A new law raises controversy regarding the press and media ethics. Oula Farawati in Amman argues that not all that glitters is gold It is an awkward situation in Jordan's media these days. The government has made a hero out of itself by announcing that it was time to regulate its relationship with the media through the novel notion of a "media pact". This charter aims at "cutting the umbilical cord which linked the press to the government in an unhealthy way, and led to a distortion of the media landscape," government spokesperson Nabil Sherif said. The government indirectly admits, in its "media code", that its relationship with the media was fuzzy. Consecutive governments have indulged in the habit of avoiding media criticism by giving in-kind gifts and incentives to underpaid journalists, who were happy with the in-all- but-name kickbacks. Responding to King Abdullah's directives, in which the monarch clearly mentions "immoral media" in his letter of designation to a newly- appointed Prime Minister Samir Rifai, the government issued this code of conduct, which limits its relationship with the ministry spokespersons and makes sure media outlets don't enjoy government largesse through ads and subscriptions. It is no secret that the king was unhappy with "some media outlets". His polemic against "negative" media last year was unprecedented. When some media engaged in a tug-of-war between two high-ranking state officials, the king called them "careless, incompetent, shameful and irresponsible". He even said he was "extremely shocked and dismayed at the low level of debate transpiring in some elite and media circles". So it is time for the Rifai government to act on the king's directives. The new government put the media in the holding cell. The verdict: no government subscriptions, no government ads, no under-the-table kickbacks and no double agents. All journalists who were doubling as "media advisors" now have to choose between their media institutions or the government. Of course, those who benefited from all the government kindness were disappointed. They criticised the code, all for the wrong reasons. Others felt relief when the government finally announced it would no longer pressure journalists into praising its members, deeds and plans. Columnist Jamil Nimri called this charter a "wise move"; he believes it was "the best approach to manage the government-media relationship." Others, like columnist Oraib Rintawi, said that at least the government now admitted that its relationship with the media was "unhealthy". Respected academic Abdel-Rahim Huneiti said that the code sets professional conditions that will reduce the wrong practices of the media. He said academia viewed it with great satisfaction as a serious step towards a constructive relationship between journalists and universities, and a consolidation of professional media. But is the government media charter an all- innocent move? Perhaps not, said veteran columnist Bassem Sakkijha. "It is the government's right to stop subscribing to papers, discontinue advertising or fire double agents but the government is only wearing the mask of virtue," he said. "Maybe the government intends to dry up the resources for the media. However, there is a subliminal message to the media: your fate is in our hands," Sakkijha added. For the veteran columnist, what happened is just a reminder of a similar incident in the 1980s, when the government decided to stop obituary ads. The government then claimed the move was taken to protect the image of Jordanians. According to Sakkijha, the goal was to drain the press; especially the press that plays the role of critic, revealing misconduct and expressing public opinion. The decision did not last for long in any case. Jamal Shawaheen, a columnist at the Islamic Action Front newspaper Al-Sabeel is also pessimistic of the potential change the government charter will create. "Maybe now is not the time to look into the causes of corruption in journalism, which date back decades, not just a few years, and led to terrible forms of sabotage by the media and the government," he wrote. "We know what happened. Media-government corruption reached the point where sides were taken between fighting state sponsors, deepened national rifts. It is clear that this is the main motive of the government," he added. Shawaheen, like many other independent journalists, does not see any light at the end of the tunnel. He believes that the code of conduct, while claiming to embolden the media, does not give the press any immunity, nor does it establish the transparency of government. "The media will remain unchanged, and the main media job will be to continue to cover the main government news, while the campaign of censorship and rapid intervention will only become stronger. It will only be uncertain as to whether the imbalance was the responsibility of the government or the journalists." Pens down. The distrust between the media and government looks like it will remain unchanged in an environment marred by unprecedented political, social and economic crises that will mean the government will continue to cover up more than it reveals.
