May 30, 2025
THIMPHU – Bhutan’s media landscape is facing a serious problem that strikes at the core of its democratic ideals. Once seen as a promising pillar of democratic transition, the Bhutanese press is now navigating a slow, painful decline—one marked by financial hardship, diminishing independence, and shrinking space for public discourse. The 2025 Rapid Assessment of Bhutan’s Media Landscape offers a stark but unsurprising verdict: the system is faltering, and the consequences could be profound.
The report, based on responses from the overwhelming majority of working journalists in the country, reveals a profession hemmed in by outdated structures and deliberate constraints. At the policy level, journalists confront mounting restrictions in their search for public information. While our Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, the lack of a Right to Information law renders that right hollow in practice. Nearly 80 percent of journalists report facing barriers when seeking even basic data from government agencies, such as the total number of EVs in the country.
That resistance is reinforced by a culture of silence in the civil service, now regulated by rules that penalise engagement with the media. The Royal Civil Service Commission’s Rules for Administrative Disciplinary Actions and the Anti-Corruption Commission’s Public Service Code may be aimed at promoting accountability, but their practical effect is the opposite—they stifle transparency and cultivate fear.
Inside newsrooms, the situation is no better. Nearly half of Bhutan’s media houses conflate editorial and managerial roles, allowing CEOs to serve as editors-in-chief. This arrangement makes editorial independence the first casualty of business survival. And in a landscape where government advertising money remains the lifeblood of many media houses, journalists are left with little incentive—or protection—to challenge authority.
The cost of this fragile ecosystem is steep. More than 80 percent of journalists admit to self-censorship. Local coverage is in decline as media bureaus close. Entry-level reporters are poorly trained and poorly paid. Some leave the profession entirely; others stay, driven by personal conviction rather than institutional support. The result is a press that is cautious, constrained, and struggling to fulfil its public mandate.
There is no shortage of policy fixes, however. What is missing is political will. We must begin by enacting a Right to Information Act—something our journalists and democratic institutions have long called for. Without it, calls for transparency are little more than slogans. An independent media endowment fund—shielded from political and commercial influence—can provide a lifeline for struggling outlets, especially those serving remote regions. And the re-establishment of an autonomous Press Council is essential to restore accountability and uphold professional standards. Because all these matter in larger perspectives.
Lessons can be drawn from the Nordic nations—Finland, Norway, and Sweden—where press freedom is both a legal guarantee and a lived reality. There, State subsidies to media are structured, transparent, and guided by the principle of editorial independence. Bhutan, with our own aspirations of Gross National Happiness, should not shy away from borrowing what really works.
Our democratic journey has been widely admired. But a democracy without a free and fearless press is a democracy only in name. The government must not treat the media as a liability, but rather as a partner in the nation-building process. Otherwise, the loss will not be the media’s alone. It will be, in the end, Bhutan’s.