NEC’s impractical guidelines

The National Elections Commission (NEC) has come out with a weird and utterly impractical set of guidelines for the media to follow during the ongoing Presidential election campaign. No media union, neither The Editors’ Guild, nor the Sri Lanka Press Institute was consulted.

These guidelines have no force of law but are so warped and complicated that they are tantamount to a censorship or news blackout. A previous attempt to attach punishments to violations was struck down by the Courts.

The NEC wants the media to engage in balanced reporting, whatever that means. It wants all candidates given equal time and space, which put mildly is a silly proposition when they themselves hint at the absurdity of the number of candidates. If any media outlet wishes to support any one particular candidate it should be at liberty to do so. If such an outlet genuinely believes one candidate is better than the other for the country, it should be able to endorse that candidate – and let the readers, listeners or viewers decide for themselves.

Media institutions may have agendas but the ultimate test should not be with some committee of the NEC, but the voter. State media is different because they are funded by the public. In democracies in the West, media endorse candidates. NEC guidelines quoting constitutional provisions seem to conflict with other constitutional provisions guaranteeing freedom of expression.

That apart, what is needed is a robust exchange of opinions not a sterile coverage. The only restraints should be on erroneous facts and intemperate language. Muzzling the mainstream media is opening the doors even wider for fake news via social media.