Everyone acknowledges the indispensable role of the media. But acknowledgment alone is not enough. In every thriving democracy, media plurality and diversity are not luxuries—they are lifelines. Imagine, if you will, a Bhutan with only two media houses. It would be as good as having none at all. The media is not just a stakeholder in democracy—it is its beating heart. It gives breath to public discourse, lends muscle to accountability, and shines light on transparency.
Governments around the world understand this fundamental truth. That is why they support their media—not out of charity, but out of necessity. From direct subsidies in France and Italy, to newspaper print support in India, to postal and tax breaks in the United States—yes, even the world’s most capitalist economy knows that a robust press needs a strong foundation. And yet, in Bhutan—where the private sector is nascent and the market small—such support is seen as unnatural, even unnecessary. The irony is deafening.
Small, independent media houses—often lacking financial depth—are, paradoxically, some of the most vital. Rooted in their communities, nimble in their operations, they amplify voices that might otherwise go unheard. Modest in scale, but mighty in purpose!
Here, the Media Enterprise Development Budget (MEDB) has served as a lifeline. It may not be grand, but it is essential. It helps struggling media houses stay afloat, holding the line against the creeping quietude that threatens our democratic discourse. That support—however modest—is not just financial aid. It is a shield against silence.
And yet, MEDB is just one instrument in a much larger symphony of support that is yet to be played. In 2015, a comprehensive Media Sustainability Report offered a roadmap—clear, strategic, and actionable. But those recommendations now lie buried, forgotten, their pages gathering dust while our media continues to fight an uphill battle, unaided and unheard. Further, the private media were told about the Economic Stimulus Plan (ESP) and asked to submit our proposals. With the government remaining silent, we do not know what has happened.
Authorities have offered verbal assurances: that MEDB will endure, that government agencies may choose where to place their advertisements based on reach. But assurances without official directives are as weightless as whispers. Without formal communication, ministries and agencies remain passive. Without instruction, they default to inaction—just as they did with the neglected Media Standard Operating Procedure, where even trained focal persons failed to implement what they knew.
It is time—past time—for the Ministry of Finance, the custodian of such critical support, to issue clear, unequivocal communication to all ministries and agencies. Only then can we begin to level the playing field and create an environment where private media is not just surviving—but thriving.
Let it not be written in history that we watched, arms folded, as the independent voice of Bhutan’s press withered into silence. Let us act—not with hesitation, but with clarity, unity, and with unwavering conviction—to defend the pillars of a free, fair, and flourishing media.
