Forms and Causes of Media Capture in Nepal and Its Manifestation in Newspaper Content

Abstract

Media capture is the sellout by media/journalists of their responsibility in exchange of monetary and non-monetary favors from the government, businesses, and other interest groups. Captured media produce and disseminate content that is neither accurate and fair, nor impartial, or they disregard the basic standards for journalism production. Instead, they produce and disseminate information – even, disinformation – as desired by the capturers. In practical terms, capture in democracies substitutes brute force that authoritarian states use to rein media for the purpose of accessing or remaining in power. Most studies on media capture by economists have resorted to quantitative analysis and economic modelling methodologies, while others have undertaken political economy analyses. This study has attempted to understand capture, using a qualitative approach – analysis of attributes of journalism drawing data from published testimonies, interviews and document reviews. It has also undertaken critical discourse analysis of media texts and includes a case study – to understand the forms of capture and its manifestation in newspaper content. Key informant interviews were used to validate the findings from data analysis. This approach primarily builds on the media capture paradigm, underlying which are multiple streams of scholarship such as political economy analysis, Critical Theory, and the Foucauldian understanding of power and how it influences social interactions. The main findings are summarized as follows: (a) Political capture has resulted from partisanship among journalists and party-affiliated journalists’ associations where politicians in government reward compliant media/journalists with handouts from state coffers, and by appointing journalists as public relations advisors or staff at state media agencies; (b) another form of capture takes place through advertising using which both government and businesses can influence viability and profitability of media in a market that is dominated by a few large advertisers, of which the government has a roughly one-third share. Circumstantial evidence suggests that advertisers even pay for content in addition to exchanging advertising for favorable coverage. Some media willingly participate in capture, because it allows the owners to extract policy favors from politicians for other businesses they own, in exchange for favorable coverage; and (c). Journalists/media payback for the favors by not-reporting, reporting selectively – even reporting alternative facts – and by killing news not favorable to their patrons. Briefly, the main conclusions of the study are as follows: The growing partiality and inaccuracy in media content and the resulting – often significant – biases are attributable to political party affiliations of journalists, and this engenders capture. Further, the framing and tonal choices in coverage, as well as the selection and suppression of content, results from unprofessional conduct – often induced by secretive (covert) monetary or non-monetary favors (exchanges) between various interest groups and media/journalists. The integrity of information in newspapers/media has been compromised, and this can be attributed to various influences that interact with news production and dissemination, or media capture. Governments use funding from state coffers to support compliant media and journalists, the payback for which is positive coverage or ignorance of issues that could project the benefactors in a negative light. Both government and businesses use advertising to influence content, which is possible in media environments with few large advertisers and a large number of non-viable media. Nepali journalism has, in effect, been unable to sever ties with partisan journalism – often touted as “mission” journalism – and adopt professionalism, which is manifested in manipulated, biased and distorted content.