Pro­fes­sion­al­ism in Kur­dish me­dia and pol­i­tics

The Kurdish Globe - - NEWS - By Gazi Has­san

We cel­e­brated the 118th an­niver­sary of is­su­ing the first Kur­dish pa­per this year. In re­cent years, de­bates emerged as a new model of di­a­logue—a com­mon plat­form for ex­chang­ing opin­ions and mak­ing ground for dif­fer­ent opin­ions. This could in­clude pro­fes­sion­al­ism, iden­ti­fy­ing the du­ties and roles of the char­ac­ters in the me­dia. We can say that pro­fes­sion­al­ism has be­come a model nowa­days, be­ing pro­fes­sional in think­ing and mak­ing de­ci­sions, but those who talk about pro­fes­sion­al­ism may not nec­es­sar­ily be com­mit­ted to the pro­fes­sion­al­ism of their work. In fact, some of those who have cho­sen to work in jour­nal­ism are as un­fit as a doc­tor who wants to work as a shoe­maker, or a shoe­maker as an en­gi­neer.

In or­der to over­come prob­lems of jour­nal­ism and me­dia, the scope of democ­racy, free­dom of ex­pres­sion, re­duc­ing cen­sor­ship and widen­ing the scope of de­liv­er­ing in­for­ma­tion to the au­di­ence via pro­fes­sion­al­ism should be of­fered and broad­ened. Jour­nal­ists them­selves should un­der­stand his or her duty, mes­sage and com­mit­ment to the prin­ci­ples, pow­ers and rules. They should be pro­fes­sion­als in the do­main; this is true for pol­i­tics too.

It’s not an ex­ag­ger­a­tion if we say that ev­ery Kur­dish in­di­vid­ual has be­come a politi­cian or po­lit­i­cal an­a­lysts, and be­haves like po­lit­i­cal actors. All the while we have a Kur­dish par­lia­ment, with a po­lit­i­cal ea­ger­ness that we should de­mand our rights from Al-Ab­badi’s gov­ern­ment in a di­plo­matic way, and claims for ne­go­ti­a­tions to re­solve the crises. It’s nor­mal if the men­tioned MP is a doc­tor, en­gi­neer or a philoso­pher in his field, but ac­cord­ing to all pro­fes­sional mea­sures of pol­i­tics he’s short-sighted and un­ex­pe­ri­enced. Just like jour­nal­ism, this is also con­sid­ered as a prob- lem in pol­i­tics. Pro­fes­sion­al­ism in pol­i­tics is noth­ing less than in the me­dia. Pol­i­tics and me­dia are two com­mon and over­lap­ping pro­fes­sions. News­pa­pers can­not stand alone with­out pol­i­tics; and with­out con­vey­ing aims and goals, po­lit­i­cal works would be­come weak and re­stricted.

The politi­cian who doesn’t un­der­stand the prin­ci­ples, power and duty of a term such as “ne­go­ti­a­tion” and is mixed up with other terms of “di­a­logue, meet­ings, and fo­rums,” is a politi­cian who does not un­der­stand the duty of diplo­macy and he will not un­der­stand the duty of pol­i­tics. Like­wise when an edi­tor in chief, jour­nal­ist or a re­porter, has be­come in­volved in jour­nal­ism for any po­lit­i­cal rea­son or just as an ac­ci­dent, and has noth­ing to do with jour­nal­ism, of course we can imag­ine that he doesn’t even dif­fer­en­ti­ate be­tween writ­ing news, re­ports and other gen­res of me­dia writ­ing. He could also have lit­tle un­der­stand­ing of the ethics of jour­nal­ism, rules of con­duct and rights of de­liv­er­ing in­for­ma­tion to the peo­ple.

Pro­fes­sion­al­ism is an important prin­ci­ple. It means be­ing ex­pert and ex­pe­ri­enced in the field. I think be­fore be­ing com­mit­ted to the work, and show­ing off in the po­lit­i­cal process, we should first think of spe­cialty, prov­ing the skills and qual­i­fi­ca­tions in the pro­fes­sion. A per­son may find strong re­marks and ef­fec­tive opin­ion the­o­ret­i­cally for defin­ing the pro­fes­sion­al­ism of me­dia and pol­i­tics, but prac­ti­cally he may not be able to find the pro­fes­sion­al­ism in even a word of a politi­cian, a page of news­pa­per or word of a re­porter or a pre­sen­ter. So pro­fes­sion­al­ism flows out from con­fi­dence and qual­i­fi­ca­tion of peo­ple, rather than the masked pur­poses of a po­lit­i­cal fig­ure on the screen, or an an­a­lyst in a de­bate.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Iraq

© PressReader. All rights reserved.