WE read on the Internet, especially in forums, about people’s difficulties and hardships. They talk about topics that interest them and discuss types of services that are provided to them. Of course, for several reasons one will not find the same type of discussions in the traditional media.
We also find some official departments — which were in the first place created to serve people and cater to their needs — dominated by “media circuses.” PR companies are often noticed holding ostentatious carnivals.
Normal circuses are places of entertainment and often include magicians who perform tricks. In light of this, one can describe our media to be similar to a circus where one hears and sees things that disappear once the show is over. Spectators will then return to reality and wait until the next show.
I say this because of what some journalists and PR officials do nowadays in some establishments and government departments. They are keen to present to the media photographs showing their officials and activities. This is regardless of whether the news is actually worth reporting.
Open a newspaper in the waiting room of a government department and notice the picture of an official on the front page, smiling while announcing a new initiative to alleviate people’s sufferings. Then watch the people in the waiting room — one will note both frustration and despair. One will immediately know the difference between the photo and the reality.
What is the point of costly PR campaigns, the printing of brochures and fliers, the hosting of journalists and the organizing of seminars, which will only be attended by those who are in attendance because of His Excellency’s instructions? What is the point of such activities when there is no end in sight to the agony of citizens?
An official may reply by saying that private companies sponsor these seminars and conferences. This justification is probably based on two things: Either poor administration of resources which have come in the form of donations, or the private companies in question sponsoring seminars and conferences to avoid punitive articles in their contracts with the ministry. What harm will it do to these ministries or departments if they use the money that is donated by private companies to improve their services to citizens, instead of trying to improve the image of the minister in the media?
While services are deteriorating, it is no longer acceptable in this Internet age to undertake such futile media stunts. No matter what they do, these ministries are only doing their duty. The word “achievement,” which appears in media reports distributed by such ministries, is no more than a synonym for the word “duty”. No one should be thanked for doing his duty. We can accept the use of the word “achievement” if these accomplishments are done cost-effectively and in record time. Why does a minister need such a “media circus” if, in the first place, he was chosen for his integrity?
