Freedom with responsibility

FREEDOM of press, right to information and other freedoms are the hallmarks of a democratic society. Without the enjoyment of these vital freedoms and rights, institutions such as the government or private and public organisations and even individuals cannot be made accountable. Under the privilege of secrecy, these bodies can choose to remain non-transparent in their activities. Some initiatives on the part of government and organisations also call for sounding out people's constructive views and opinion on them. For this purpose also, citizens should be supplied with inadequate information or they need to be empowered to demand such information. It is good to see that the concept of the freedom of the media is relatively well entrenched in Bangladesh. A freedom of information act is on the anvil and its introduction will mean citizens' unhindered access to information having relevance to their needs and interests.
Freedoms and rights are extremely significant for a functional democratic order and for good governance. However, there is also the other side of the coin that must not be lost sight of. All sensible persons would agree that nowhere absolute freedoms and rights can be welcomed because the same may be also be misused ironically in the name of promoting the good of the people. For example, in most countries responsible and constructive sections of the media are to be found as well as the ones that indulge in sensationalism or media hypes. The latter sections of the media are not conducive to the growth of a healthy and progressive society. The latter may also scandalise persons or institutions -- unfairly -- tarring their images and whipping up public emotions unnecessarily on non-issues paving the way for social and political unrest that are detrimental to normal life and the economy. Thus, in the developed countries which are also found to be mature democracies, the freedoms and rights do also enjoin upon the media a great deal of responsibility. In the UK, for instance, safety measures against irresponsible use of freedom and opportunities are seen in the existence of elaborate laws of libel and defamation, the operation of a council to exercise a guardian-like role over the functioning of the media to prevent it from unconscientious and arbitrary use of media power, etc.
The measures must not be construed as impinging on the essential freedoms discussed above. The same are provisioned only to curtail recklessness and doing of willful injurious things on the strength of these freedoms and rights. Therefore, it is imperative to realise the great importance of proper exercise of responsibility that must be made an integral part of such freedoms and rights for the purpose of admitting them to be truly successful. Like the umbilical chord, the two sets of aspirations must be considered as inseparable in the highest public interest. These issues need to be understood and appreciated well by all concerned quarters. On its part, this paper, as a financial daily, considers that freedom of information, with objectivity practised by the media personnel forming their core professional value, can be the most important factor for policy decisions, based on free flow of information, by those involved in policy-making and operating businesses.
The media in Bangladesh did commendable work in many areas in sensitising people rightly about important issues, identifying national problems and airing people's grievances. But misinformation and slanderous items without justification and proper verification, arising out of a situation where the accuracy of reports and comments is not ascertained, are at times also published or given prominence by some sections of the media, knowingly or unknowingly about their consequences. Thus, it is necessary that the laws about to be introduced or beefed up for ensuring freedom of information do also need to be suitably counterbalanced, without compromising the basic objectives of freedom of information.