A media soap opera in Kabul

Asia Times/ April 2008

KABUL - A fresh deadline seeking compliance with a ban on the five Indian TV serials being broadcast by private Afghan TV channels was due to end on Tuesday. The ban, ordered by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, has caused public controversy and a strident clash between conservatives and liberals. The truth is more multi-layered: not all those who oppose the serials are doing so out of conservative values, nor are the reasons for their defense uniformly liberal.

The serials are considered by critics to have content considered "too modern" for Afghan audiences. Meanwhile, the so-called values the shows portray are viewed as regressive, even backward, in India. By positing this case as a simple test of media freedom, there is a danger of losing sight of the



complexities that need to be addressed to strengthen the independence of the Afghan media.

The debate over the ban has been described in private national media and the international press as "the latest battle of the long-simmering war between cultural conservatives and liberals", as one reputed newspaper called it. The reality is somewhat more complex. While conservatives, including some of the religious ulema, have been consistently pressuring the government and TV channels to curtail any content that goes beyond their interpretation of Afghanistan's conservative social mores, in this instance the demand for curtailing the soap operas has more widespread support. The reasons for this are two-fold.

The story lines of some of the serials go beyond traditional family scenarios to include complex relationships that are anathema to Afghan families. Children born out of wedlock and extramarital relationships are just two salient examples. The second reason for the criticism is that the serials have allegedly become addictive to viewers, especially young children.

"My daughter is worshipping her dolls, setting then out in a row as she sees people worshipping in the serials," a liberal female member of parliament (MP)told a diplomat when asked for her views. A senior political figure - who has little sympathy for conservatives - said his children were emulating scenes from the popular Indian soap opera Tulsi. Meanwhile, a senior government official said social customs viewed in the serials were being emulated in middle-class Afghani homes.

Liberal MP Shukriya Barakzai told Asia Times Online that while she did not support the ban - which she said appeared to be a result of political machinations - she felt there needed to be more indigenous content on Afghan TV.

"Afghans have a rich history and culture," she said. "The Ministry of Information should make a strategy so that we have our own serials or other programs. Otherwise, if you ban Indian serials, some other serials, maybe from Iran and not in keeping with our culture, will take their place."

In India, soap operas face strong competition from other forms of programming as well as social and cultural activities. But, in Afghanistan - especially its urban areas - such alternatives are unavailable. In fact, there is a disproportionate emphasis on TV viewing; Afghan social customs place low priority on family activities in public spaces, leaving television as one of the foremost "family" events.

Lack of indigenous programming has also meant an over-reliance on foreign content. Bollywood's serials, slickly produced with engaging plots, have been gross earners for the channels which broadcast them. The lack of a strong and varied programming base has meant that an unprecedented number of viewers watch serials such as Tulsi, the most-watched of the five Bollywood soaps that face a ban. The serials also inhabit terrain that is culturally more familiar to the Afghan viewer. Dubbing them in Dari, the local language, has provided an additional comfort factor which has resulted in an undue influence on viewers.

It may be that the familiarity of the customs, culture and values presented in the shows is what's causing consternation. Because the content comes from a similar culture, it has greater impact and influence than content that is completely alien, for example Hollywood products. As such, the Indian soaps are understandably influencing behavior patterns among Afghan viewers.

A senior official of the Ministry of Information and Culture (MIC) said he had nothing against the Indian serials, but commented that TV channels were showing them "too much". He told Asia Times Online, "By going too far some of the media organizations are closing even the existing space for media freedom. If the conservatives strike back forcefully even the existing freedoms may be lost."

Information Minister Abdul Karim Khurram, who is seen as a conservative, has argued that it is not he, but a joint meeting of the Media Commission, MPs, the ulema and media houses that made the decision to ban the soaps. According to Khurram, the decision constitutes a legal order because the Media Commission was involved in the meeting. Khurram also said the MIC would like new legislation to regulate and limit the proportion of foreign content in local media. The minister declined to discuss what steps would be taken should the MIC ban be flouted.

The saas-bahu or "mother-in-law and daughter-in-law" serials as they are called in India, are watched by mostly conservative, urban middle-class families. Most feminists and liberals view the soap operas with distaste because they allegedly stereotype male and female family roles and present everyday life through the lens of so-called "family values".

At best, the saas-bahu soaps are viewed as "traditional", and at worst anti-feminist and regressive. The marketing of family values is another reason why the serials appeal widely in Afghanistan; their heavy focus on the family being something to which many Afghans can relate.

Women outside the family structure have no place in Afghan society. This is the main reason why there has been little progress in the area of gender rights, specifically in the provision of protection mechanisms for female victims of violence.

The most popular Afghan TV channel, Tolo TV, has so far defied the ban on Indian serials. Its owners have argued that they were only following public demand. A journalists' union has called for a meeting with President Hamid Karzai, Khurram, directors of Afghan television and representatives of the Council of Religious Scholars to "find a moderate solution for the problem".

While pushing for greater leeway over the right to broadcast these five Indian serials, journalists need to be careful about who they invite to the table. A media commission, charged with arbitrating on media content, already exists, but needs to be strengthened through wider civil society and media representation. To invite others, including the president, the minister of information and the ulema to decide the fate of the serials would set a precedent that would make them legitimate stakeholders in any decision-making on media content in the future.

At a time when the media law is on hold, and there is continuous pressure from religious leaders, the government and the Taliban, the media need to emphasize the importance of the rule of law rather than arbitrary decisions in regard to televised content. The debate over these five serials also loses sight of the complexities of media content and survival, issues that need to be addressed to strengthen an independent media as well as larger progressive rights.

Debate over democratic, political and human rights - including women's rights - is being increasingly dismissed as "Western" or alien. An editorial published in the government-owned newspaper Kabul Times provided an apparent justification for domestic violence against women, arguing that nagging women provoked their husbands and other male family members to "beat them black and blue". The editorial passed without any remark from any member of the government.

Today there is greater intolerance in Afghanistan. Specifically in the expression of progressive social, cultural and political mores and also for democratization. The international community, fearful of losing its leverage, has tiptoed around these issues, taking refuge in the all-encompassing pretext of "cultural propriety".

The current debate over the Indian soaps needs to take into account the complexities of the issue. It must differentiate between conservative opposition, parental concern and the government's use of this issue as a tool to gain greater control over the media and to tame private media by hitting them in the pocket.

Any discussion should consider the need for more varied programming, indigenous content and financial viability. By lumping all opposition to the Indian family dramas into one basket and losing sight of the complexities, those espousing more progressive values could walk right into a trap that would help affirm larger space for cultural intolerance.