CAIRO: Egyptian businessmen do not make suitable newspaper owners because their interests are “inextricably linked with the regime and the government,” newspaper editor Ibrahim Eissa said last week.
The controversial journalist again made headlines in October when he was sacked from Al-Dostor following the acquisition of the outspoken independent daily by businessmen Reda Edward and Al-Sayed Al-Badawy.
Al-Badawy, the leader of Al-Wafd party, later sold his shares in the paper to Edward.
In September, Eissa stopped presenting “Baladna Bel Masry” on the OnTV satellite channel, which he also used as a platform for vocal criticism of the regime, amid rumors that the channel had come under government pressure to remove him.
During a seminar held at Cairo’s Center for Socialist Studies, Eissa sidestepped a question from an audience member about what he thinks are the “real reasons” why he was removed from Al-Dostor and OnTV, saying “when I find out I’ll tell you.”
His talk however, a 101 class on the history of the Egyptian press and newspaper ownership, was delivered according to the classic Eissa formula of derision; there was no doubt about the target at which the editor was directing his barbs.
Eissa began by outlining what he termed as the “square of four factors” that makes a successful newspaper. A newspaper, he said, must “take a stance” on events.
“Even if a newspaper claims that it doesn’t take a stance, this in itself is taking a stance … a real paper has to have a stance even on modern art: Is it for or against Farouk Hosny’s paintings?”
Eissa pointed to the example of the British press during the last UK elections — “which, of course, are nothing like the elections here” — and the Guardian’s backing of Nick Clegg.
“Here’s a paper, described as independent, privately-owned, saying vote for so and so. We’re talking about British newspapers with a legacy and history that are careful to preserve their professionalism and their neutrality but that nonetheless come out and call on people to vote for a particular party.”
Language, distribution and influence are the other essential elements of a successful newspaper. “Distribution without influence is worthless. You’re selling toilet paper.”
Al-Dostor, Eissa said, fulfilled all four requirements for a successful newspaper, which is what “set it apart” from other Egyptian newspapers.
“It is the four factors which make the paper … the name Al-Dostor has weight [only] when these four factors are present. Without them you’ve got rid of the firing pin. Every gun has a firing pin. When you get rid of the firing pin you turn the gun into an antique piece. Or to scrap metal.
“And the difference between an antique and scrap metal is according to taste. Some people see antique pieces as scrap, and some see scrap as an antique,” Eissa told the seminar.
Newspaper ownership is a key determinant of a publication’s independence, Eissa said, adding that until 1960 (when the press was nationalized “and the government came in on its train”) only individuals — rather than companies or businessmen — owned newspapers, and newspapers were owned by the people who created them.
“Why did this change? Was it because back then there were rules and ethics in the trade? Perhaps. Was it because the situation was … constantly changing and thus a newspaper might be a burden on its owner? Perhaps.”
Eissa said that this distinction between owners and makers used to be reflected — until 1960 — in the existence of two journalistic syndicates, an editors’ syndicate and a syndicate for newspaper owners. The same system still exists in Lebanon.
Eissa said that a new breed of publishers has come into existence, whose newspapers “are an expression of the interests of businessmen.” The same applies to private satellite channels, owned by businessmen, “who have 60 business interests” other than the channel.
“Why isn’t a businessman suitable as the owner of a newspaper or a satellite channel? Because his interests are the market. Because he is intimately linked with the regime and the government.
“[A businessman’s thinking is]: ‘Ibrahim Eissa goes on TV and insults the government and I lose LE 100 million?’ It shouldn’t be allowed to happen, logically,” Eissa laughed.
“Even if these businessmen are saints, ultimately their interests are directly linked to the regime and cannot therefore enjoy the freedom or independence which will allow them to be the voice of the people, rather than the voice of their president or their own interests.
“You cannot imagine a businessman breaking off his interests with the regime for the sake of freedom of expression. He’ll tell you and freedom of opinion and expression to get lost.”
Eissa said that there exists a “real crisis now about who owns Egyptian newspapers” and that the way out of this crisis is for “people to own their newspapers.”
“This is the real crisis Egypt is facing now. Our privately-owned newspapers and our satellite media don’t reach the people, who have no say over their media, neither in government or privately-owned media.
“We have government papers creating sewage and privately-owned newspapers treating this sewage.”
What is the solution to Egypt’s political problems?
“I don’t know but democracy for me is like a bus, and we’re defending our right to get on this bus. Where will this bus go? That’s up to the people — to the left, to the right, to the Muslim Brotherhood, to liberals — I don’t know. But I want people to have the right to get on this bus.
“Our society has to pay the price of its choices. If it chooses incorrectly it will learn the lesson and after four or five years make the right choice. Consciousness will grow and develop with experience. But as long as we’re in this kindergarten of ‘nobody goes near the people because they’re my people and I’m free to do what I want with them,’ this is tedious.”
Eissa said that the elections were a manifestation of “a power struggle above” between the National Democratic Party’s old and new guards.
He jokingly added, “President [Hosni] Mubarak describes the elections as an ‘unprecedented experience.’ They are unprecedented — are there elections like that anywhere else in the world? Or democracy like that anywhere else in the world?”
One member of the audience attributed Eissa’s removal from Al-Dostor and OnTV to the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections and that “things will blow over and Ibrahim Eissa will be able to be editor of any paper he wants.”
“Al-Ahram,” Eissa said, laughing.
“If we surrender, they’ll go deeper and be fiercer, but if we resist they’ll retreat. We have to resist. It’s unacceptable that Egypt should remain for another year or another two years in this mess that we’re living in.”
