These are the best of times and the worst of times for the Egyptian media. Following the 25 January Revolution, a media boom led to a proliferation of satellite broadcasts, print media and websites. But professional standards have dipped, profits are shaky and the state-owned media is heavily indebted and, apparently, lacks a sense of direction. People are following the media more than at any time before, and there are more and better jobs available for journalists. However, there is a definite malaise in the air. As private business has come to dominate a considerable part of the media scene, editorial policies can be biased. And with broadcasters competing for viewers, sensationalism is becoming more common. In the print media, objectivity can be sacrificed, with party lines overcoming responsible reporting. Many people are also blaming the media for the troubles of the country, a sentiment that needs to be addressed with urgency as it may encourage a clampdown on freedom of expression. The Egyptian media fall into three categories: state-owned, party-owned and independently owned. Media collectives, firms that are owned cooperatively by editors and writers, are rare. SERVING THE PUBLIC: The main justification for the state-owned media is that it provides the public with access to information that otherwise would not be available. Many countries, including key capitalist states, maintain state-owned media. But in democracies, ownership is mostly kept at arm's length to preserve editorial integrity, and strict guidelines are enforced to make sure that the media work for the benefit of the nation and not for the government in power. Egypt has a long history of state-owned media. The first state-owned media appeared in the nineteenth century, with the publication of Al-Waqa'i Al-Masriya (The Egyptian Chronicle) in December 1828 as a service to the state and local and foreign business. Egypt had privately owned radio stations in the 1920s, but its first government-owned radio station was only launched in 1934. The independently owned media were common in the first half of the twentieth century, adding vitality to the liberal political scene. But once the government took a socialist path in the 1960s most of the media came under state control, a situation which has had a profound impact on the current media scene. By the time the country erupted in revolt in January 2011, the state-owned media were bloated and struggling to compete with the increasingly energised local and regional independent media organisations. Worse, the public was fast losing confidence in the reliability of the information provided by the state-owned media. Professional standards were slipping and calls for reforming the media were made. These calls were reinforced by the heavy indebtedness of the state media organisations and their obvious inability to stand up to competition from a new crop of rivals. All too often, the state media organisations were accused of squandering resources, lacking a constitutional framework, and failing to submit to any form of self-organisation or quality control. To make things worse, these organisations had incurred debts to the tune of LE30 billion ($4.2 billion). With a staff of journalists, technicians and administrators of nearly 70,000 people, demands for downsizing posed grave social and political risks. Arguments for preserving the state-owned media are backed by the long history, established tradition and aura of familiarity these organisations have earned over the years. Also, with the immense assets owned by these organisations, any notion of privatisation is likely to produce a backlash of suspicion, if not litigation, that no one wants to tackle at the moment. Protecting the state-owned media is not just about workers' rights and the sense of national identity. There are also questions of public service involved, with many saying that these organisations, if allowed to play their rightful role, are best placed to fill gaps in the provision of information. As Egypt reinvents itself, building a new state and tackling delicate issues, there is no guarantee that the independently owned media organisations, with their private or even foreign funding, are best positioned to shed light on current developments with the professionalism and impartiality that the public needs. There are of course no guarantees of professional performance and objective reporting in the state media organisations either, but there these guarantees are not hard to enforce, and the current constitution offers a roadmap for improved media performance in both the state and the independent media organisations. Once we are willing to admit that our state media organisations are in need of radical change, the rest will be easy. We need to make sure that our state media are independent from government interference, committed to freedom of expression and intent on achieving the highest possible standards of professional integrity. Restructuring the state-owned media is inevitable, and we must pursue it without delay out of social need, economic prudence and a concern for democracy. Bearing this in mind, it is important to point out that it is common for democracies to have state-owned media organisations that are funded by taxpayers and run independently as a service to the public, not the government that happens to be in power. These organisations are closely monitored to ensure their lack of bias and respect for professional standards. Moreover, Egypt has invested heavily in its state-owned media, and it cannot afford to squander their assets in hasty privatisation schemes that could be lop-sided and controversial. Without interfering in the media's editorial policies, the government needs them to bring the views of policymakers to the public. Once stripped of the sycophantic propensities of their authoritarian past, the state-owned media can turn into proper vehicles for channelling and assessing public policy. When it comes to professional standards and integrity, the independently owned media have been just as guilty as the state-owned ones. And when it comes to funding, questions of transparency are of particular relevance. Any future regulation of the media will have to involve proper verification of funding and circulation. RESTRUCTURING STRATEGIES: Before discussing future strategies for the state-owned media it is necessary to agree that they can and must act as reliable conduits of public policy, as well as promoters of culture and knowledge and fairness and objectivity. If the country's state-owned media abide by international standards of probity and objectivity, and if they uphold a code of conduct that makes them act in the public, and not in the government, interest, they will truly be vehicles for national progress. Any future strategy for the state-owned media must ensure that the existing organisations remain state-owned for at least ten years to avert any hasty action that may undermine years of achievement in this sector. Following this, further steps can be taken, including the creation of the two agencies mentioned in the constitution. These agencies, the National Press Organisation (NPO) and the National Media Organisation (NMO), should be identified as the authorities overseeing the state-owned media. The staff of the organisations should be drawn from the profession and from civil society, in order to ensure full independence from government, and the organisations should be mandated to monitor and evaluate media performance in order to ensure its compliance with laws and regulations. A capable management structure must be put in place to enhance the efficacy and professionalism of the organisations and to ensure that they serve the public and not any special interests. Accountability must be reinforced in keeping with laws and regulations. Self-regulation by the profession must be reinforced in order to enhance performance and uphold professional standards. THE INDEPENDENT MEDIA: The country's privately owned media must be held to the same professional standards as the public sector, the recent rise in the size and influence of the sector bringing with it certain responsibilities and the need for greater accountability. Sensationalism, opaque funding and excessive bias to special interests must be kept in check under any future regulation or self-imposed code in the industry. According to advertising companies working in Egypt, media advertising income fell by 60 per cent in 2011 alone. But in the same year, 25 private satellite channels were opened and dozens of newspapers and websites launched. Former information minister Salah Abdel-Maqsoud has pointed out that while the private satellite channels spent about LE6 billion ($900 million) on their operations in 2012, their income was only LE1.5 billion ($200 million). This gap in funding poses questions regarding political funding and integrity. Despite the drop in revenues, investors have kept applying for media licences, and many of them are setting up new media outlets through existing companies. This is good news for journalists, who can get jobs more easily and with better remuneration than before. It is also good news for the industry in terms of up-to-date equipment and professional training. But due perhaps to increased competition and the whims of capital, the mood in the industry is not one of ebullience, but of anxiety and uncertainty. As media outlets have proliferated, questions have been asked about the affiliation of the new organisations and the sources of their funds. With many of the organisations lacking solid economic foundations and apparent feasibility, quality may be compromised and continuity hardly guaranteed. Some of the satellite channels that have appeared recently have managed to spend lavishly, with little expectation of recouping their outlays. Fuelled by financial and political motives, sensationalism has become a common feature of reporting in various organisations. And as standards of objectivity have slipped, truth has been a victim. THE CONSTITUTION AND SELF-REGULATION: Articles 211-213 of the constitution envisage the formation of a Supreme Council for the Regulation of the Media (SCRM) as well as the NPO and NMO. Articles 65, 68, and 70-72 provide guarantees for freedom of expression, independence of the state-owned media, access to information, and abrogation of the penalty of imprisonment for publishing offences. By enacting and amending the existing laws the ground will be prepared for more professionalism, transparency and accountability in the industry. With its longer tradition and better unionist practices, the print media in Egypt is better placed for self-regulation than the broadcast or electronic media. It is therefore quite possible to create a framework for self-regulation that would reduce bias, sloppy reporting and sensationalism in this branch of the industry, without compromising its freedom. One proposal for self-regulation involves the creation of a Journalism Council comprising members of the press, academics and activists. According to the proposal, the council would include 13 members, two to be named by publishers, two by editors, four by the Journalists Syndicate, two by academics, two by civil society activists and one to be named by the judiciary. The council would elect a president from among its members for a term of three years. The role of the council would be to formulate professional standards and codes of conduct for the industry and supervise their implementation. It would also ensure that data about media circulation and ownership were accurate and accessible. The council would look into complaints from various parties and investigate cases of professional malpractice. It could also decide on penalties against the parties concerned. In addition, it could organise seminars and workshops as needed to meet industry needs. The writer is a researcher on media affairs.
