How not to gag press freedom

For a journalist, covering news in Bangladesh has been tough for a long time. The immediate past Awami League-led government repressed the media through draconian laws, including the Digital Security Act (DSA). They used law enforcement and security agencies to intimidate, harass and detain journalists. They shut down media houses or made it difficult for them to survive, by throttling all their revenue sources. Some journalists also fell victim to enforced disappearances. Journalists in Bangladesh have always had to operate in a difficult environment, but the last 10 years have been especially perilous. 

Thankfully, since August 5, these tools of repression have been beaten back. However, a new challenge has recently emerged. 

The recent mob actions targeting Prothom Alo (PA) and The Daily Star (DS) have shown us how quickly situations can escalate. While state repression under the Awami League (AL) government was the hallmark of earlier threats, social media now dominates this troubling landscape. These mobs, spurred by narratives propagated on digital platforms, mark a worrying shift in how grievances against media outlets manifest. 

Also, vandalism, as seen in PA's Rajshahi office, and public demonstrations under the guise of 'protests', blur the line between civic activism and mob rule. Such acts threaten the core democratic principle of free speech and press freedom.

Does that mean there cannot be grievances towards any media platform? Surely, there can be. But there needs to be a proper recourse to express those grievances. This mob behaviour creates an environment where genuine public grievances—such as allegations of bias or twisting narratives through wordplay—are overshadowed by criminal intimidation. 

If you follow Facebook and YouTube, chances are high that you know about the campaign against PA and DS. But at which line does it become an infringement of freedom of the press? 

Dr Gitiara Nasreen, Professor of the Department of Mass Communication and Journalism at the University of Dhaka, said, "An independent media is essential for democracy. If the media reports the truth properly, some people may lose interest or be offended. But it is everyone's responsibility to ensure that the security of the media or media persons is not compromised, because the media is working in the public interest, not in the personal interest." 

Barrister Sara Hossain, lawyer and human rights activist said, "Anyone who wants to uphold rights and justice in Bangladesh needs to speak out and condemn the dangerous and opportunistic mobilisation of hate - based on entirely false and malicious claims -  and physical  attacks  and intimidation against  newspapers such as PA and DS, which have been bastions of independent journalism and have suffered greatly due to the repression of the previous and indeed earlier regimes." 

Indeed, PA had been constantly attacked by Sheikh Hasina during the last years of her regime. She even called it a force of darkness on the floor of the National Parliament. 

Containing the mob 
Any sort of mob attack or vandalism is not the way to express grievances. It is the state's responsibility to demonstrate a firm commitment to press freedom by acting decisively against mob intimidation. Swift legal action against individuals or groups engaging in violence would serve as a deterrent, reinforcing the message that dissent must not devolve into criminality.

As Dr Gitiara Nasreen puts it, "An attack on a newspaper office or a journalist is undesirable in every way; it is an attempt to silence their voice." 

Md Nahid Islam, Information and Broadcasting Adviser to the Interim Government, said, "The government doesn't support vandalising newspaper offices or exerting pressure to shut down any newspaper. The government won't tolerate any similar attempt in future. The government is providing protection and cooperation to the media houses." 

He added, "The people wanted to express their accumulated anger. They should be given the chance to release their anger. We told them to organise their demonstration peacefully and talk about their grievances. And if they have any definite complaint, they may follow the legal route." 

Barrister Sara Hossain said, "If we want to nurture free expression-  of course with limits restricting hate speech, intimidation and incitement to violence - we need to start practising a culture of responding to speech which we don't agree with with counter-speech rather than with criminal cases or incitement to violence." 

"Media regulation is something that needs to be discussed.  Self-regulation or an independent regulator are options - but we need to think about how these might work in our context," she added.

Dr Saimum Parvez, a lecturer at the DW Akademie, said "Arranging peaceful protests and mobilisations should also be considered a democratic tool. However, mobilisation of unruly mobs that could threaten the lives and property of a media establishment should be stopped immediately by the law enforcement authorities." 

"To establish democratic values, any complaints against a media outlet should be addressed by a fair trial," he added. 

Strengthening institutional mechanisms
Democratic societies rely on institutions like press councils and ombudsmen to mediate disputes between the public and media. It is deemed the ideal way to express any grievances, according to the former General Secretary of the Jatiyo Press Club, Elias Khan. 

He said, "If any person or party has any complaint regarding a particular news or media house, it can be filed at the Bangladesh Press Council." 

Dr Gitiara Nasreen also echoed the same, "The media is not above errors and omissions. If there is any error in the news service, then there must be accountability and this accountability must also be done in a fair manner." She continued, "There is a Press Council to report any complaint about the print media, and the aggrieved can also approach the court. If it is necessary to take an easily accessible measure to report the complaint, that can also be demanded." 

But the problem is, in Bangladesh, the Press Council has not been very effective. There has been undue political influence, and it played no role during the previous regime's repression of journalists. 

It spends significant public funds, yet rarely addresses complaints or press freedom issues, focusing instead on administrative matters and events. The Council has evolved into a symbol of bureaucratic inertia. Even when cases are addressed, resolutions often lack enforceability, rendering the Council ineffective.

A functional and impartial Press Council, empowered to hear grievances transparently and enforce accountability, would mitigate the need for extrajudicial measures.

Promoting media literacy
Much of the discontent against the media arises from public misunderstandings about journalistic practices. It can often be crucial. 

When The Business Standard shared the news of the killing of Advocate Saiful Islam Alif on Facebook, some readers started to react angrily, demanding to know why the name of the alleged perpetrator of the killing was not mentioned. However, it is a basic journalistic practice not to name any perpetrator without police or judicial investigation. 

Media literacy programmes, particularly in an era dominated by digital misinformation, can educate citizens on how news is curated, the distinction between editorial and opinion content, and the value of dissenting perspectives. This understanding can reduce the susceptibility of the public to manipulation.

Civil society organisations can also facilitate dialogue between aggrieved citizens and media outlets. Platforms such as dialogues, online forums or public discussions allow for constructive airing of grievances without resorting to intimidation. Such engagements strengthen trust between the media and its audience while upholding the principles of dialogue over discord.

Democratic models to follow
Bangladesh can look to international models for inspiration in reforming its approach to media grievances. 

Despite its limitations, the Press Council of India actively addresses ethical violations and works to mediate disputes while maintaining an arms-length relationship with political influence.

The UK's Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) is the largest independent regulator of the newspaper and magazine industry in the United Kingdom. IPSO enforces a code of conduct through voluntary participation, emphasizing accountability and public trust without state interference.

The Scandinavian councils such as the Swedish Press Council, Danish Press Council or Council for Mass Media in Finland combine robust self-regulation with statutory oversight to balance press freedom and accountability effectively.

By adopting a multi-faceted approach—spanning institutional reforms, public education and robust legal frameworks—Bangladesh can safeguard its media and ensure its commitment to democracy and freedom of the press.