Blood and murder are promoted, and the killer is made a hero more on the screens of the ruling medias. They interview the accused themselves, talk about how he committed the crime, and use surveillance camera footage almost like an action film.
Only the reporters of the authorities' television channels accompany the security agencies when they raid the suspects. It’s their camera zoom that shows the story of our heroic forces. It’s them who publish pictures of murdered people, burnt bodies, insulting prisoners, confessions of accused, violating the rights of accused, put themselves in the place of courts and judges. There should have been a generalization on this joke.
The generalization of the Presidency of the Office of the Council of Ministers wasn’t necessary. It is your own medias that violate the principle of protecting the investigation, violate the dignity of the law and the courts and the privacy of the accused and their families, they are the ones who enjoy the news of killings, especially when it is in the context of zone war, politically spicing them up.
The decision to ban crime coverage widens the gap of distrust between citizens and the government. Simply put, when the KRG hides authorized information about crimes, citizens do not know what is happening, rumors and misleading news increase, and accountability becomes more difficult. Simply put, if no one knows the crime rate, how can the government and ministers be held accountable?
Every media in the world has its own ethics or general ethics for covering crime. Professional media and journalists do not need ministerial decisions and generalizations to teach them their work. They must know where their boundaries end and do it in a responsible and ethical manner. In the sense that it can cover and protect the path of research and the psychological and social aspects of people.
It is the rules and ethics of the profession that govern the coverage of any topic and bind the media to an ethic of professional honor rather than generalizations and judgments, and when errors occur, the reporter and his agency are responsible. Those who harm the dignity of others must be held accountable, but under the Privacy of Journalism Act, not the Terrorism Act or the General Act.
When is it right for smuggling, trade in heavy and light weapons, and war to have a free market, but information about crimes be prohibited? Wouldn't it have been better to issue a guideline for the implementation of Law No. 11 of 2013 on the Right to Information?