My article à ¶»à ·‘à ¶´à ·€à ·Âà ·„à ·’à ¶±à ¶º, à ¶»à ¶±à ·’à ¶½à ·Š à ·ƒà ·„ à ¶¢à ¶±à ¶¸à ·Âà ¶°à ·Šâ€Âà ¶º (Rupavahini, Ranil and the media) brings to light the decrepit nature of State media through a recent personal encounter.
Promised that my response to Rupavahini on a recent statement made by Ranil Wickremesinghe criticizing three key Editors of newspapers, I was deeply saddened to note that the broadcast censored what I had to say about the deterioration of media freedom and the severe intimidation many journalists have to face. I also noted that the Chairperson of the Sri Lanka Working Journalists Association, Sanath Balasooriya, also had his statement to Rupavahini severely censored.
By attempting to teach Ranil a lesson or two in media ethics, what was evident is that Rupavahini itself is in dire need of educating itself on media professionalism and impartiality.
On the other hand, it is my personal belief that Ranil’s criticism of the media is based more on parochial political gain than any real interest in strengthening media freedom in Sri Lanka. My article goes on to examine in detail the lack of professionalism in media today with reference to their varying approaches to the reportage of the UNP, SLFP and the JVP. While the context of media freedom in Sri Lanka is extremely disturbing, I go on to point that it is also the case that reportage of political convenience is as detrimental to media development as direct threats to media freedom.
Read my article in full here (in Sinhala) or read it online on Vikalpa here.