Mervyn Silva's latest criminal offence of roping a Samurdhi employee to a tree, is now proof of media's mediocrity and its own opportunist bias. This time, EAP Networks (Pvt) Ltd., stooged most shamelessly to white wash Mervyn and tell its viewers, there was no crime committed by Silva.
EAP's “Swarnavahini” which claims it is Sri Lanka's “Pride”, was completely evasive on 03 and 04 August, about the roping incident, when all other private channels considered the incident important as public information, for coverage. All private electronic media channels except those owned by EAP Network, covered the incident with enough material for the public to understand that Mervyn Silva was responsible of a crime, in roping the Samurdhi employee to a tree.
In fact Mervyn had gone on record too, a few days before 03 August, he would rope any official to a tree if there were any lapse in anti Dengue work in his area. Visuals carried by most privately owned TV channels showed Mervyn with a thick rope in his hand, questioning some one in the crowd at the scene.
On 05 August, there were wide spread protests called by Samurdhi employees' trade unions supported by other sympathising groups and trade unions. All that information was in public domain through different media sources. All private electronic media, except, once again the EAP Network, provided detail information about these protests. They also carried news about the isolated campaign, no doubt ordered by Mervyn himself, held in support of Mervyn at Kiribathgoda.
The “Swarnavahini” once again consciously misinformed the public by editorially organising bias information in providing a completely constructed news story on the picket in support of Mervyn at Kiribathgoda. Swarnavahini wanted the public to believe there was no protests against Mervyn for his criminal act. They went to the extent of informing the public, that the victim of the roping incident himself had thanked Mervyn for his commitment in keeping the area clean.
On 06 August, the EAP Network, went completely “threadless” on the issue, cleaning up Mervyn Silva and using the victim of the incident, who is said to be helpless under threat to save his life and his family. There was no mention of protests, no mention of threats to the Samurdhi employee and his family and no mention that “tying a person” in any way is a criminal act, that has to be taken up by the police and dealt by law.
This EAP Network and its “Swarnavahini”, has a track record of playing with the regime. For EAP, having control of a media network, adds an advantage in “dealing” with the regime. It thus brought Mervyn Silva as a member of a jury in one of their “Mega” shows, when Mervyn was socially condemned as a “thug” who attacks and intimidates the media. When Mervyn was being talked of in the city as the political “link” to the underworld. The whole “Swarnavahini” project was to help “recycle” Mervyn's garbage image, into one with “decency”. This effort by “Swarnavahini” was consciously supported by Opposition celebrities, who on their own had no sense of political decency and sat next to and played in front of Mervyn, in giving him a less vulgar appearance.
Mervyn's criminal act of roping a citizen to a tree, should have thrown him out of public gaze as condemned and called for his immediate arrest. That's how a civilised, decent society reacts to criminal acts. That is how a socially responsible media behaves in the face of “break down of law and order” in society. Yet “Swarnavahini” does not subscribe to such social responsibility, nor do they think they have to. For EAP, there is no difference between pawning gold and pawning the media, if they can make a quick buck out of it. They have thus got themselves heavily tied to political power in deals, that keep their businesses running. They can not afford to leave their commitment in supporting what ever the regime wants and “Mervyn” is within that deal.
The responsibility and duty of the concerned and conscious public does not end with that of “Swarnavahini” and the EAP Network. That responsibility goes beyond that of asking for justice to the Samurdhi employee. Beyond that of asking for the arrest of the criminal and legal action against him.
EAP's “Swarnavahini” which claims it is Sri Lanka's “Pride”, was completely evasive on 03 and 04 August, about the roping incident, when all other private channels considered the incident important as public information, for coverage. All private electronic media channels except those owned by EAP Network, covered the incident with enough material for the public to understand that Mervyn Silva was responsible of a crime, in roping the Samurdhi employee to a tree.
In fact Mervyn had gone on record too, a few days before 03 August, he would rope any official to a tree if there were any lapse in anti Dengue work in his area. Visuals carried by most privately owned TV channels showed Mervyn with a thick rope in his hand, questioning some one in the crowd at the scene.
On 05 August, there were wide spread protests called by Samurdhi employees' trade unions supported by other sympathising groups and trade unions. All that information was in public domain through different media sources. All private electronic media, except, once again the EAP Network, provided detail information about these protests. They also carried news about the isolated campaign, no doubt ordered by Mervyn himself, held in support of Mervyn at Kiribathgoda.
The “Swarnavahini” once again consciously misinformed the public by editorially organising bias information in providing a completely constructed news story on the picket in support of Mervyn at Kiribathgoda. Swarnavahini wanted the public to believe there was no protests against Mervyn for his criminal act. They went to the extent of informing the public, that the victim of the roping incident himself had thanked Mervyn for his commitment in keeping the area clean.
On 06 August, the EAP Network, went completely “threadless” on the issue, cleaning up Mervyn Silva and using the victim of the incident, who is said to be helpless under threat to save his life and his family. There was no mention of protests, no mention of threats to the Samurdhi employee and his family and no mention that “tying a person” in any way is a criminal act, that has to be taken up by the police and dealt by law.
This EAP Network and its “Swarnavahini”, has a track record of playing with the regime. For EAP, having control of a media network, adds an advantage in “dealing” with the regime. It thus brought Mervyn Silva as a member of a jury in one of their “Mega” shows, when Mervyn was socially condemned as a “thug” who attacks and intimidates the media. When Mervyn was being talked of in the city as the political “link” to the underworld. The whole “Swarnavahini” project was to help “recycle” Mervyn's garbage image, into one with “decency”. This effort by “Swarnavahini” was consciously supported by Opposition celebrities, who on their own had no sense of political decency and sat next to and played in front of Mervyn, in giving him a less vulgar appearance.
Mervyn's criminal act of roping a citizen to a tree, should have thrown him out of public gaze as condemned and called for his immediate arrest. That's how a civilised, decent society reacts to criminal acts. That is how a socially responsible media behaves in the face of “break down of law and order” in society. Yet “Swarnavahini” does not subscribe to such social responsibility, nor do they think they have to. For EAP, there is no difference between pawning gold and pawning the media, if they can make a quick buck out of it. They have thus got themselves heavily tied to political power in deals, that keep their businesses running. They can not afford to leave their commitment in supporting what ever the regime wants and “Mervyn” is within that deal.
The responsibility and duty of the concerned and conscious public does not end with that of “Swarnavahini” and the EAP Network. That responsibility goes beyond that of asking for justice to the Samurdhi employee. Beyond that of asking for the arrest of the criminal and legal action against him.
