strive to live a balanced and spiritual lifestyle. This is a key takeaway for me, and something I really needed to learn and apply in my own life.

The progress of Nepal’s peace process has been patchy since its formal beginning in 2006. The faltering transitional justice pro­cess, an integral part of the peace process as well as the Comprehen­sive Peace Accord (CPA), does not augur well. But two other major components of the peace process—management of arms and army of the then Maoist rebels and consti­tution-drafting—have been success­fully completed. Every conflict and peace process is unique. But Nepal’s peace process is still distinct and cannot be compared with that of any other post-conflict country. Peace, constitution-drafting and transitional justice processes are always risky. But Nepal not only concluded the management of arms and army, but in the process also established a unique Nepali model while following international norms and standards.

Positive messages

First, Nepal’s peace process is led by domestic actors; polit­ical parties initiated and led the entire process. There was no third party involvement, as happens in most post-conflict countries. It is worth noting that in a highly polarized society and fractured pol­ity like ours, a cross-party mecha­nism with no experience in a peace process not only took all decisions based on consensus, but also estab­lished a Nepali model of arms and army management.

Second, Nepal’s armed con­flict ended on the back of sus­tained dialogue among political parties. The CPN (Maoist) renounced violence and embraced a peaceful democratic process. The Maoists joined the political mainstream and transformed into a civilian party by dissolving their army and handing their arms over to the government.

Third, despite disagreements on various issues, major politi­cal parties kept talks alive. They shared their views and debated issues to understand one another. Keeping the negotiation process alive ultimately paid off. The political parties followed the prin­ciple of ‘consensus through dia­logue’ which is a unique lesson from Nepal’s political transition.

Forth, Nepal learned from other post-conflict countries but did not import or replicate their model. Instead, it developed its own model of constitution drafting and management of arms and army. Nepal did not follow the technical process of disarmament, demobi­lization and reintegration (DDR) adopted by many post-conflict coun­tries. Rather ex-combatants were demobilized and disarmed. Nepal also did not use the loaded phrase ‘security sector reform’ (SSR), but still followed its principles during the peace process.

Fifth, according to the prevalent international practice, there are two options for ex-combatants: integration into security agen­cies or reintegration into soci­ety. But Nepal introduced a new concept of voluntary retirement. Out of 19,602 ex-combatants, 15,624 chose voluntary retirement rather than integration or rehabilitation. Likewise, 1,422 ex-combatants were integrated into the Nepal Army (NA). Only six opted for rehabilitation. Voluntary retirement was a new and highly risky experiment but it worked in Nepal. It is a Nepali con­cept that can be applied to other conflict-ridden countries.

Sixth, the NA played an exem­plary and instrumental role while integrating its former enemy. Even when political parties had con­tradictory stands, the NA agreed to take in ex-combatants. On this issue, the NA at times seemed more flexible and liberal than the opposition parties. The NA also adeptly carried out all its responsibilities during the inte­gration and training of integrated combatants. Had the NA been hes­itant, integration would have been more difficult. No national army has played such a constructive role in similar contexts abroad.

 Had Nepal also been able to complete transitional justice, the country would have won greater kudos

Negative messages

First, the management of the arms and army is now complete and the constitution has been promulgated. But the process was lengthy and expensive. There is no official data on the expenses of the entire peace process including constitution draft­ing, but everyone agrees that it has been a costly endeavor. However, we shouldn’t forget that peace is less expensive than war.

Second, Nepal’s peace process is heavily focused on integration and rehabilitation. But the govern­ment and political parties did not pay attention to conflict victims. The whereabouts of 1,452 ‘disap­peared’ people remain unknown 12 years after the peace process started. But the government did nothing save distribute some cash relief to the victims, and even then most of the cash ended up with political party cadres. Therefore, the victims are still fighting for truth, justice and reparation.

It took almost eight years to pro­mulgate a controversial transitional justice act, one that is not accept­able to the victims, civil society, and human rights community. The act came into existence because of a marriage of convenience among political parties. The gov­ernment constituted the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission for Investi­gation on Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP) after 9 years of the signing of the CPA. But for four years those toothless transitional justice bodies could do nothing except reg­ister complaints. Those who com­mitted serious crimes during the conflict should have been brought to justice. But no government has been serious about transitional justice and ending impunity.

Third, the government offered attractive cash packages to verified Maoist combatants. But what about the 4,008 disqualified combatants? The government did offer them a small package, which they declined because it came too little too late and because the ‘disqualified’ tag still hung over them. Female com­batants and their children were also badly neglected.

Conclusion

Despite the faulty transitional jus­tice process, Nepal will always be credited for working out a unique model of constitution-drafting and management of arms and army. Had Nepal also been able to complete the transitional justice process, Nepal would have won greater kudos. Still, that does not detract from its remarkable achievements in the peace process thus far.

Geja Sharma Wagle played an active part in the integration and rehabilitation process of former Maoist guerillas and is still involved in the transitional justice process