If someone is spreading fake news, there are many legal tools to correct this mistake. You cannot have a free press by attacking a media outlet or demanding its closure. This kind of act is just the work of an autocrat

In the early 1990s, when I was a junior journalist at the Daily Star, two of my colleagues requested an interview with then Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and opposition leader Sheikh Hasina. They were given time even though none of these colleagues were political journalists or seasoned journalists.

Fast forward to 2023. During a press conference by then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at the Prime Minister’s Office, a veteran journalist stood up in the crowd during a question and answer session answers. He asked the Prime Minister if she would allow Khaleda Zia to go abroad for treatment.

It can be said that the free press does not guarantee quality journalism. Of course. In a democracy, anyone can open an information platform. You can be right-wing, left-wing or centrist. You are free to support the Awami League or the BNP or the Jamaat or the Jatiyo Party, or the CPB. Or you can choose to be anti-establishment and always take a stand against the government of the day. The rest is up to readers to choose the media they prefer. This is how the media works

Hasina exploded in anger: why was the journalist so sympathetic towards Khaleda, who had tried to kill her (a reference to the August 2004 grenade attack)? Hasina was so angry that she ended the press conference on the spot. Later that evening, the lead reporter lost his job (he got his job back several months later).

These two contrasting scenarios remind us that there was once a free press – where senior leaders respected even the youngest journalists in the early 1990s – where a senior leader became so high and powerful that if a question asked him offended, a journalist could lose his job.

Between the early 1990s and 2002, Bangladesh enjoyed a free press like never before. During this period, we wrote freely. If we made a mistake, we received rebuttals or phone calls from the injured party. There have been no attacks on the media by the authorities and no attempts at intimidation by the government. There have been some incidents, but they were not committed by the government.

The first serious attack on the free press came from the BNP-Jamaat government, against Ekushey TV, Bangladesh’s first private television channel which revolutionized the way news was to be presented in broadcast media. The BNP-Jamaat government perceived Ekushey as a pro-AL media outlet and closed the channel in August 2002.

However, after this incident, the government generally allowed other media outlets to publish their articles relatively freely. But the closure of Ekushey TV has become an example for everyone to see what the government can do if it becomes too hostile to a certain house.

The free press became a controlled press under military influence between 2007 and the end of 2008. This was the time when journalists were beaten, when articles were withdrawn or ordered by military intelligence services. Those were the days when editors were getting calls from the spy agency telling them what we should and shouldn’t publish.

At the end of 2008, the free press returned. After the AL took power, in 2010, it repeated what the BNP-Jamaat government had done in 2002. The government arrested the editor-in-chief of Amar Desh and closed the newspaper in June for 10 days. Although the newspaper was later allowed to resume operations, it was closed again in 2013. Other opposition media outlets were also attacked one after another.

Young people today may not understand what press freedom really means, as they live in a world of social media, alongside professional media. People can post anything on social media without being held accountable. They can say things using false identities; they can say things about Bangladesh from another continent.

But that’s different from the role of the press. The press is an organized platform that must obtain permission from the government to operate in order to publish information. It is bound by the laws relating to the written and audiovisual press; pay taxes and it is managed by professionals. They are physically present in society and cannot get away with saying anything.

It can be said that the free press does not guarantee quality journalism. Of course. In a democracy, anyone can open an information platform. You can be right-wing, left-wing or centrist. You are free to support the Awami League or the BNP, or the Jamaat or the Jatiyo Party, or the CPB. Or you can choose to be anti-establishment and always take a stand against the government of the day. The rest is up to readers to choose the media they prefer. This is how the media works.

This is why, whatever party you vote for, readers do not prefer partisan newspapers. We have seen that over time, most partisan newspapers have an ornamental existence or, at best, are subscribed only by die-hard partisans.

The most popular newspapers in the country are only protest newspapers. They can have tilts to the right, to the left or to the center; but their principle acts as a safeguard against the powerful. They operate on a commercial principle: they can earn journalists’ salaries and, if possible, distribute dividends to investors.

The revival of democracy following the massive upheavals of the 1990s has raised many hopes for a new Bangladesh. But the journey soon became thorny when the Awami League chose not to cooperate with the ruling BNP. Their feud has made the overall socio-political environment of the country vicious.

And this took an extreme form under the Hasina regime, especially after 2014. Not only were media outlets shut down, but the most popular ones lost advertising revenue because spy agencies forced all major advertisers to stop their provide advertisements. There was regular intimidation from spy agencies. And above all, some of the very partisan journalists seemed to slander those who tried to publish revealing articles.

To survive in this environment, the media have resorted to self-censorship and strategies to keep their noses above water. Readers were disappointed by the progressively soft tone of the newspapers/media. But it was at this time that the administration, the police and even the courts became partisan. For example, if we wrote something about S Alam, there would be calls from the spy agency and the PMO to editors or investors. And then S Alam would go to court and get a verdict that the press couldn’t write about him.

Today we hope for an end to this vicious environment. We hope that the free press will return to diagnose the problems and focus on the prospects of this society, so that readers and policymakers can take the right next step.

A free press would mean, like the different types of political parties in a democracy, the presence of diverse voices. There will be supporters, there will be neutral ones, there will be advertisements and there will be philosophical journals. If you don’t like a newspaper or media outlet, don’t buy their news. If someone is spreading fake news, there are many legal tools to correct this mistake. You cannot have a free press by attacking a media outlet or demanding its closure. This kind of act is just the work of an autocrat.

Sharier Khan is editor-in-chief of The Business Standard.