Different armed groups in Myanmar have vastly different media strategies, resulting in uneven coverage, while journalists must balance access to combatants with loyalty to the truth.
By HEIN THAR | FRONTIER
While the situation on the battlefield remains in flux, there are already clear winners and losers in Myanmar’s media war. The military regime has completely lost control of the narrative, ceding ground to ethnic armed groups and post-coup resistance forces to define the situation in the country.
The military’s hostility to journalists is infamous; it has arrested, tortured and killed reporters since the coup. Meanwhile, within the anti-junta forces, there are vastly different media strategies that often reflect their political ideologies.
The Karen National Union, Myanmar’s oldest ethnic armed group, and the Karenni Nationalities Defence Force, formed after the coup, have emerged as the most media-friendly forces, and are widely considered the most internally democratic as well.
Both groups have welcomed foreign journalists into their territory, and in exchange have been rewarded with flattering media coverage in some of the world’s biggest newspapers, including the Washington Post and New York Times. This coverage helps sustain the KNU’s decades-long partnerships with Western aid agencies, which the Karenni Interim Executive Council is also now poised to benefit from.
More authoritarian non-state armed groups, like the United Wa State Army and Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army, both formed from the remnants of the Communist Party of Burma, have been substantially more tight-lipped.
This has its own benefits. The MNDAA was able to seize huge swathes of territory in northern Shan State when it launched an offensive in late October, known as Operation 1027. The group’s secrecy may have helped prevent any news from leaking ahead of time, preserving the element of surprise. It also keeps the group safe from scrutiny of their more authoritarian tendencies – good for the MNDAA, but bad for journalism and the general public.
Journalists are forced to navigate these difficult and varied landscapes, and often have a different idea about the purpose of journalism than the armed groups they are covering.
“All the armed forces want the media to promote them, to make propaganda for them, and if we don’t do that, they don’t like us,” said Esther J, who has reported from Kayah and Kayin states since the coup.
Others may feel obligated to strike a balance between being critical of armed groups, and maintaining a good relationship with them to preserve access.
“Revolutionaries believe the revolution is the first priority and all professions must be in service of the revolution, but journalists think good journalism is the first priority,” said Ko Mratt Kyaw Thu, an independent award-winning journalist now based in Spain.
Many have been forced to flee the country, increasingly relying on sources on the ground, who are difficult to fact-check, while grappling with their own biases that often favour the revolution.
In the early days after the coup, when the military was slaughtering protesters by the hundreds in urban areas, there was little conflict of interest. But Esther J said that as the conflict drags on, civilians increasingly face hardships not only from the military, but also from resistance groups.
She said journalists have to report the truth, including how civilians are suffering from the conflict, but neither the military nor resistance groups appreciate that.
“Our revolution is for democracy, and the right to information is a basic principle of democracy. If the armed forces don’t value that, then it’s not democracy they are fighting for,” she said.
New restrictions
In April, the KNU and the Karenni IEC announced new media restrictions that surprised and distressed many local journalists.
Among the most onerous restrictions from the KNU was a demand that journalists not do anything that “could impact the security, dignity and image” of the group, and show videos and photographs to KNU officials in advance of publication if requested. The statement also threatens to add “the responsible journalists and the news agencies” to a “blacklist” if they don’t comply.
Historically, the KNU has had a reputation for facilitating access for journalists, with readily available spokespersons for different departments, including areas like health and education. Journalists in exile have been able to do cross border trips from Thailand, an easier journey than trying to access territory controlled by groups like the UWSA and MNDAA, which are more restrictive and lie on the border with China.
But the KNU’s new policies seem aimed at suppressing independent reporting and dissenting viewpoints.
A veteran journalist with 12 years’ experience, currently based in Kayin, said he worries the new directives could cause “confusion and misunderstanding even within the KNU”, and lead to ordinary people refusing to speak to journalists out of fear of punishment.
While it’s important for organisations like the KNU to ensure information about them is accurate, this should be achieved through transparent and accountable means that respect the principles of freedom of expression and the press. These regulations, instead, prioritise control over information, potentially undermining the democratic values of openness and accountability, he said.
Padoh Saw Taw Nee, spokesperson for the KNU, said the rules are mainly to “ensure the safety of journalists”. He declined to elaborate on the points that could be interpreted as restrictions on reporting, saying the group plans to meet with the Independent Press Council of Myanmar, an exile media body.
The Karenni IEC’s media code of conduct was less draconian, but still imposed numerous bureaucratic hurdles for journalists, particularly in terms of access.
The mandate that journalists must obtain approval from commanders before traveling to specific areas raised some concerns about censorship, as did a vague demand that journalists not undermine military operations and local governance.
Ko Myo Satt Hla Thaw, an independent photojournalist who spent over two years in Kayah, said the instructions contain some positive elements, like requests to respect local culture and better safety measures. But he said it could be wielded to suppress information.
“The longer I spend reporting on the war, the less interested I am in shooting and clashes and how many soldiers died. I’m more interested in the stories of ordinary people who are suffering from the war,” he said.
But the Karenni IEC insisted the content restrictions will only apply to “military operations security”, like journalists inadvertently giving away the movements or positions of resistance forces.
“We will not control what journalists can report,” said Khu Plu Reh, general secretary of the Karenni IEC. “The media, frankly, has helped the revolution a lot. And we understand that trying to control freedom of expression is not compatible with the democratic country we long for.”
A foreign journalist who has reported from multiple conflict areas since the coup said it’s normal for governments to impose certain restrictions in times of war.
“People would expect this from the Ukrainian government, for example. Given that resistance authorities should be respected as governments in the current context, why not expect it from them?” he said. But he added there is an inevitable trade-off if resistance groups are seen as controlling information.
“If a resistance group insists on previewing and censoring material gathered by visiting journalists, they can expect a drop in media coverage.”
Close to the chest
The harder line taken by the KNU and Karenni IEC was particularly concerning, given they were traditionally the most welcoming of the major ethnic armed groups. Others, like the UWSA, MNDAA and Arakan Army are substantially more secretive and restrictive, making it difficult or impossible to report from their territories. Meanwhile, the Kachin Independence Army has recently joined this group of guarded organisations, after being one of the most media-friendly armed groups in the years preceding the coup.
Groups like the KIA, MNDAA and AA have one official spokesperson, while most other officials refrain from talking to the media entirely. When those spokespersons choose not to engage with the media, for whatever reason, information dries up.
This restriction underscores the challenges faced by journalists seeking to report from conflict-affected regions, where access is limited and controlled by armed groups. These armed groups are happy to share information with the media that shows them in a favourable light, but are tightly restrictive of anything sensitive.
“They only give us controlled information, so it’s very hard to learn anything they don’t want us to know. There is almost no window of opportunity for this,” said a journalist based in Thailand mainly focused on ethnic affairs who works for a foreign news agency.
She highlighted Operation 1027, launched by the Three Brotherhood Alliance of ethnic armed groups, consisting of the AA, MNDAA and Ta’ang National Liberation Army. The tight control of information gave them an element of surprise, but has also obscured the full picture of the conflict, particularly the experiences and perspectives of ordinary people.
It’s impossible to keep a lid on everything, though. Allegations of human rights abuses have emerged, including reports that the MNDAA is engaging in forced conscription and discriminating against ethnic Bamar residents in their newly conquered territories. But without free access to the area or contacts in the armed group, it’s difficult to get a fuller picture and hold the MNDAA accountable.
Mratt Kyaw Thu said that the Brotherhood groups effectively and strategically used the media by engaging with them on their own terms during Operation 1027, at a time when public opinion of them was favourable because the groups were fighting the regime.
But now that the MNDAA and TNLA have signed a ceasefire with the military, a decision that’s sure to be more controversial with the public, they’ve both gone silent.
“It shows that they just used the media; they don’t have a professional relationship with the media,” Mratt Kyaw Thu said.
Many journalists consider the AA one of the most difficult forces to talk to, releasing information only through spokesperson U Khaing Thu Kha, usually at designated press conferences. While some reporters may have mid to high level contacts willing to divulge information anonymously in other armed groups, like the TNLA, the AA is an information black hole.
Mratt Kyaw Thu said this is becoming a problem due to increasing tensions between the AA and the persecuted Rohingya Muslim population in Rakhine State.
AA leader Twan Mrat Naing has started posting increasingly controversial comments about the Rohingya on social media, repeatedly referring to them as “Bengali”, often used to imply Rohingya are illegal immigrants and therefore justify their oppression.
Mratt Kyaw Thu said journalists should have the opportunity to ask him tough questions about this to clarify his stance, but it’s not feasible due to the AA’s refusal to engage.
Remote reporting
Since the coup, many journalists have been forced to leave the country, marking a significant transformation, with many now dependent on remote reporting. While modern technology makes it possible to stay in regular touch with sources on the ground, it remains difficult to confirm details.
Without the ability to physically witness events or assess the credibility of sources in person, journalists are at increased risk of biased reporting, with many simply regurgitating battlefield updates and allegations of military abuses from resistance forces.
As a result, the coverage tends to prioritise immediate updates and developments at the expense of nuanced and in-depth reporting with comprehensive analysis and local context. The tendency to prioritise breaking news, often in an effort to beat other media outlets to report the story first, makes media more susceptible to spreading misinformation. But the general public’s appetite for news – particularly reports that look good for the resistance – means media outlets are sometimes actually rewarded for spreading unverified information.
This is a particular problem in the central Dry Zone, which is far from international borders, and therefore difficult to access. Most journalists rely on tele-reporting to cover the conflict in Sagaing and Magway regions between the military and People’s Defence Forces, pro-democracy militias formed after the coup.
One of the few journalists based in Magway said the PDFs were initially very eager to speak with the media, but unlike some of the more professional ethnic armed groups, didn’t have information officers or trained spokespersons.
He added that as the conflict has progressed, some resistance groups have turned to warlordism, and now try to avoid media or use it as propaganda, rather than cooperating with it.
The dependence on remote reporting also puts journalists more at the mercy of resistance groups, because all it takes to cut off a key source of information is to stop answering the phone. This leaves some reporters in fear that unfavourable reports will limit future access.
Most journalists are also at least sympathetic to the resistance movement. This is understandable, given the conflict began when the military overthrew a highly popular elected government and killed hundreds of peaceful protesters.
But this bias may also lead some to overlook abuses committed by resistance groups, believing it necessary to support the fight for democracy with the rationale that the end justify the means.
The foreign journalist said it’s only natural for resistance groups to be subject to more scrutiny as they gain power.
“If the trajectory of a collapsing junta continues, we can expect more media coverage, especially of the PDF areas. This is bound to create more tension between the media and some elements of the resistance,” he said. “Some actors may not put much worth into media coverage, but without it, even more of the junta’s crimes will remain in the dark – an injustice to the victims and humanity as a whole among other things.”
