Media in Pakistan

Media has assumed a very significant role in today’s modern world. Ever since the electronic revolution, and the
advancement in technology in the telecommunications sector, an unprecedented growth in electronic media has seen an
increase in the ability of the government and political parties to reach to the masses whether it be through the radio, TV or
the internet. This enhanced ability of reaching out to the people has given tremendous power and influence to those who
control the communication channels between the rulers and the ruled, giving them the unique power of influencing both
the masses and the government. However it would be incorrect to assume that this influencing goes both ways. As we
would discuss today, this communication is generally unidirectional which serves the interest of those powerful lobbies
that control the media. Today media is a powerful tool for international and regional diplomacy shaping the conditions for
achieving maximum advantage in diplomatic maneuvers and negotiations. The US used her powerful media to shape the
global public opinion against Iran’s nuclear program, to brand it as an axis of evil and to rally the world behind her (The
United States). This helped the US to achieve her strategic objectives in the gulf and to launch a diplomatic offensive
where she was able to ensure that her interests are safe. Another example of how the media aided a government in her
diplomatic maneuvers is the recent tensions between India and Pakistan after the Mumbai blasts on 26th November.
American newspapers, the Wall Street Journal, and the NewYork Times together with Indian Newspapers, The Times of
India and The Hindu, ran a successful campaign to have the Pakistan based Militant group Jamat ud Dawa banned by the
United Nations Security Council. In fact the political crisis in South Asia has further demonstrated that, when guided by
their respective governments or powerful lobbies, media is a powerful tool for propaganda purposes. However the best
example to demonstrate the influence and usefulness of media, is the Bush Administration’s propaganda against Saddam
Hussein’s regime, where the Americans used the Media to prepare a global public opinion against Saddam Hussein,
where the media did not just propagate half truths or twisted facts but rather fabricated and invented false charges of Iraq
possessing weapons of mass destruction, a basis which was used to legitimize America’s invasion of Iraq. The same
exercise of using selective stories, partial facts and of demonizing the enemy was and is being carried out by Western
governments to fight the War on terror. The Iraqi example further demonstrates, the power of media, when the British and
the French used the Arab media, Al Jazeera for example, to expose American atrocities in Iraq and Guantanamo bay,
Cuba to internationally embarrass and humiliate America and rob her off her moral authority in the world. Something
which has contributed greatly in the weakening of American political power around the globe. These are but a few
examples of how media has helped re- define the way international struggle proceeds, of how international politics and
diplomacy is carried out and how wars are fought. All of this is related to relationships between states; however in the
modern polity media has a critical role in the domestic workings of a state. It is the primary tool for changing hearts and
minds of the people, affecting the dominant thoughts and emotions of the society and shaping the course and direction of
domestic politics. Furthermore, in modern societies media has taken the central position in accountability of the rulers and
the incumbent government to an extent where media is termed as the fourth pillar of a democratic state together with the
legislature, the executive and the judiciary.
The Pakistani state saw an explosion of private electronic media since 2002, followed by a reshaping of the domestic
political infrastructure and an increase in the awareness of the general public. The role played by the private electronic
media, especially in influencing local politics and the opinions and emotions of the masses since then, compels us to
understand the circumstances and the dynamics which led to the setting up of these new media outlets to correctly and
fully comprehend the role they have played and will play in the future in influencing the lives of the people of Pakistan.
This understanding will help the Dawah carriers in making correct political opinions and guide them in making appropriate
political strategies when they strive to attain Allah’s pleasure by establishing the Second KHILAFAH e Rashidha.
The Military government of General Pervez Musharaf established the Regulatory Authority for Media Broadcasting
Organization (RAMBO) in April 2000 and renamed it to PEMRA in January 2001 to regulate electronic media in Pakistan.
It was however in 2002 that PEMRA started issuing licenses to private TV and Radio Channels. Since then according to
PEMRA it has issued 64 licenses to private satellite TV channels and 116 FM Radio Stations. This is apart from the
foreign channels which were being aired in Pakistan before the establishment of PEMRA and issuance of licenses to local
broadcasters. This move followed months of speculations that Pervez Musharaf plans to allow private electronic media
outlets. At a meeting aimed at the reorientation of the Information Ministry, on 16th January 2001 General Musharaf said:
“Pakistan's national strategic interest in the international media should be projected with particular focus on our principled
stand on Kashmir. We should not be lagging behind in responding to stories that may be carrying a slant or tilt or
whatever. We should rather encourage a pro-active approach in responding”. Such statements followed by a number of
steps like the inauguration of Current Affairs and News Channel of Radio Pakistan in April 2001, the establishment of the
7th Wage Board Award which regulates the salaries of the journalists, the declassification of the Hammod ur Rehman
Commission Report, the abolishment of the News Print Quota which was used by governments to financially blackmail
print newspapers, the establishment of the Press Council, a journalistic body which devises the rules and regulations for
the Press and which does not include representatives from the government, NAB’s announcement that it won’t investigate
judges and journalists and hosting of regional conferences and local workshops on press freedom were some of the
signals which the military regime sent to the Media as good will gestures and to show the government’s willingness to be
more tolerant of criticism by the media and the government’s desire of establishing private media outlets. It seemed that
through such actions, the military regime wanted to achieve the following two objectives:

• Increase the credibility of the government by establishing private media outlets, at a time when the government
was under criticism from the secular segments of the society for forcing in to exile the heads of the two largest
political parties, the PPP and PML-N.
• The Pakistan Military establishment’s realization that India had the upper edge in the propaganda war and the
shaping of the international public opinion due to private media outlets. This feeling was exaggerated after the
Kargil conflict in which the Pakistan military desperately felt that she was forced to abandon the Kargil conflict due
to the political weakness of the civilian government and the lack of support internationally. The military wanted a
similar tool at its disposal to counter Indian propaganda internationally and to make sure that she was not
snubbed off by the civilian government in the future.
It was not however until in May 2002 that Pakistan’s first private satellite channel GEO started transmission and it was
towards the end of year 2004 when electronic media started having a major influence in the Pakistani Society. The
privatization of media in Pakistan however seems to have more than just local motivation of seeking domestic credibility
and protection of strategic interests. Several local and international factors point towards this direction:

• The media was privatized during the reign of Pervez Musharaf, America’s most loyal agent, who blindly followed
American dictation on even the most controversial issues like establishing diplomatic ties with Israel, pledging to
send troops to Iraq at the height of anti-Americanism in Pakistan, carrying out raid on Islamabad’s Red Mosque
and twice removing the former chief justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chadhury from his office.

• The establishment of private media outlets followed the adoption of a hawkish foreign policy by the neo
-conservatives in the American administration and followed America’s launch of the War on Terror after the
September 11 attacks. As various American think tanks, officials of the State Department and Pentagon and that
of the Bush Administration have stated the US plans to fight the war on terror for decades to come. This strategy
required redefining the geo political landscape of South Asia. As we would discuss later privatization of media in
Pakistan, and than controlling it, was and is one of the tools by which America seeks to secure its interests in the
region.

• The launching of the War on terror and the invasion of Iraq by the US suggests the American desire of being
physically present in the Muslim World. HIZB in quite a few leaflets and Question Answers has said that this
urgency represents America’s fear of Muslim renaissance and the reestablishment of the KHILAFAH State. The
US while physically assaulting the Muslim Ummah had simultaneously increased the cultural and political invasion
of the Muslim World where she had stepped up her efforts to promote liberal values regarding political and social
lives of the Muslims. Establishing so called independent media outlets is part of this strategy of cultural invasion.
• America has long viewed the Muslim world through the Middle East. The American polity has been to target the
Arab World with her ideas in the hope that convincing the Arabs would ultimately result in convincing the non Arab
world, given the leadership the Arabs enjoy in the Muslim World. This strategy has failed miserably, as the
Muslims in the Arab world have rejected Western ideals completely. America seeks to reverse this policy, with
now focusing on the non Arab world in the hope of reversing the flow of ideas from the non Arab world towards
the Arab World. Pakistan is one of the ideal candidates for such a model given the openness of the society and
the Arab world’s admiration towards it due to her military strength. Private media outlets are going to serve as a
platform in this regard.
Let’s look in to these points in detail. Richard Haass, Director Policy Planning Staff in the US State Department is his
speech titled “Towards Greater Democracy in the Muslim World” delivered at the powerful American think tank, the
Council on Foreign Relations on December 4, 2002 mentioned eight guidelines which would help promote democracy and
liberal values in the Muslim World and one of them was the establishment of independent and responsible media. He
said:” The media has a critical role to play as a key element of civil society. In democracies, the media is free, and is not
under the state’s control. This allows for multiple views, ideas, and perspectives to be aired in the free marketplace of
ideas. The best protection against the media promulgating views that people do not agree with is the proliferation of more
perspectives, not the squelching of voices.” Richard Haass was the head of the policy planning team in US State
Department at the time when media was privatized in Pakistan.
In 2002, at a time when US neo conservative hawks were more focused on invading Afghanistan and Iraq, the then
Secretary of State Colin Powell launched the Middle East Peace Initiative (MEPI) Program to focus on what has come to
be called softer elements of the US foreign policy, promoting Western values in the Muslim World. Although the Program
initially received a small amount of funding and was aimed at the Arab world, the model strikingly resembles the US policy
towards Pakistan for the last eight years. Moreover the program has been quoted as a role model for many future
proposals to the US Congress and the US administration with regards to formulating a policy towards the Muslim World.
The MEPI was designed to achieve four objectives in the Muslim World: political reform, economic reform, educational
reform and women’s empowerment. These are the same lines on which America worked in Pakistan. Whether it be the
repealing of the Hudood Laws, the Mukhtara Mai Case, the Red Mosque Operation or building the case for Madrassah
Reform and change in the educational curriculum in Pakistan, the media played an important role in achieving these US
objectives in Pakistan.
The influential think tank RAND Corporation, which is funded by the Pentagon, and which invented the term” enlightened
moderation”, is more explicit on the subject. In a report issued in 2007 titled “Building Moderate Muslim Networks” the
think tank compares the threat of radical Islam to Western values with that of Soviet Communism and proposes that the
US should use the same approach which it used while confronting Soviet Communism, of building moderate Muslim
Networks who promote Western values of liberalism and democracy and who promote a Western version of Islam. The
Report States: “Partners in the moderate network-building effort should be those who adhere to key dimensions of
democratic culture.
The effort could initially focus on a core group of reliable partners whose ideological orientation is known and work
outward from there. The researchers recommend targeting five groups as potential building blocks for networks: liberal
and secular Muslim academics and intellectuals; young, moderate religious scholars; community activists; women’s
groups engaged in gender equality campaigns; and moderate journalists and writers. Functioning again in a foundation
like role, the United States should assist programs that promote democratic education, particularly programs that derive
authoritative teachings supportive of democratic and pluralistic values from Islamic texts and traditions, moderate media,
gender equality, and advocacy for moderate agendas.”
In the same report the researchers propose a shift in US policy of viewing the Muslim World through the Arab World and
focus on the non Arab World. Given the prominent position Pakistan holds in the non Arab Muslim World, the report is
infact a blue print for US policy towards Pakistan. It states: “RAND proposes a shift of focus from the Middle East to
regions of the Muslim world where greater freedom of
Action is possible, the environment is more open to activism and influence, and there is a greater likelihood of success.
The researchers emphasize network-building opportunities in the Muslim Diasporas in Europe, among Muslims in
Southeast Asia and Turkey, and in some of the relatively more open societies in the Middle East. Recognizing that radical
ideas from the Middle East are being disseminated to the rest of the Muslim world, RAND recommends opening channels
of communication that will encourage the dissemination of modern and mainstream interpretations of Islam back into the
Middle East from moderate Muslims elsewhere.”
In another report by RAND, published in 2003 titled “Civil Democratic Islam” which was adopted by the US government,
the think tank proposes the propaganda items which the US should focus on, in order to promote a Western version of
Islam. These included promoting Democracy and Human Rights and attacking Islamic opinions on polygamy, criminal
punishments, Islamic Justice, the rights of minorities, women’s dress and the idea of Husbands being allowed to beat
wives. The report urged the US government in finding partners to carry out this propaganda and categorized the Muslims
in to fundamentalists, traditionalists, Modernists and Secularists and proposed a strategy to deal with them and how some
of these groups can be used to promote Western values. Almost all of the propaganda items discussed in the report have
been taken up by the Pakistani media and addressed either through specific campaigns like the one ran by GEO TV
network on “ The Hudood laws” and “The Hasba Bill” or through weekly programs like “Aghaz” on ARY ONE and “Alif” on
GEO TV.
One more example of how the Privatization of Pakistani Media has provided more access to the US to influence the
Pakistani Society is that of the “Hadith Wars”. In the same report, “Civil Democratic Islam”, the researchers of RAND
propose starting Hadith wars in the Muslim world to confront the interpretations of Islam presented by fundamentalists like
Hizb ut-Tahrir. The idea is that there is a universal agreement on Quran being beyond criticism; however the authenticity
and interpretations of Hadiths can be challenged which would create confusions in Islam. Javed Ahmad Ghamdi has
been provided unprecedented access to almost all major private media outlets to spearhead the Hadith Wars in Pakistan.
Another objective of privatizing the media in Pakistan is to challenge the conservative structure of the Pakistani Society
and the deep rooted ethical and moral values held in high esteem in Muslim societies like Pakistan. This approach is
specifically targeted towards the Muslim Youth. Promotion of events which encourage free mixing and socializing between
men and women are seen as anti dotes to radicalism. In the name of providing entertainment the radical and conservative
opinion of the society towards different social practices are softened. The US hopes that this softening of opinion towards
Western values would eventually lead the youth to adopt these values. Thus entertainment channels like “Aag” and “MTV”
have been set up to present an alternative way of life to the Muslim Youth in Pakistan. Fashion and Game Shows, Musical
nights, Valentine’s Days, Romantic screenplays, liberal advertisements, Chit Chat Radio Talk shows, unregulated internet
access and co education at the college and university levels are redefining the moral fabric of the Pakistani Society and
weakening its Islamic emotions.
Before further analyzing the role the media played in executing American plans in the region lets first have a look at the
ideological composition and political affiliations of the Media in Pakistan. The Pakistani Media and intelligentsia can be
categorized in to three broader categories on the basis of their view point towards foreign policy, relationship towards the
West and the domestic polity.
The first category is that of the Nationalist Islamists which is led by Majid Nizami’s Nawaiwaqt group. This group derives
its ideology from the Two Nation theory presented as the basis of the partition of Pakistan. They believe that Pakistan
should be a parliamentary democracy with Islam as one of the sources of legislation. They are conservative Islamists and
recognize the 1973 constitution as a legitimate document. They are opposed to a secular outlook for the country and
presented a formidable challenge to the Musharaf regime’s campaign of enlightened moderation and of presenting a soft
image of the country by adopting liberal values. However due to their staunch and rigid nationalistic viewpoint and strict
adherence to the ideas of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and other politicians involved in the Pakistan Movement they accept the
right of the majority to amend the constitution even if the amendment is against Islam and other nationalistic ideas which
they adhere to. They consider the resistant movements in occupied Muslim territories in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and
Kashmir as legitimate. Due to their deep commitment to the Two Nation theory, and their nationalistic ideals they
advocate a firm and strong policy against India and America. Nawaiwaqt aggressively challenged Musharaf’s policy of
normalization with India and putting the Kashmir cause on the backburner. They however failed to pressurize the
government in opting out of the normalization process and giving concessions to India. Nawaiwaqt also put up a strong
challenge to the Musharaf regime’s incrimination of Dr. A. Q. Khan. It was due to the pressure created by the Nawaiwaqt
and the Islamic elements within the Pakistan Army which forced Musharaf to refuse American access to him after
Musharaf successfully removed him as the head of Pakistan’s nuclear program. The Nawaiwaqt is opposed to the War on
Terror and does not view Jihad as terrorism. However due to international public opinion it has been forced to abandon
openly calling for it although it still has sympathies for Jihad and does not hide these sympathies. It openly calls for Jihad
as a solution for the Kashmir dispute; however it may be forced to abandon this policy in the wake of the Mumbai blasts.
The Nawaiwaqt considers itself as an umbrella organization for all Islamic parties whether they be the democrats like
Jamat e Islami and JUI-F, the Jihadis like the Afghan Taliban and the Kashmiri Militant organizations or radical Islamists
like Hizb ut-Tahrir. They consider it as a moral obligation to cover their activities and publish their viewpoint. The
Nawaiwaqt consider the Taliban insurgency against the Pakistan Army as anti Pakistan however they advocate a
negotiated settlement between the Pakistan Army and the Pakistani Taliban. When ascertaining the blame on the
lawlessness caused in FATA, they are reluctant to blame the Taliban and support the viewpoint that American and Indian
Secret Agencies are behind the mayhem in NWFP. Unlike the secular media outlets, who blame the Taliban for the
lawlessness in the tribal areas Nawaiwaqt considers the American presence in Afghanistan as the root cause of the
Problems which Pakistan faces in its northern areas. Although it has no solution for the problem as it believes Pakistan
cannot standup to America it advocates limiting engagement with the US and supports the doctrine of maintaining
strategic depth in Afghanistan by having covert relationships with them. The Nawaiwaqt sees the Baloch insurgency as
anti Pakistan and considers the Pakistani Army’s Operation against the Baloch insurgents as a necessary evil. It was
however critical of Musharaf’s extremely harsh approach towards the Baloch nationalists. Nawaiwaqt staunchly opposed
the secularization of Pakistan’s educational curriculum, the repealing of the Hudood laws, Mixed Marathon Races,
removal of the religion column from the passports of Pakistani Citizens and the 17th constitutional amendment. It is critical
of Western backed NGOs and generally adopted a very aggressive stance towards Musharaf’s anti Islamic policies.
The second category is that of Secular Nationalists. No single newspaper or media group exactly falls in to this category
however different writers like Sherien Mazari and Ayaz Amir who write in The NEWS or Talat Hussain who hosts a
popular TV show on AAJ TV fall in to this category. Newspapers like The Frontier Post and The Observer who have a
secular outlook tend to take strong nationalistic positions. The Urdu Press, with the exception of Nawaiwaqt and
newspapers associated with religious parties, generally adopts a secular nationalistic posturing. Secular nationalists
believe in liberal democracy however they are ready to compromise on it in the favor of national interest. They were
hostile towards the Musharaf regime and generally criticized its autocratic policies however they applauded his liberal
policies of women empowerment and giving more freedom to the press. They believe in the separation of state and the
religion and oppose the idea of religion being a source of legislation or policy making. They however believe that religious
forces are a reality in Pakistan and are willing to accept their role in politics, although they constantly try to limit the
political space available to the religious forces. They severely criticized the MMA for supporting Musharaf on the 17th
Constitutional Amendment but on the other hand although they were critical of the Red Mosque clerics and their ideas,
they were opposed to the Red Mosque operation. Secular Nationalists are closer to reality and not very rigid in their
opinions. They are guided by their nationalist and secular ideas and generally take positions based on their understanding
of the events. However they are biased against the Islamists and are generally pragmatic. They initially supported the
Musharaf Regime’s decision in siding with the US in its War on Terror on the pretext that Pakistan has no choice but to
support the US in its invasion of Afghanistan. After the strong resistance which the US faced in Iraq and Afghanistan they
have changed their stance and have been calling for redefining Pakistan’s engagement with America. Due to their
nationalistic ideas, Secular Nationalists are staunchly anti American. They have severely criticized the government on its
weak stance against America’s drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal areas and have called for threatening to and cutting off
the food and fuel supplies going to the NATO and US forces in Afghanistan. They are skeptical of the normalization
process with India and although they do not oppose peace overtures towards India they advocate a more dignified
approach. They believe in a tit for tat approach towards India, where peace should be met with peace and War with War.
They have been very critical of the government with regards to her stance after the Mumbai bombings. They feel that they
have been vindicated by India’s hostile attitude in the aftermath of the Mumbai bombing as they have been for long
advocating a more dignified approach in which concessions should be given to India only if they are reciprocated by the
Indians. They, together with the Nawaiwaqt group were one of the harshest critics of Musharaf regimes’ handling of the
Dr. A. Q Khan case. They opposed Musharaf’s policy on the Kashmir dispute. Secular Nationalists accept that terrorism is
a home grown problem of Pakistan and believe that limited military operations in Pakistan’s tribal areas can be carried out
to eliminate militants. On the other hand, they are opposed to using brute force to curb the challenge of militancy in the
tribal areas of Pakistan. Their viewpoint on the War on terror and Military Operations by the Pakistan Army in its tribal belt
is not guided by any ideology, they rather see the issue as a threat to Pakistan and are willing to accept any solution
which would solve the problem or limit the disastrous consequences faced by the Pakistani State as a result of this
problem. Similarly, the secular nationalists view the Baloch insurgency in a pragmatic manner. They blame the
government for depriving the Balochi people from their rights on the other hand they criticize the Baloch insurgency as
anti Pakistan. Due to their liberal ideas the secular nationalists view the repealing of the Hudood Laws and changes in the
educational curriculum as necessary steps in the direction towards separating state and religion. They criticize the
Islamists for their opposition of Western backed NGOs and mixed Marathon races.
The third category is of pro Western secularists. The DAWN, The Daily Times and The Friday Times generally fall in this
category. This group believes that Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who is credited by them to be the founder of Pakistan,
envisioned Pakistan to be a liberal secular democracy. They are staunchly opposed to the role of religion in public life and
hate those who want to bring religion in to public life. They aggressively opposed the Military dictatorship of Zia ul Haq
and his Islamization drive. They term the Zia era, which saw an increase in the role of religion in Pakistan’s public life, as
the darkest period of Pakistan’s history. They were the first ones to embrace Musharaf regime’s U Turn on Pakistan’s
Afghan policy after 9/11. They owned the War on Terror as their own war and aggressively supported it in the hope that
this will force the Pakistan Military to abandon its ties with the Jihadi Organizations and Islamic political parties. Pro
Western secularists are harshly opposed to the role of Military in Pakistani politics. They were the biggest hurdle for the
Musharaf Regime and were at the forefront of turning public opinion against him. They consider the Western ideology and
values to be far better than any other ideology. They are convinced of West’s moral, political and military superiority.
Hence they see West’s interference in the Muslim World, especially Pakistan as help towards liberalizing Pakistan from
conservative Islamist forces. Therefore they are ready to provide ideological support to any Western plan which is aimed
at promoting Western values in Pakistan. They idealize the Democratic Models present in India, Turkey and Eastern
Europe as they consider that these states have been able to establish liberal Western style democracies with the help of
the West and they hope that they would be able to do the same if they cooperate with the West. Pro Western secularists
advocate a friendly policy towards India and want peace between India and Pakistan. They reject the idea of India being a
rival state and are ready to accept Indian hegemony in the subcontinent. They are generally anti American whom they see
as a guarantor of Pakistan Military’s influence in the region and who is ready to compromise democracy and promotion of
Western values for political gains. The 1973 constitution is a sacred document for them. They bitterly opposed the 8th
constitutional amendment made at the time of Zia ul Haq and the 17 th constitutional amendment and the removal of
Supreme Court judges by Pervez Musharaf. Pro Western Secularists realize that they are in a minority in Pakistan. They
think nationalism and Islamic Ideas complement each other and weaken their influence in Pakistan. Therefore they avoid
taking hawkish stance and advocate avoiding war and term themselves as “peace doves”. They supported Western
pressure against the Pakistani State on the issue of nuclear proliferation by Dr. A. Q Khan although they were careful not
to be labeled as anti Pakistan given the popularity of the nuclear scientist. They advocate a negotiated settlement to the
Kashmir dispute and are in the favor of having good relationship with India and are against the idea of Kashmir centric
Indian Policy. They strongly oppose the military operation in Balochistan and term it as army’ quest for power and
influence. They advocate the idea that the Baloch insurgency is a result of injustices carried out against the Baloch people
by subsequent civilian and military regimes. They consider it as a moral obligation to highlight the cause of the Baloch and
campaign for their rights. They however stop short of supporting the demand of an independent Balochistan. Pro Western
Secularists aggressively support the promotion of liberal values in Pakistan. They ran a passionate campaign and
pressurized the government to repeal the Hudood Ordinance and carryout Military Operation against the Red Mosque
Clerics. They supported and adopted Musharaf’s theme of “enlightened moderation”. They supported the de radicalization
of the education curriculum in Pakistan and campaigned for bringing Madrassah Reforms. They consider it as their moral
obligation to support “women empowerment” schemes and to protect the rights of “Non Muslims minorities”. They
passionately cover atrocities committed against women and non Muslims and blame them on Conservative Muslim
majority. They have high regard for human right groups and view them as promoters of liberal values and thus extend
every possible support to them.
After analyzing the ideological divisions within the Pakistani media and those who influence it let’s now have a look at the
political affiliations of different media outlets. To fully understand these affiliations we first need to know the stakeholders
involved. These can be divided in to two groups:

• International players: which include America and Britain.

• Local players: which include mainstream political parties the PPP and PML-N.
In order to determine the political affiliations of private electronic and print media outlets both with the local and
international players we need to understand the difference in policies which these different players have with regards to
different policy matters. America and Britain disagree in Pakistan on the following policy matters:
• The War on Terror: The War on terror is America’s War aimed at securing American interests in South Asia.
Britain is opposed to increased American influence in the region and therefore opposes the War on Terror in the
hope of weakening America’s influence in the region.

• The Kashmir Dispute: America wants to delink the Kashmir Issue from Pakistan India rivalry and make it
irrelevant. Britain wants the issue to be addressed through the United Nations and seeks to maintain the dispute
in order to frustrate American plans.
• The Role of Military in Pakistan: Military is the primary institution which guarantees and secures American
influence in the region. America has long worked to consolidate Pakistan military’s influence in the country,
although that policy may be changing now. Britain seeks to weaken Pakistan military in the hope of weakening
American influence in Pakistan.
• The Baloch Insurgency: Britain has long supported the Baloch insurgency in order to weaken Pakistan’ military
and hence American influence in the region.

• Strong State Institutions: Britain being the old colonial masters of Pakistan has considerable influence in
Pakistan’s Bureaucracy and Judiciary. America has never allowed these institutions to become strong enough to
challenge the Pakistan Military.
The PML-N is a party loyal to the Americans, while the PPP has been historically close to the British. The PML-N and the
PPP have the same differences which Nationalist Islamists have from Pro Western Secularists. Having said that, such
differences are cast aside for political expediency and for the sake of their colonial Masters. Now that we are aware of the
differences between the Americans and the British and between the PML-N and PPP its easy to determine the political
affiliations of various media outlets. Let’s discuss each of them one by one:
The Jang group which includes THE NEWS, The Daily Jang and the GEO TV Network. This group is owned by Mir
Shakeel ur Rehman and is loyal to the Americans and supports the PML-N. Its agenda is openly pro Western and is at the
moment dominated by pro Western secularists. It receives funds from America and toes the American line on all policy
matters. It was very close to the Musharaf regime but developed personal enmity towards the military dictator in the last
year of his Military rule due to a personal dispute between Mir Shakeel ur Rehman and General Musharaf. GEO TV
Network has the largest viewership amongst private satellite channels and together with ARYONE Group and AAJ TV has
helped America transform the political infrastructure of Pakistan from that of street politics to media centric politics. They
have helped redefine political struggle in Pakistan with media being at the center stage and made it easier for America to
strengthen her grip and influence on the Pakistani Politics.
The DAWN GROUP which includes The DAWN newspaper, The Herald Tribune and DAWNNEWS Channel. This group
is owned by the family of Mahmood Abdullah Haroon and is loyal to the British. The Haroon family has strong tries with
Britain since before the partition of Pakistan. They support the PPP with many loyalists of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Benazir
Bhutto and pro British bureaucrats writing for the newspapers. They are very close to the British. Its present and former
editors like Zafar Abbas and M. Ziauddin used to work for the British Broadcasting Corporation. Irfan Hussain one of most
influential columnists who writes weekly in DAWN was a former speech writer for Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Ayesha Siddiqua,
another pro British academic also writes regularly in the newspaper. The newspaper can be considered the guardian of
British influence in the region and is amongst the most influential groups amongst all of the media outlets.
The NAWAIWAQT Group, which includes The daily Nawaiwaqt, The Nation and the Waqt TV. This group is owned by
Majid Nizami and is perhaps the only media outlet in Pakistan which is independent of foreign influence. It pursues its own
policy and supports the PML-N. It is the most powerful voice of Islamists in Pakistan and has given tremendous resistance
to American plans for the region.
The Daily Times, Friday Times, the Buisness Recorder and Daily Aajkal. This group is owned by PPP loyalist and
governor Punjab Salman Taseer. Its group editor Najam Sethi is also Pakistan’s correspondent for the influential British
Newspaper The Economist. He has been awarded the Golden Pen of Freedom Award 2009 by the European agency the
World Association of Newspapers. The group is loyal to the PPP and according to some reports have strong links to the
British Secret Service the MI5.
The Frontier Post is owned by Rehmat Shah Afridi who is loyal to the PPP and the British. Rehmat Shah Afridi was
sentenced to ten years in jail by the Nawaz Sharif Government in 1998 on charges of drug trafficking when he refused to
testify in different cases against Benazir Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari. Asif Ali Zardari, in one of his first actions after the
February 18th elections Zardari secured the release of Rehmat Shah Afridi on bail.
The ARY Group. This group is owned by Haji Abdur Razaq. It is close to the MQM.
The EXPRESS Group which includes the Daily Express and EXPRESSNEWS channel. This group is owned by Sultan Ali
Lakhani. The group editor is Athar Abbas who is loyal to the PPP. The group maintains a high standard of reporting and
gives ample space to independent reporting. The Express News channel has recently given increased coverage to US
diplomats, moreover it was equally behind (along with Geo) in Swat Whipping video propagation and supporting US
operations along with there planned extraordinary coverage of the release of an Indian agent from Pakistani jail, a US
agenda. Thus it seems It is more inclined to the US these days as is PPP after the NRO deal.
The ideological affinity and political affiliations of all the major media outlets in Pakistan indicate that giving them a free
hand is actually aimed to stop the Ummah’s march towards revival. At a time when the call for Khilafah is finding roots in
the Pakistani Society these media outlets are busy churning out Western ideas of freedom, democracy and liberalism.
They are helping in strengthening the influence of Western colonial States in Pakistan and are busy shaping the public
opinion in favor of policies which would best serve the powerful capitalists who own these media outlets. They are
polluting the minds of the young generation and destroying their Islamic emotions. They have played a critical role in
convincing the Pakistani masses of Western Military supremacy and their inability to challenge the West.
It is hoped that the above discussion would help the dawah carriers in understanding Pakistani politics in a better manner.
The above analysis was with regards to the role of Private Media in Pakistan. It cannot and should not be considered as a
case against the privatization of media outlets. Hizb has included media as one of the structures of the Khilafah State and
has defined a role for the media in an Islamic Society, which can be the topic of one of the upcoming monthlies.