The media plays two contradictory roles with respect to issues impacting minorities and ethnic groups. While some minorities or ethnic groups are keen to own media outlets that express their visions and policies, media outlets aligned with the state attempt to either absorb or place intense pressure on these channels; the latter policy is currently the most prominent within several countries of the region. The media, both conventional and modern, has utilized social media and websites as platforms for launching attacks against either the state or minorities, especially if the minority in question is categorized as an opposition force, calls for secession, or has federalist demands.
Most countries of the region have a diverse ethnic makeup which has allowed the presence of media that acts as a mouthpiece for these minorities, or these groups exerted efforts to create media which discusses their affairs. Despite this, restricting minority media is extremely prevalent in the region for several reasons, perhaps most importantly because the media’s role in political issues and disputes between the state and its minorities have escalated, transforming the media into a tool for conflict on part of both parties. This exacerbates the degree of polarization between the two and leads the state to restrict or close media associated with minorities.
Mutual Use:
In light of the growing role played by the media over recent years, owning a private media outlet has become a sign of power, capability, and influence, and various minorities in several countries of the region have launched their own media outlets to express their ideas, which are sometimes at odds with state policies.
Although the media is supposed to play a role in bridging the gap between cultures, religions, and sects within one society, in several countries the media has been forced into conflicts between authorities and minorities who demand reforms such as expanding the margins of freedoms and equality, enhancing the standard of living, and developing infrastructure.
In this framework, minorities’ goals in launching media outlets vary according to the entity that established them. If the state owns this type of media, objectives may include communicating better with minorities, especially if located in border areas, and consolidating soft power across the entirety of their territory. Another crucial goal is that of integrating these minorities and listening to their demands, especially as they typically control the media content that is presented and thus pretend a state of harmony between these minorities and the central state, working to obscure points of dispute between the two. In this case, the media fails to play a significant role for minorities, pushing the latter to pursue ownership of their own outlets, independent and removed from state control.
In many cases, media owned by minorities is used as a platform to attack the state if such a dispute exists. This applies to Kurdish media in Iran and Turkey as well as Oromo media in Ethiopia, for example. Other minority media do not necessary express a dispute with the state, which is the case for the Berbers of Morocco for example.
Several Models:
There are several models which highlight how the media can become a tool for conflict between the state and minorities, the most important of which include:
1. Disciplinary Targeting: Despite the spread of the Kurdish language in audio, visual, and print media in Turkey, and Kurds occupying space in Turkish dramas, the failed coup of 15 July 2016 motivated the state to take several measures to reel in Turkish media in particular and opposition media in general, at the forefront of which was the Kurdish media. Secular newspapers and others owned by Kurds suffered the most damage, and nearly 170 outlets disappeared according to some estimates, which led Turkey to occupy 151th place among 180 countries on the annual Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders in 2016.
But the failed attempted coup was not the only reason Kurdish media in Turkey was subjected to oppressive practices at the hands of authorities. Restrictive measures have been imposed on Kurdish media, not just in terms of print; Kurdish journalists have been arrested at much higher rates on charges of involvement in supporting the PKK or spreading propaganda for the group.
2. Systematic Restrictions: The Oromo of Ethiopia are considered one of the ethnicities most in conflict with the government. More than once they have been vulnerable to oppression at the hands of the authorities due to successive protests against economic conditions and the government ignoring their demands. The Oromo moved to own their own media outlets ranging from television channels, newspapers, radio stations, and websites, and they are active on social networking pages.
The Media Office of the Oromo Front announced on 7 February 2009 that the group would launch their first TV station in three local languages – Oromo, Amharic, and Somalian, the first broadcasting from Adama, and the second from Addis Ababa. Both stations have been subject to restrictions imposed by the Ethiopian government on more than one occasion.
To combat these measures, the Front began broadcasting its channels via YouTube through channels such as Bilisummaa TV Oromia. The Front broadcasts from more than one radio station via Internet, such as Radio Hegeree Oromia, which is delivered in English, and the Oromo Future Arabic News RHO.
Oromo television and radio stations have resorted to broadcasting from abroad for a significant period of time due to Ethiopian security forces scrambling their signals. They rely significantly on images and news published by activists on social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter, particularly during the most recent upheaval witnessed in Ethiopia between the Front and the authorities which had direct implications for their media outlets located inside the country. It is also important to note that the Oromo have several active Facebook pages, especially in the recent past, which are most likely operated outside of the country. It focuses on the situation in Oromo areas in general and the repressive practices imposed on their residents by the Ethiopian government in Arabic and English. These pages include Oromia Region and Oromia Media Platform as well as the electronic economic magazine Oromian Economist which offers economic analyses on the situation in the region and Ethiopia and particular and Africa in general.
3. Double-Edged Policy: Iran has taken a keen interest in what may be called‘regional media,’ by launching official television via local channels broadcast in different areas of Iran, which discuss regional developments and have allowed various ethnic groups and minorities to express their attitudes in the media. Iran owns 37 such regional television channels but the initiative has not helped build bridges between minorities and ethnic groups in Iran and the central state, especially because official media has played a role in the state of polarization plaguing Iranian society on more than one occasion by mocking minorities and ethnic groups. The most recent example of this phenomenon took place in 2015 when a television program accused Azeris of being “unclean.” A cartoon implying this stereotype was aired on official television, leading to demonstrations in areas where Azeris reside.
Iranian authorities have also levied heavy restrictions on minority and ethnic media, especially those which oppose the regime and continuously criticize the situation and freedom of minority groups. This in particular includes the Kurds, Arabs, Sunnis, and Bahais, as their media outlets have been subjected to escalating restrictions, especially in times of crisis and turmoil. Decisions have been issued to close their newspapers and their journalists have arrested, meaning that Iran ranked extremely low on the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index, earning the 169th place out of a total of 180 countries.
Overall, it can be said that minority media is one of the most complicated types of media because the goals motivating the establishment of these outlets varies depending on the owner. They will, in all likelihood, remain the subject of controversy in the coming period due to the escalating polarization and turmoil that has impacted the countries of the region, most often pushing relevant authorities adopt extreme policies in engaging with this type of media.
