Journalism today faces unprecedented attacks worldwide, targeted by powerful actors regardless of the size or influence of the targeted media outlet . Politicians, security forces, and individuals wielding technological tools are simultaneously undermining legacy or mainstream media (MSM). Donald Trump set the tone when he branded journalists “enemies of the people.” In his second term, the attacks have only grown more brazen. Politicians across the globe have followed suit, no longer willing to face scrutiny, dismissing investigations as nothing but conspiracies. On the battlefield, the situation is even grimmer. In Israel, the campaign to silence coverage of atrocities has broken all records. According to the United Nations Israel killed more journalists in the past two years than in the two World Wars, wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq combined. Elsewhere, too, journalists are routinely targeted by security forces who operate with impunity, thanks to weak civilian leaders...

In an article titled ‘How Not to Describe the Awami League’ , published in this paper, British journalist David Bergman rightly underscores the importance of accuracy in labeling a political party—particularly when such labels carry potential legal consequences. Those familiar with Bergman’s work over the years know that he has consistently taken on politically sensitive and controversial subjects, often at significant personal and professional cost. His courage and commitment to journalistic integrity deserve recognition. Bergman is correct in asserting that “while serious criticisms of the Awami League are both valid and necessary, they must be proportionate and grounded in fact.” His analysis focuses primarily on the legal validity and appropriateness of labeling the Awami League as “fascist” or “Nazi.” He argues that comparing the party to the Nazi regime trivialises the scale of Nazi atrocities and misrepresents the complexities of Bangladeshi politics. Indeed, any historical comp...

  What makes an MP’s job so attractive? Despite being a supposedly noble role in the service of the nation and constituents, it should not be judged solely on the basis of the rewards, whether financial or otherwise. However, the esteemed position they hold has suddenly appears to be at risk of being discredited, at least according to Mujibul Haque Chunnu, the opposition chief whip, following the purported revelation of MPs’ emoluments and allocations for individual constituencies by a newcomer. Without mentioning the name of the newcomer in parliament, the JP MP remarked, "We are all affected by what was said in his Facebook post." The accused in this case, against whom the opposition chief whip sought the speaker’s intervention, is none other than the populist lawyer, Sayed Sayedul Haque Sumon, who gained fame through social media, particularly Facebook live, and succeeded in entering parliament as an independent member in the 12th parliamentary election on January 7. His v...

  “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”- This is what article 19 of the Universal Human Rights Declaration promised 75 years ago . As a signatory to this declaration, Bangladesh is duty-bound to uphold these rights for all its citizens. At the heart of this commitment lies the crucial role of journalists and media outlets, entrusted with the responsibility of delivering fact-based, unbiased information. Nevertheless, within the current political environment and economic realities, the cherished ideal of press freedom appears increasingly elusive.   Even more disheartening is the unprecedented level of assault on journalism worldwide. Governments, large corporations, tech giants, transnational criminal syndicates, and various interest groups are all intimidated by \ revelations, fiercely s...

The welcoming reactions from the mainstream opposition parties to the recently announced visa policy by the United States for Bangladesh was predictable, as they have been relentlessly complaining about the systematic destruction of a credible electoral institution. But the often confused reactions from the government and the ruling party seem surreal, as if this foreign intervention in favour of a free and fair election in the country is a blessing for them, too. The official reaction given by the foreign ministry was so welcoming that Matthew Miller, spokesperson of the US Department of State, said, “We were heartened by the announcement from the government yesterday (May 24) that welcomed the steps that we took.” The foreign ministry statement, perhaps, was symptomatic of the consistently inconsistent statements made by the minister-in-charge. We have heard countless times from Foreign Minister AK Abdul Momen that his government does not want any country to get involved in Banglades...

Our foreign ministry, reportedly, has informed a parliamentary standing body that Bangladeshi expatriates involved in “anti-government activities” abroad will be brought under law. One report published in this newspaper on October 28, titled ‘ Expats involved in anti-govt activities to face music’ noted that the report submitted by the ministry officials in said, “Sadly, besides playing a positive role in protecting the interests of Bangladesh and sending remittances, many of the expats are engaged in propaganda against Bangladesh and the government. The government is working to bring those who are engaged in anti-government activities and giving provocative and completely fabricated statements to book.”  Apparently, it may sound like a patriotic duty of the government to counter anti-Bangladesh propaganda. However, the word “anti-government” in the statement clearly implies that it has nothing to do with patriotism, but to silence critics of the government. And the efforts or act...

Two verdicts in two different countries, located thousands of miles apart, by the respective supreme courts last week have stoked a serious debate about the role of the judges and politicisation of the judiciary. Both these countries are known to be models of democracies - one for unfettered freedom of speech and the other for the vast number of its constituents. Both these verdicts have huge implications on the future of democracy beyond their borders, as the disputes involved religion and politics.   One of these two verdicts was in the United States. A nearly 50-year-old ruling which had given women reproductive freedom was reversed, which has shocked the majority and drawn criticism from world leaders, but bolstered American conservatives and anti-abortion Christian faith groups. The appointment process of the US Supreme Court justices is known for its notorious political exercises.  The other verdict was in India, in which the Supreme Court has not only given the Pri...

  On May 31, our diplomat-in-chief, foreign minister A K A Momen sent a message to diplomatic correspondents in Dhaka suggesting what questions they should ask the US ambassador. By the time his message was transmitted to journalists, the US ambassador’s press event, DCAB Talk was over, and the minister’s note ended up as a story itself instead. It couldn’t be ascertained whether the message was a government advisory or a tutorial note as there was no official explanation about it following the publication of the story.  It was a story for all the wrong reasons. Contents of his note suggest that he was unhappy, perhaps angry, too - at the US ambassador’s public comments on the state of democracy, human rights, press freedom and sanctions on RAB. He wrote, “Please, you (newsmen) ask the US envoy why they cannot stop such extra judicial killings in their own country? Secondly, about 100,000 US citizens go missing every year. Even children are deprived of reuniting with their His...