Referring to the Table 2.1, Jakubowicz adapted here the four underlying values of communi- cation policy as was first described by the McQuail, 1992. Jakubowicz separated Order from solidarity and suggested the latter one as more suitable for the totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. McQuail stated that these underlying values in any communication policy are of far reaching implications in attaining required goals. Mcquail suggested that except for totalitarian regimes there lie more than one component of communication values.
Globally, the underlying value for press media is usually market driven freedom based on lib- ertarian model. Pakistan on the other hand does fit under the social context of authoritarian and totalitarian system where only approved voices are given the authority to voice. ”Order” has been the underlying value in the press media of Pakistan since its independence.
(like other developing countries, McQuail, 1986) has been based on Development Communica- tion normative model. After the liberalization of broadcasting media, PEMRA aspired to stick to the similar course for private broadcasting organizations as well. But the liberalized media turned out to be more rebellion than the publicly owned and run Pakistan Television, PTV. Suc- cessive socio political incidents of the country compelled PEMRA to act vehemently as the tool of successive Pakistani governments in facilitating their authoritarian designs against freedom of expression.
Normatively, to incorporate democratic values to guarantee pluralism and diversified content, (section 18-20, PEMRA ordinance, 2002), everybody with the means to run a broadcasting house was given opportunity to step up and get licensed by the authority (PEMRA Ordinance, 2002). Measures were taken to confirm the equal and fair access to media and so the Cable cartel was extended to far flung areas of the country (PEMRA annual report 2010-11 [16]). But empirically, the tug of war between media houses and pubic bodies soon led the latter to fur- ther intensify their hold by strengthening the grip of PEMRA’s regulatory mechanism. Within three years of PEMRA inception and onwards, media conglomerates were found at daggers drawn with state actors where PEMRA allegedly acted as the mouthpiece of federal bureau- cracy [61]. Thus the 2002 PEMRA ordinance was extensively revised and was made intricate and strict to avoid vilifying content against state institutions or public bodies. A series of re- strictive measures were incorporated in the original PEMRA ordinance of 2002 and PEMRA was given the powers to implement new restrictions with all its might. The 2002 ordinance was first intensified by the 2005 amendment act which added clauses to the original act. Later in 2007, two amendment acts were promulgated mainly in reaction to stop increased civil unrest and lawyer’s movement.
Acts included ”Defamation Law” which prohibited media from telecasting derogatory content against any of the state or government actor/institution. Further, in 2009 a Schedule A was annexed to PEMRA regulation regarding the ”Code of Conduct” which predominantly dictates to avoid defamatory content and to be considerate of ethical and pro national sentiments while broadcasting. However the derogatory content still needs to be differentiated from sarcasm for the sake of freedom of speech. Recent code on content, 2012 has officially restricted broad- casting media where PEMRA is more inclined to act as an authoritative state actor to curb the freedom of liberalized media with extensive penalties in the form of sticks.
The ultimate goal of PEMRA has been the fulfillment of interests of powerful elites. Unfor- tunately, PEMRA is obliged to work as government puppet. Section 5 of PEMRA ordinance (2002 and 2007) decrees PEMRA to abide by Federal governments binding directives on policy matters and if PEMRA considers those directives not relating to policy matters even then the latter is obliged to adhere to them.
The strict measures and hard penalties are still part and parcel of PEMRA statute to compel the media houses to functions as per government’s preconditions. To further tighten PEMRA stronghold, PEMRA framework is given supremacy over all other laws and its verdicts are cog- nizable and compoundable in all the courts of Pakistan (PEMRA ordinance, 2007). PEMRA now is license issuing office with regulatory powers which has not only tightened the public control over commercial broadcasters and cable operators but has also exposed them to the dangers of corruption and extortion [61]. Thus, the underlying value of PEMRA regulatory framework can easily be tagged as ”order” as usually the case in other authoritarian and totali- tarian countries. However, currently the situation of public control over media is hampered (to
good extent) in Pakistan [82].
Though political exclusion of the society has remained Pakistan’s prime purpose for decades but now because of the arrival of multiple private news channels, their availability on internet and massive use of this ”new media” has given a serious jolt to the vested nefarious designs of political and business elites of Pakistan. Because of the availability of news content on the web- sites of private news channels, political activism through social networking site like facebook, audio video uploads in hyper local journalism sites like you tube and other blogs on internet, have tremendously diminished governments control over content consumption.
Despite the loosening public control over content consumption, the idea of centralized potent media is also fading away. Today the communicators have not only increased in number but are also disintegrated. Their influence upon the masses is also divided (depending upon the access opportunities and personal interests of the consumers).
The regulatory framework of PEMRA also has a streak of socialist responsibility model. Coun- cil of Complaints, CoC, is especially established to register complaints from the consumers of broadcasting media or distribution service providers to keep a check on the latter. General pub- lic is given the opportunity to register their complaints against any content that may have caused discomfort or indignation on their part as a citizen of Pakistan. This is to ascertain audiences input to formulate further regulation if necessary. But the incorporation of such egalitarian mea- sures has proved to be futile in the long run.
On receiving complaints, PEMRA though issues notices to respective broadcasting and distri- bution organizations but the follow ups are scarcely compliant. Audience complaints ranging from over advertisements of private TV channels (as PEMRA forbids media organizations from crossing the limit of 4 ad breaks (3 minutes each) per hour) to the obscene content from foreign media (PEMRA allows the landing rights of Indian content for only 10% of the total broad- casting per week but the transmissions often exceeds this limit), all are incessantly disregarded by media houses and cable distributors. PEMRA has turned out to be a complete failure in this regard. So PEMRA comes out well where political elite’s vested interests are involved but otherwise mighty media houses emerge as the winners.