The regime’s henchmen have rolled out their latest tactic aimed at discrediting the country’s few remaining independent media outlets: the multiplication and intensification of denigration and demonization campaigns. After Nawaat, Al-Qatiba and others have been spinelessly attacked for having dared—in a country governed by fear and submission—to exercise their right to analyze and criticize government policies. These zealots have but one idea in mind: restore mediocrity at any cost!
The media have always been a major focus for successive governments, not because they wished to reform or develop them, but rather to subjugate them, bring them to heel and use them as a mouthpiece. One point on which all governments before and after the revolution agree. The question is: what type of media does the regime want? Sycophant, propaganda-diffusing, censorship-abiding media outlets? Are our governments naive enough to believe that it is possible to impose censorship and hide the truth from the citizenry in this era of information revolution and social media networks? Or else do they believe that they can make the serious content diffused across these networks disappear amidst the whirlwind of fake news and hate speech? Clearly, this is precisely what they are hoping. There is no other explanation for what is taking place: the takeover of public media, reduced to serving as mouthpieces for the government, the subjugation of private media and, finally, the intimidation, denigration and demonization campaigns launched against independent media. But they have not succeeded, and will never succeed in killing the truth, because free ideas cannot be enclosed within the prison of censorship.
A strategic campaign
The past several years have been marked by unprecedented threats to freedom of opinion and expression in Tunisia. These threats have manifested in a number of ways, notably in trials carried out and arrests made on the basis of Decree 54 which has been denounced by civil and political forces across the spectrum, and by professionals within the sector. Journalists, both men and women, have been brought before the courts and search squads for opinions expressed or articles published. The right to access to information has been flouted and a climate of censorship and imposed silence weighs heavily upon the country, paving the way for rumors to spread and depriving citizens of their right to information. Of course, all of this has been followed by denigration and intimidation campaigns against any dissonant or critical voices. More recently, these campaigns have zeroed in on independent media outlets which refuse submission and censorship and remain committed to their right to practice free, unhindered journalism. The association of Nawaat’s journalists believes that the objective of these campaigns is to “push for self-censorship and deviation from the editorial line based on complete independence from government narratives, and committed to the defense of human rights and humanitarian issues, while covering the pulse of social movement and society’s concerns, and shedding light on the failure of economic policies implemented by successive regimes.”
These attacks carried out against independent media clearly aim to disappear any vision which contradicts the one espoused by the regime in power, and to exempt the latter from any responsibility in relation to the deterioration of economic and social conditions facing Tunisians. Ostensibly, the goal is to distract public opinion from the government’s lamentable failure to find solutions to the problems in which the country is mired, and to direct it to other issues that are marginal and of little concern. The regime is furthermore attempting to deprive public opinion of its right to information, and above all to free and fair information, as the country’s Constitution stipulates. Depending on the issue in question, populist discourse and conspiracy theory attribute the current collapse to either phantasmagorical entities, speculators, conspirators or traitors. Nawaat’s statement affirms that
…attacks are being multiplied against different elements of civil society. Alternative media and associations committed to defending migrant rights are especially targeted. Since the government launched its campaign against undocumented immigrants, voices contradicting the president’s rhetoric have been demonized. Human rights activists are thrown in prison, while civil society associations and independent media continue to endure disruptions and financial restrictions.
The question of sub-Saharan migrants is an example of this policy. The regime should have explained to the public how the situation has deteriorated and how to move beyond it. How have thousands of migrants been able to arrive so easily from the country’s western borders? Does Tunisia have the means to organize massive expulsions of undocumented migrants? Why is it closing its eyes to securing the land border with Algeria and banning illegal entries, whereas significant efforts are being made to secure maritime borders and prevent migrants from reaching Europe? Above all, what are the terms of the protocol agreement with the European Union and bilateral agreements signed with Italy and Great Britain on immigration? Of course, no answer has been provided for any of these questions. Instead, we are witnessing the rise of racist rhetoric, both in the context of official discourse as well as within society, which was the spark for serious conflicts between undocumented migrants and citizens in several regions, especially the governorate of Sfax. Migrants were exposed to inhumane treatment in which they were deprived of shelter, food and water. This was in addition to acts violence fueled by racist slurs denouncing the presence of sub-Saharan Africans in Tunisia and accusing human rights activists and the opposition of being the cause. But their sycophancy vis-à-vis the regime in place and their fear of police prevent them from uncovering the truth, although they are convinced that the primary responsibility for all of this falls to the government. The latter has effectively transformed the country into a trap for migrants, who enter without any difficulty via the Algerian border and are subsequently prevented from leaving the country by way of Italy’s sea border.
This provocative and openly racist discourse has gained ground in the political arena as well as in the media. Politically, this is particularly the case through the volatile statements made by members of the Assembly of the Representatives of the People. Before them, the president evoked a “conspiracy” aimed at changing Tunisia’s demographic composition, which set the stage for calls to violence and hatred directed towards migrants. In the media, this has been evident in the alignment of certain outlets with the government’s rhetoric around the issue. The media have indeed contributed to the superficial and irrational treatment of a question as sensitive as undocumented migrants in Tunisia.
Truth-seeking versus disinformation-diffusing media outlets
The current regime, like all regimes and governments before and after the revolution, does not want independent media outlets committed to the truth and to the real causes which concern Tunisians, such as justice, freedom, and development. Instead, this government prefers a controlled media landscape that it alone has created and shaped.
Everything began with the sadly famous Decree 54, which serves as a sword of Damocles for anyone who dares to criticize the government or express a different opinion. On the basis of this text, dozens of journalists, bloggers, activists and unionists have been prosecuted, and some have been imprisoned. Sycophants of the regime, on the other hand, enjoy lifelong immunity and systematic impunity in spite of the many violations they have committed (inciting hate and violence, slander, etc.), which Decree 54 was presumably designed to counter. As a result, a climate of fear has washed over the country, and the media have chosen to keep in step with the regime, avoiding coverage of topics that might embarrass those in power. In this way, self-censorship has returned to editorial rooms, while professional designations are being made on the basis of allegiance within public media institutions. The latter have been transformed into propaganda machines whose function is limited to repeating the government’s rhetoric and stigmatizing those who oppose it. We have thus witnessed the return of the type of media coverage that we believed to have disappeared along with Ben Ali, and of concepts which belonged to the era of propaganda under the November 7 regime. That government was overturned by the cries of demonstrators denouncing exclusion and censorship, and demanding freedom and dignity. The same demonstrators who were characterized by the media outlets in Ben Ali’s pay as “masked criminal gangs.”
This policy built upon media lockdown and censorship does not tolerate that the independent media work freely. Which is why we have seen the proliferation of slander campaigns and efforts to intimidate and incite violence against independent bodies or journalists who express opinions that are incompatible with the government’s vision. What is curious is that these campaigns are often synchronized, in the sense that certain suspicious pages, along with omnipresent politicians and so-called journalists, directly attack any media outlet which publishes an article or investigation that does not correspond with the government’s stance. This is true for Nawaat and Al-Qatiba, which have been the target of attacks for their professional coverage of certain subjects, including the alleged conspiracy to undermine national security, the question of sub-Saharan African migrants, torture, the unresolved cases of suspicious deaths, and so many other subjects which offer the public a vision that is different from the official version. And the regime will not have it.
The media have always been an engine for the development of public life, for defending rights and freedoms. However, the regression which has hit Tunisia’s information sector has largely reduced the media to a tool used by the government to control society. Still, some pockets of “media resistance” remain. Despite their limited scope in comparison with private and public audiovisual media, independent and alternative media still play an important role in covering the real issues of concern for Tunisians, with audacity, professionalism and commitment to the truth. These media will continue to play this role, defending just causes, freedoms and human dignity, and combatting all forms of exclusion, corruption and the arbitrary use of power. These outlets are resisting subjugation, following the example of Zouhair Yahyaoui on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of his disappearance, combating authoritarianism and denouncing any sort of compromise.
iThere are no comments
Add yours