6
It is a pity that the code regulating the functioning of the country’s electronic media landscape had to come from the government rather than the Pakistan Broadcasters’ Association. But the failure — and given the context of the problematic journalistic practices that have become a hallmark of Pakistan’s raucous electronic media over the years — meant that somehow or the other, regulation had to be effected.
The result is the Electronic Media (Programmes and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015, announced a little over a week ago, which makes amendments to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) Rules of 2009.
Apart from everything else, I find the section on advertising interesting, given my concern for Pakistani society’s slide, in the main in the elite and upper-middle-class sections, into unthinking and often crass consumerism.
Ads targeting children are examples of unbridled obfuscation.
First, the 2015 amendments to the Pemra rules require that “Advertisements shall be readily recognisable as such and kept separate from programmes”, and that “Advertisements in the form of subtitles, logos or sliding texts shall not exceed a maximum of one-tenth of the whole screen”. It is an open secret that the financial interests of parent companies of media groups have played a role in determining the output from that platform; the most commonly used form is advertising posing as reportage, and sometimes even the naked promotion of this conglomerate or that, even in talk shows.
If it can be implemented — which remains to be seen since big money tends to trump all else, here in Pakistan or elsewhere — adherence to such a rule could make a significant difference in terms of people not being duped into consuming advertising and buying, as it were, heedlessly into the narrative being plugged by business interests.
The rules state that: “Advertisements intended for children shall not directly ask the children to buy the product”, and that “Advertisements shall not promote obscenity, violence or other activities harmful to human health or property”.
I’m not sure whether I fully understand the first, which seems to me to be a case of ‘as opposed to asking parents or other adults to buy for them’. But this I know with certainty: the advertisements targeting children that run on television networks available in Pakistan, like anywhere else in the world, are good examples of unbridled obfuscation at best, and outright misrepresentation at worst.
To be sure, that is what advertising anywhere does — project something that you may not need or that may not be good for you in a manner that tries to convince you to buy it. Yet children become convinced with rock-solid certainty that X brand of biscuits is healthy because of the advertisement, or that Y brand of candy is just fine because the advertisement said it was made from fruit. Advertising for adults follows the same pattern, but adults are fully responsible for their choices.
Which is why I find the last part of the second of the two clauses quoted above so beguiling. “Harmful to human health or property” … does this mean that I can go to the appropriate forum and, if I am able to convince it that candy or deep-fried processed meat products have adverse effects on children’s health — and there is much evidence for that — the rules require the advertising be taken off air?
That seems like a case worth fighting for a generation of young Pakistanis whose dietary choices have, in the short span of a generation, made a perceptible and under-studied shift towards harmful junk and processed foods. I know it’s a case I probably won’t win — big business trumps — but it’s a warming thought that the rule is on the books.
And another section of the Pemra code: “Exploitation of religious or nationalistic sentiments and use of religious or national symbols and anthem purely for the purposes of promotion of a product or any quality in such product shall be prohibited [sic].”
About a decade ago, I was disturbed by an Independence Day advertisement put out by a major mobile phone service provider that was a replay of that beautiful milli naghma, ‘Yeh watan tumhara hai.’ The use of this song as a barely glossed-over advertisement was outrageous. Worse was the fact that it featured the singer, the master Mehdi Hasan, ageing but stoic, in a wheelchair. I assume he was paid for the appearance, and I’m sure it was welcome given the way Pakistan treats its performing arts’ icons, especially those who are ageing or infirm, but it was nevertheless abhorrent.
There are many examples of similarly problematic advertising, but this sticks in the mind for sheer insensitivity.
If the new set of guidelines can get broadcasters to stick to the norms of decency, then perhaps we’re looking at the Pakistan electronic media finally, at long last, doing a bit of growing up.
The writer is a member of staff.
Published in Dawn, August 31st, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
