Charting a Nation's Media, Arts & Cultural Environments

 

Media access is also largely dependent on geographic location. Often, those living in rural areas (which make up 70% of Tajikistan's population) have a lower income than their urban counterparts and therefore cannot afford internet access. Furthermore, the mountainous landscape makes infrastructural developments like fixed telephone cables and broadband difficult and costly to install. This results in low levels of internet access and also low levels of newspaper delivery. However, with the introduction of mobile phones, mountainous regions have become more connected than they once were. Inhabitants can not only contact family members with ease, but can communicate with business partners in other parts of Tajikistan.

 

Because of the government's censorship of journalists, which is discussed on the Knowledge Monopoly page, many Tajiks have turned to social media to express themselves freely and read opinions that may oppose the government. And because of the independent nature of social media, the Tajik government has tried its best to censor information posted on such sites. However, it is difficult to monitor every post an entire country produces, especially on websites that are hosted overseas. Thus, the government’s strategy is to shut down the internet when sensitive material is posted, to stifle its spread. Often, the sensitive material is that which criticizes the president or displays the government in a negative light. For example, when a Russian online magazine published an article suggesting the weakness of President Emomali Rahmon’s regime would result in his downfall, many social media sites, including Facebook, were blocked for several days to prevent the spread of the article. The government's explanation for blocking the internet is usually one of two things: there were technical difficulties that caused the internet to shut down, or, it shut down the internet in an attempt to prevent conversation that may spur another civil war.

 

One internet user described perfectly the attitude the government has toward any possible protest or disobedience. His comment is titled "The dialogue of the people and the government of Tajikistan."

 

“People: "We want change"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We are tired of labour migration"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want to live in our homeland"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want jobs in Tajikistan"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want freedom of doing business"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want the electricity"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want hot water and heating"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want competent officials"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want to enforce laws"

Government: "You want war"

People: "We want fair and democratic elections"

Government: "You want war"

People: "See how people live in the developed countries"

Government: "Look how they live in Somalia and Afghanistan"

People: "We do not want to look at the backward countries; we want to look at the developed ones'

Government: "You want war"

People: "We do not want war; we want to change our government under the law and Constitution"

Government: "You want war"

What kind of government do we have? Why do the authorities have just one answer to all questions? Do we need such a government?