It seems as if the Presidency wants to tell a large number of Egyptians that they are second-class and do not have a "President" whose news, images and interviews they can follow. The Presidency also denies these people their right to news of the President's health and feelings after the death of his grandson, Mohamed Alaa Mubarak. The reason is that these citizens dared and preferred reading independent papers to those which are owned and managed by the government!
I think it is my right to comment on this point because everything in Egypt, with the exception of the Presidency, has changed or wanted to change. For tens of years, the Presidency has allowed only representatives of the government newspapers to follow the President's interviews and news in accordance with a certain system. This was acceptable at the time when Egypt had no independent papers.
The poor readers were reading government papers because they had no alternatives, but times have changed and the State gave licenses to independent newspapers. It is natural to see fierce competition between the "government" papers and the "independent" papers. This competition is, in fact, in the interest of Egypt, people, the ruling regime, and the press industry itself.
The State supported such a competition. Without an independent press, Egypt would never enjoy real freedom and good conditions because such papers made it incumbent upon officials to do their jobs to avoid the anger of public opinion. However, the Presidency refused to change and insisted on the "monopoly of the President's news and photos" by the government press.
For those who do not know, it is the Presidency itself that sends the President's photos to the press. It is also the body which appoints reporters and correspondents of the government papers. It also denies private papers access to such photos as if these papers were issued in another country under another president with other readers. Does the Presidency want to protect the government papers and secure their "monopoly"? Does it want to send a message to the independent newspapers that "You are not Egyptians"? Is this: stagnation in thought, a single view, and determination not to develop and keep pace with the times?
It is the right of 80 million Egyptians to follow the President's news and photos. The Presidency does not have the right to deny the private papers access to such news as this runs counter to the discourse of the ruling regime that we have a large margin of democracy. Safwat al-Sharif alleges that "we live in the brightest era of democracy", so why does the Presidency punish people just because they chose to read the independent press?
How can you say to readers: If you want to follow the President's news and photos or even want to know about his health after the death of his grandson, you have to read the "government press" otherwise you are "deprived" due to orders from on high. Can the Presidency name another country doing so? Can it give us a logical and acceptable reason behind this "control of the press and people"? Oh, our great Presidency, independent newspapers are national and Egyptian papers. It is not their fault that they compete with the government papers. It is not a crime if they become better than the government ones. The Presidency is a sovereign and independent body to which we resort when we experience injustice. Therefore, the question now is: Why do these papers suffer this cruel injustice as if they are opponents?
It is not the task of the independent journalists to shed tears at the threshold of the Presidency to get the President's news and photos. It is not logic to beg the President's photos from the competitor papers. We will not do this or that, so who will be the loser?
