The <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DQtSOT6ilFC/?img_index=1">post on Instagram </a>has an image of Sudan Gurung. Over the top is the message: ‘We wont let this year’s election happen if Gen Z’s demands are Ignored’. The account’s bio is ‘Uniting Nepalese Through Independent Investigative Research.’ Post like these have become a template for the information ecosystem in the aftermath of the GenZ revolt in September. Social media feeds are saturated with content that uses multimodality of captions, video, audio, to convey alarm and warnings about how GenZ aspirations are being subverted. Research by MIT showed that on X false news reaches 1,500 people six times faster than the truth. Fake news goes ‘farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth’, researchers concluded. Narratives compete on platforms, and users gravitate to the shock-value of the news and not to factual precision or nuance.&nbsp; “On social media misinformation easily mutates into disinformation,” says media literacy trainer Deepak Adhikari. “The news we see on social media are often out of context, with little information that misinforms more than inform.”  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251203121236_6daaeaf8ed255fda4a431d0419d9ae1a0908259af14529835034ce48653064a9.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20251203121236_6daaeaf8ed255fda4a431d0419d9ae1a0908259af14529835034ce48653064a9" data-rendition-name="original" width="1501" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="Doomscrolling democracy NT"> </figure>   <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20251203121232_8a7a41b8bd1892137d1dd97fd1c1408d2879ff96fa69a4d6d5acff7239869d4b.png" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20251203121232_8a7a41b8bd1892137d1dd97fd1c1408d2879ff96fa69a4d6d5acff7239869d4b" data-rendition-name="original" width="1601" height="340" loading="lazy" alt="GenZ instagram"> </figure>  Indeed, today’s ‘Post-Truth Society’ is characterised by a media environment where users give more credibility to their pre-existing beliefs and emotion rather than objective facts or subjective nuance. Post-Truth does not refer to what comes after the truth, but rather a cultural or information environment where pre-held personal beliefs shape public opinion, not facts.&nbsp; Rumour, bias and propaganda have always been a part of the informationsphere, but what makes it different today is the velocity at which falsehood spreads. The news cycle is short, and before content can be verified the damage is already done.&nbsp; Adhikari says that pre- and post-publication fact checking can be a potential antidote. However, when a video with misleading content goes viral, and even after fact-checkers catch up to correct it, the fear-mongering, anger or hate has already spread.&nbsp; In Nepal’s social media, apparently everyone is tarred as guilty, or funded by a foreign government. Calls to dismantle federalism, restore the monarchy, or teach political leaders a lesson by supporting authoritarian alternatives are no longer fringe ideas discussed in private. They circulate routinely in the algorithmic streams legitimised not by evidence but sentiment. When misinformation becomes the default, nostalgia for a mythical prosperous past begins to look like a rational response. While these positions are not new, their algorithmic amplification gives them perceived legitimacy that makes it hard to estimate, or far exceed, their actual political support. “We have not highlighted the achievements of our multiparty democratic system, and the new generation has not experienced authoritarianism,” Adhikari explains. “Therefore statements like federalism is expensive and the monarchy was better have taken up space, because the evidence of the counter narrative is underreported.” There is a positive side to social media. The GenZ movement took on momentum, and the protestors organised and supported each other through the very platforms that are now full of content that can potentially derail the democracy they wanted to strengthen. Just like it was trendy to be revolutionary during the protests, it is now trendy to be skeptical and to distrust the very people who were installed in the interim government through online voting. Such is the architecture of social media: it rewards immediate reaction over reflection, and due to its interface design, it not only shows what could be relevant ‘for you’ but also tells you what others are thinking about that. The role of the mainstream press as the traditional gatekeeper of information has been superseded by the digital sphere — both in access and sharing. This poses new challenges because social media content may not be news, and just because a page claims to be a news site that does not mean it is journalism. Social media feeds are not chronological newspapers but an algorithmic marketplace. TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube all rely on recommender systems, now powered by AI to keep users on their platforms for as long as possible. The feeds then collapse the distinction between credible news, speculation, parody, and deliberate disinformation, especially in a politically volatile environment.&nbsp; Everything appears in the same vertical stream, formatted with similar fonts, voiceovers, and music, making a platter of content that they know you are most likely to consume. For Nepali users, this has created personalised and parallel political realities. Two people living in the same household may open TikTok and encounter completely different idea of the problems and solutions of Nepal. One is fed content in favour of elections in March, while another pushes conspiracy theories about anti-GenZ activities aided and abetted by foreign powers. None of these feeds reflect the whole picture. Each reflects what the algorithm has learnt will capture user attention. Academics have long found that social media sites do thousands of A B testing to silently optimise which colors, captions, or video formats users respond to most intensely.&nbsp; Tests help design the most addictive feeds. Interface interference allows platforms to limit discoverability of certain features such as the ‘Logout’ and ‘Privacy’ settings so the system remembers users preference for the next time they are scrolling the platform. When faced with such infocalypse, we have the option to withdraw and not engage with our feeds or our phones. But billions of dollars have been spent by Big Tech to keep us hooked. We need more structural revisions that integrate the need of a safer online environment. Media and digital literacy must be woven into both formal education and public institutions. It cannot be an optional topic or a workshop for a select few.&nbsp; Students must learn how algorithms work, how misinformation spreads, and how to verify information before sharing it. Adults need community-level programs that help them navigate the online world that now shapes politics.&nbsp; Content creators also must be held accountable. Profiles posing as news sites must also be brought under the same scrutiny as the mainstream press. Directives for social media journalism, a section in the Press Council’s Journalism Code of Conduct can be introduced as provisions that foster transparency and ethical journalism practices on social media. Creators should pledge to verify facts, cite sources, and clearly label opinion or commentary. While this will not entirely curb disinformation, it can be the first step towards a digital public sphere that can host democratic dialogue with nuance and facts.&nbsp; Says Adhikari: “Journalism doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and our knowledge space, academia, think tanks, research centres, archives, are scaffolding to support journalism, and we must make them stronger. The role of journalism can be to humanise the news and journalists can be storytellers, but the responsibility of the information ecosystem does not rely on journalists alone.” Ayusha Chalise is a communication and development scholar specialising in how politics is experienced in the digital space.

Ayusha Chalise

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

thumbnail

viewImage

Doomscrolling democracy

Guilherme Canela is Chief of the Freedom of Expression and Safety of Journalists Section of UNESCO in Paris. He recently visited Nepal to discuss <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/internet-in-everything">freedom of expression in the digital media</a>. Nepali Times spoke to him about new challenges to free media. Excerpts: Nepali Times: Can you tell us about how the discussions with Nepal’s lawmakers went? Guilherme Canela: My visit, in partnership with the Inter-Parliamentary Union, was to have an open discussion with them about international standards on freedom of expression. It was very enriching to learn the key concerns of Members of Parliament regarding the current challenges Nepal faces regarding the existing legal framework regulating the media and digital ecosystem, vis a vis the immense changes in this environment related to the technological revolution we all are experiencing, and how these challenges can be addressed in alignment with the International Human Rights Law. There is a fine balance between freedom of expression and that same freedom being used to spread intolerance and hatred. What are the main conclusions of UNESCO’s own study on the governance of digital platforms?&nbsp; Digital platforms have become a new front in the pursuit of peace. They have had a transformative role in advancing human rights. They have democratised access to knowledge and culture, enabled new voices to be heard, and fostered global connections, but, as you say, at the same time they have become <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/banner/press-for-people">ecosystems of misinformation, disinformation, ideological polarisation, and incitement to violence, discrimination, and hate</a>.&nbsp; Such features have undermined democratic values and threatened human rights across the world. Our job, therefore, is too foster the huge positive side of this equation and to counter the negative externalities it generates. Thus, whereas the digital companies don’t operate with transparency, accountability and due diligence, many countries have embarked on regulatory processes without keeping a human rights approach as a main principle thereby risking the shrink of the civic space and leading to different kinds of restriction not aligned with International Human Rights Law. UNESCO aims to ensure that everyone’s <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/no-freedom-after-expression">freedom of expression</a>, access to information and diverse cultural content are guaranteed, while various stakeholders, including governments, deal with the problems of dis- and misinformation and hate speech online. These problems will be better addressed, in a way that aligns with international human rights law, through implementing the UNESCO Guidelines in a comprehensive and coherent manner. In a nutshell, UNESCO’s proposal, which was debated worldwide for almost 2 years, and received 10,000 comments coming from actors from 134 countries, suggests a governance system that can improve the processes currently used by the tech companies, aiming to expand freedom of expression, while dealing with the negative externalities. But when can we deem the risks so high that governments can justify restricting freedom of expression through digital platforms under international standards? The rapidly evolving digital era has seen the rise of the imposition of restrictive measures on freedom of expression and the press such as infringement on right to privacy, censorship, and the prevention of general access to the dissemination of information, both online and offline, including internet shutdowns. However, the justification for governments to restrict such freedoms on digital platforms arises when there are identifiable and/or substantial risks to public safety, national security, or individual rights which cannot be sufficiently mitigated through other means. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/nepal-should-be-open-for-south-asia">Nepal should be open for South Asia</a> In order for any restriction to be legitimate it must fulfil the criteria set out in international standards on freedom of expression, such as the Articles 19 (3) and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the Three-Part Test, which demands that any interference must be provided for by the law, pursue a legitimate aim, and be necessary and proportional to secure one of those aims.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20240326090344_61e1f3e429a81b7cb025116ed038eadcd019e4a3dc0203af4e48abaa2c81fbe3.jpg" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="20240326090344_61e1f3e429a81b7cb025116ed038eadcd019e4a3dc0203af4e48abaa2c81fbe3" data-rendition-name="original" width="853" height="1280" loading="lazy" alt="Guilherme Canela in Nepal "> <figcaption>Guilherme Canela(Photo: Sonia Awale)</figcaption> </figure>  In essence, any statutory restriction to freedom of expression must be subject to oversight and review mechanisms in order to uphold the principle of transparency, accountability and prevent abuse of power. While governments may be justified in <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/multimedia/gagging-the-press-in-installments">restricting freedom of expression</a> on digital platforms under certain circumstances, such restrictions must be carefully circumscribed to protect the fundamental rights of individuals and uphold the principles of democracy, pluralism, and open discourse in the digital age. Is there not a danger, then, that states can justify banning digital platforms using the excuse of maintaining “social harmony”? Measures applied by both companies and states should always be proportional to the harm that is intended to prevent. From companies, removal and blocking of content and account suspension should only be used as a last resort in the most serious cases. From the side of governments, <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/rattled-by-criticism-nepal-bans-tiktok">banning a digital platform</a> should be proportionate to the level of harm it causes and should be accompanied by transparent processes, due diligence, due process of law and consideration of alternative measures to mitigate risks while preserving the benefits of digital platforms for legitimate users. Additionally, regulatory actions should be based on evidence-based assessments and subject to judicial review to ensure they are fair, just, and consistent with principles of freedom of expression and the rule of law. <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/talking-about-tiktok">Banning digital platforms</a> can be considered proportionate in certain circumstances where their activities pose significant harm that outweighs the benefits they provide. Here are two scenarios where banning digital platforms might be considered proportionate. Systemic violation of international human rights standards: If a digital platform systemically violates international human rights standards despite warnings and sanctions. And second, Exploitative Practices: when platforms engage in exploitative practices such as facilitating illegal activities (such as child pornography) or enabling human trafficking. However, it is important to outline that our Guidelines do not call on the government to establish a department or organisation to moderate content. The Guidelines consider that digital platforms should not be held liable when they act in good faith and with due diligence, carry out voluntary investigations, or take other measures aimed at detecting, identifying, and removing or disabling access to content that is prohibited under article 20 of the ICCPR or that has been restricted in terms of article 19(3) of the ICCPR. How can journalists protect their freedoms when democracy itself is threatened? Journalists can protect their freedom by first keeping on doing their job and <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/censuring-censorship">hold all powers accountable</a>. But they cannot do it alone or in a vacuum, neither should they be left alone to deal with existential safety and viability challenges. As proclaimed by all UNESCO’s member states, journalism should be valued as a fundamental ‘public good’ with citizens putting their trust in it also through teaching and encouraging media and information literacy. It demands the State protect media viability, the rule of law institutions defending media freedom from all attacks, including by elected officials, and for politicians committing to respect the fundamentals of democracy, including the role of the press as a watchdog. There is an urgent need to further demonstrate to our societies the value of journalism (and all fundamental freedoms) not only to guarantee political and civil rights, but to guarantee all other rights. When someone is protesting to have better education or better health, ultimately what they want is to protect the rights of education and a healthy life, but they can’t do that if they don’t have freedom of expression in the first place and if watchdogs, like journalists, are being silenced. Your report also cites the critical need for digital platforms to protect electoral integrity. How can this be done?&nbsp; Firstly, in UNESCO Guidelines for the Governance of the Digital Platforms, we highlight the need for Digital platforms to recognise their role in supporting democratic institutions by preserving electoral integrity. Their acceptance of the role is not trivial as it implies an engagement regarding democracies. UNESCO also recommends establishing a comprehensive risk assessment process that focuses on the integrity of the electoral cycle leading up to and during major electoral events. These assessments should be conducted transparently and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and should include a gender perspective to address the escalating online violence against women in electoral contexts. Proactive measures based on the identified risks are essential to prevent potential threats to the integrity of the electoral process. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/dont-act-on-the-act">Don't act on the act</a>, Editorial Secondly, UNESCO urges digital platforms to ensure that users have access to a diverse range of information and ideas, in line with international human rights law. Attention should be given to automated tools to prevent any hindrances in accessing election-related content and diverse viewpoints. Additionally, digital platforms should review their products, policies, and practices related to political advertising to avoid arbitrary limitations on candidates' or parties' ability to disseminate their messages during the electoral cycle. The promotion of independent fact-checking, advertisement archives, and public alerts is highlighted as crucial measures to uphold electoral integrity in content dissemination.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20240326090344_d2b0d4b66fb1632336f876e84b0e72004620937c79e36d9f94828bd8478ab937.jpg" data-media-id="editor_10" data-image-id="20240326090344_d2b0d4b66fb1632336f876e84b0e72004620937c79e36d9f94828bd8478ab937" data-rendition-name="original" width="730" height="1029" loading="lazy" alt="UNESCO guidelines for the governance of digital platforms"> </figure>  Finally, transparency is emphasised across various aspects, including the use and impact of automated tools, engagement with stakeholders and governance systems, and the identification of political advertisements. Digital platforms are responsible for disclosing funding details, applying equal content moderation rules, and tracking the monetisation of political posts. The retention of advertisements in a publicly accessible online library, along with information on funding and targeted demographics, contributes to an accountable and transparent digital environment during electoral cycles. If put in place by the platforms, these measures will collectively reinforce the commitment to preserving electoral integrity in the digital age. How can digital platforms be held more responsible when Big Tech is controlled from outside national jurisdictions whereas the impact of their content is domestic?&nbsp; The strategy for the implementation of the UNESCO Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms aims to promote the enabling environment for freedom of expression and information and enhance the responsibility of digital platforms worldwide by Building a Network of Networks by fostering international collaboration and cooperation among regulatory authorities and civil society to develop common standards and regulations for digital platforms. This can help ensure that platforms adhere to responsible practices regardless of their location of ownership and may also reduce lawfare. Then there are Public-Private Partnerships to address regulatory challenges associated with digital platforms. Collaboration between governments, industry stakeholders, and civil society can facilitate the development of effective governance frameworks. Read also: <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/media-melee-in-the-age-of-ai">Media mêlée in the age of AI</a>, Kunda Dixit Promoting transparency and accountability of the governance system (independent regulatory authorities) and of the digital platforms policies and practices. Human rights due diligence and content moderation and curation based on international human rights standards must be upheld. The governance system itself must have independent oversight mechanisms to monitor the activities of digital platforms within national jurisdictions. We must also empower users by providing them with tools and resources to understand and manage their online experiences through media and information literacy. This includes features for content control, privacy protection, and mechanisms for reporting harmful content or behaviour. Lastly, there must be ethical guidelines for digital platforms that prioritise transparency, fairness, and respect for human rights. These guidelines can serve as a foundation for responsible platform governance.

Balancing free expression with fake news on social media

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221114131144/637238b69c7e80680e0c739fjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="640"/><figcaption>Photo: JORGE FRANGANILLO/WIKIMEDIA</figcaption></figure>In June, inside a crowded auditorium of the Oslo Met University in Norway, YouTube’s Brandon Feldman was fielding questions from fact-checkers from around the world.Feldman had just finished a "fireside chat" with Baybars Orsek, the director of the International Fact-checking Network (<a href="https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/">IFCN</a>), when he was bombarded with questions from the audience.To the applause of fellow fact-checkers, one speaker after another exposed YouTube's failure to stop the spread of false information on the platform.A participant from Pakistan's Soch Factcheck said he came across a flood of potentially fatal false claims on YouTube. Others exposed videos with hate speech that went unchecked. Feldman promised reform, but it was too little, too late to appease fact-checkers.I was in Oslo for the annual <a href="https://globalfact9.com/register">Global Fact 9</a> Summit, the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/fact-checking-movement-grapples-with-world-awash-false-claims/">first in-person conference</a> in three years with nearly 500 participants from 69 nations.I clicked through our own South Asia Check and showed <a href="http://southasiacheck.org/fact-check/popular-youtube-interview-on-covid-19-full-of-false-misleading-claims/">articles</a> debunking conspiracy theories around Covid-19.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/election-infowar-goes-digital/">Election infowar goes digital</a>, Ramesh KumarIn one session, employees of TikTok, a short-video platform that is becoming increasingly popular in Nepal, spoke about how they were tackling information disorder on the platform. There was a session on automated fact-checking. At another panel, a Meta speaker noted that Facebook does not moderate political content.After a week of this, I was a little overwhelmed by the work that lay ahead back in Nepal which is having federal and provincial elections on 20 November. If the local election in May was any indication, this one too would be fought on social media platforms.Balen Shah and Sunita Dangol, who ran for mayor and deputy mayor of Kathmandu in May were the targets of rumours and false information. Disinformation actors aim to delegitimise candidates or attack rivals with propaganda. The objective is to influence, if not manipulate, public discourse.With easy access to the Internet, more Nepalis are getting news and entertainment through their mobiles. This will inevitably lead to a proliferation of falsehood because social media algorithms promote clicks that are designed to attract users, and keep them on the platform.Both Facebook and TikTok have features that help content go viral. During significant news events, such as elections, people unknowingly share false information (also called misinformation) with significant impact on the integrity of the electoral process.Fact-checking, supporting media literacy initiatives, and media monitoring during elections can all contribute to fostering trust in public institutions.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/the-social-media-contagion/">The social media contagion</a>, Mukesh Pokhrel One of the reasons we started <a href="https://nepalcheck.org/">NepalCheck.Org</a> as the elections approached was to combat misinformation. But it is difficult to distinguish fact from fake, truth from trolls, and most importantly, to expose public officials who are lying. The fact-check report must be supported by reliable, authoritative evidence.How do we do it? The same tools that help spread misinformation and disinformation can also be employed to identify and debunk false claims.We conduct keyword searches on Google to verify information. Finding problematic online content requires constant social media monitoring. Since the news is the main source of false information, fact-checkers must be up to date on current affairs.Online search skills are also crucial. But there is a catch: you have to keep refining your searches and building on what you find in order to identify the origin of a misleading photo or video.Since fact-checking started in the US in the early 2000s, a lot has changed. It picked up steam during the 2016 US presidential elections. Recent international events, such as the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, have demonstrated how you can find the truth by utilising information that is publicly available.It has prompted the creation of novel tactics such as <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/osint-ukraine-war-satellite-images-plane-tracking-social?utm_source=dynamic&amp;utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter">open-source intelligence</a>, which assesses data from readily available sources using more sophisticated technologies to combat misinformation.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/paradigm-shift-in-nepali-media/">Paradigm shift in Nepali media</a>, Shristi KarkiDespite the rise in popularity of fact-checking, the pervasiveness of viral disinformation makes it appear like an intractable challenge. A quote often attributed to American author Mark Twain succinctly captures the situation: “A lie can travel halfway around the world while truth is putting on its shoes.”In my two and a half years as a fact-checking editor, I have occasionally felt like I am up against powerful fake news factories. Only a small portion of online misinformation and disinformation can be fact-checked.New studies in ‘inoculation theory’, have given me hope for a better future. Researchers from the universities of Bristol and Cambridge in the UK <a href="https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/08/can-you-inoculate-people-against-misinformation-before-they-even-see-it-this-study-says-yes/">found</a> that users can more effectively battle misinformation and disinformation if they are aware of the techniques used to distribute it.A total of 30,000 participants watched video clips to become more familiar with manipulative strategies, including employing polarising and emotional language. The study advocated immunising people against the tactics of misinformation and disinformation, drawing on the psychological concept of ‘inoculation'.Exposure to less harmful disinformation can aid in the development of a person's defences against propaganda and misleading claims, much like a vaccine does.As we progressively recover from the Covid-19 pandemic thanks to the vaccine, let us hope that a new vaccination will be an effective tool against the ‘infodemic’.Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/punished-for-fact-checking-in-nepal/">Punished for fact-checking in Nepal</a>, SalokyaDeepak Adhikari is the editor of NepalCheck.Org, a new bilingual fact-checking platform in Nepal. He was the editor of South Asia Check from March 2020 to July 2022.

Inoculation against misinformation

Who is accountable for teacher-student relationships?

Early on Monday morning, a bus from Pokhara to Kathmandu plunged off the highway in Dhading killing 19 passengers. Two weeks ago, another bus fell into the Tama Kosi in Manthali, killing 12. A few days before that a bus crash in Baitadi killed 13 people.&nbsp; In just the month before Nepal's election, more than 50 people have been killed in road traffic accidents. Most of these cannot be called 'accidents'. They are a direct result of poorly maintained highways and lack of enforcement of traffic discipline. Political parties in Nepal have rolled out their election manifestos, and voters are once again presented with a flood of promises. Page after page, these documents list megawatts and microcredit, highways and airports, jobs and investment. In these manifestos, growth is quantified, projects itemised, revenue forecast — and there are even threats to beat up contractors who do not finish their jobs. But when everything is declared a priority the stale promises are empty. The voter is left confused as to where the party’s loyalties really lie. Will any of these plans and pledges actually ever materialise and help Nepalis live longer, safer, healthier lives? The main job of any accountable government is to protect its citizens, not so much from foreign enemies but from domestic mismanagement. And this means the most basic test the new government should be made to pass is whether it can ensure basic well-being and protection for all its people. The problems of safety, health, and survival remain unresolved for most Nepalis, and are quietly eroding their lives. In the past year alone, the country’s <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/roadkill">roads and highways claimed more than 2,300</a> lives. An estimated 41,000 Nepalis die each year directly because of <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/what-is-invisible-is-more-dangerous">air pollution</a>, and their <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/air-pollution-killing-season-starts-early">lifespans are lessened by 3.4 years</a>.&nbsp; <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/editorial/poor-health">Non-communicable diseases</a> now account for well over half of total deaths in the country. And even where survival has improved, deprivation remains. Chronic malnutrition continues to haunt communities in <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/mass-migration-from-muktikot">Nepal’s western mountains</a> despite progress in maternal and child health.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260223130240_4f4ef83a31c3c4ae36ecdffb33a355e2fa3de9e98244b840a895af2d95c35ac0.jpg" data-media-id="editor_5" data-image-id="20260223130240_4f4ef83a31c3c4ae36ecdffb33a355e2fa3de9e98244b840a895af2d95c35ac0" data-rendition-name="original" width="1024" height="683" loading="lazy" alt="A life-first manifesto for Nepal NT"> </figure>  These are the lived realities of most Nepalis, and it is here that development can deliver its most immediate returns. A rising GDP, in and of itself, does not make roads safer, clean polluted air, or provide enough nutrition to children. Such outcomes demand intentional, granular policies that confront the specific, everyday problems shaping people’s lives.&nbsp; Macroeconomic growth, trade and investment are important, but these alone cannot guarantee improvements health and safety. The word ‘growth’, after all, is also synonymous with malignancy. Economic progress and human protection are correlated only when governance deliberately links them. Impact on life is the unit in which ordinary Nepalis calculate progress. What is needed, then, is a governing philosophy measurable in these same terms: a ‘life-first’ standard where every policy, budget, and reform can be understood and judged by its impact on protecting and extending human life. Such a ‘life-first’ approach would scrutinise three aspects of every policy. First, whether the policy prevents loss of life. A death is termed preventable if better, more coordinated response systems and regulations could have avoided it (vaccines, drugs, road safety, clean drinking water). A newly built six-lane highway <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/highway-accidents-are-no-accident-in-nepal">can be a death trap</a> due to poor design or lax enforcement of safety rules. If neonatal deaths continue in a district despite hospitals being present, or if malnutrition claims lives in predominantly agricultural regions, they too are failures. Preventable deaths also cluster where accountability is less direct. Just last year, <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/suicides-a-pandemic-within-a-pandemic">Nepal recorded 6,866 suicides</a>, with nearly 20 lives lost every day, yet these deaths fail to prompt any serious examination of governance. The same holds for fatalities linked to domestic or communal violence, alcohol and substance misuse, or ‘natural’ disasters, which register as ‘tragedies without remedy’ rather than as outcomes policy can influence. But when avoidable loss of life recurs at scale, isolated incidents become patterns, and patterns reveal systemic neglect. Saving lives, however, is only the first step, and what matters just as much is the quality of years lived. Nepal’s life expectancy now stands at 71 years, yet many citizens spend years in avoidable disability, untreated chronic illness, or mental distress. A life- first government must ask not only whether people live, but whether they thrive. Are citizens able to pursue education, work, and family life without fear of preventable harm? Do communities have access to clean air and water, nutritious food, and basic healthcare? Can a teenager anywhere in Nepal imagine a future not foreclosed by premature marriage, or untreated depression?  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260223130240_157d72b80b82a07699b6bffbb30036b86f0f767a5674cc3db3d5c20343442940.jpg" data-media-id="editor_8" data-image-id="20260223130240_157d72b80b82a07699b6bffbb30036b86f0f767a5674cc3db3d5c20343442940" data-rendition-name="original" width="2529" height="1427" loading="lazy" alt="A life-first manifesto for Nepal NT"> </figure>  Thriving requires policies that prevent suffering and promote well-being in addition to ensuring survival.&nbsp; Finally, governance must consider graceful aging. Elderly Nepalis should not be left to navigate disease, poverty, or isolation alone. Social systems, healthcare, and community support must enable their continued participation and dignified well-being. Adopting this three-layered standard would gradually reorient how success of any new government is defined. Transportation would be judged by fatalities reduced on the roads. Electricity generation would be measured by whether households can switch from firewood dependence to smoke-free electric stoves.&nbsp; Increase in annual rice harvest must translate into better nutrition, reducing the prevalence of chronic diseases like diabetes. Accountability must follow problems rather than stop at Singha Darbar. Only then will politicians and bureaucrats eventually recognise that their work converges on the same human endpoint. Critics will argue that economies are complex, trade-offs are inevitable, and that governance cannot be reduced to a single metric.But, as Acemoglu and Robinson show in their book <a href="https://ia801506.us.archive.org/27/items/WhyNationsFailTheOriginsODaronAcemoglu/Why-Nations-Fail_-The-Origins-o-Daron-Acemoglu.pdf">Why Nations Fail</a>, the key difference between prosperity and poverty lies in inclusive institutions that empower citizens and create broad incentives for well-being.&nbsp; Extractive institutions concentrate power and wealth in the hands of a few while keeping the majority trapped in neglect. Nepal’s governance has remained a striking example of extraction. If lawmakers in the new Parliament continue to resist changes that would save and improve the lives of ordinary citizens, the same systemic rot will persist for generations to come. A life-first mentality can cut through this inertia by clarifying the moral centre of governance and reminding policymakers that behind every policy failure lies human cost. <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/here-now/epicentre-of-hunger">Every mother in Bajura</a> with a child going hungry at night, every farmer in the Madhes unable to afford medical care, and every family that has lost <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/comment/saving-kidneys-to-save-nepal">a migrant son to kidney failure</a> understands the true <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/multimedia/dirty-dangerous-difficult-and-dehydrating">value of a life saved</a>. Life is the one metric that transcends ideology, ethnicity, and region. Centering governance on this single, focused metric, can shift an election from a contest of rhetoric to a contest of evidence. Which party ensured access to safe water and basic healthcare? Which made work at home and abroad safer and less exploitative. Which measurably extended healthy years of life for ordinary citizens? Health is wealth. By improving the healthy lifespan of citizens economic prosperity would follow naturally. A ‘life-first’ governance model would therefore compel Nepal to address the underlying structural failures across all sectors, rather than merely alleviating their symptoms. The GenZ protest that toppled the government last September was, at its core, a demand for accountability and a rejection of politics as usual. But as the country edges closer to the polls, that clarity has started to dissipate. Parties are now echoing the language of reform, but the public discourse remains dominated by promises that feel disconnected from Nepal’s most immediate and basic priorities. Every preventable death, every hungry child, and every neglected elder becomes a direct failure of governance and a moral debt the state must answer for. It is how we can make sure we keep the next government in check. The writers are Nepali GenZ students of biomedical engineering at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Nepal’s life or death election

The series Nepal Made profiles Nepali products and the people who make them possible.&nbsp; In the lap of Langtang lie misty meadows that are carpeted with alpine flowers during the monsoon. It was here that Gyalbu Tamang (pictured, right) spent his childhood accompanying his father Pasang Norbu to high pastures, to milk nak and make cheese. Norbu himself was taught to produce Emmentaler cheese by two Swiss experts in the 1950s. Switzerland and Nepal are marking the 70th anniversary of diplomatic ties this year, and the cheese plant in Kyangjin was one of the first the Swiss were involved in.&nbsp; Langtang had surplus milk, and the idea was to turn it into cheese to raise nutrition levels. “The Swiss were very hard-working, and were not used to the laid back attitude of Nepalis,” remembers Gyalbu Tamang, now 50. “The children in Langtang were scared of the tall blonde foreigners, but I got along with them.”  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260221070240_dd47ceaf71a505e075f4a3628baf70161a40ebd21bcec1b1a2ebe03b28da4293.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="20260221070240_dd47ceaf71a505e075f4a3628baf70161a40ebd21bcec1b1a2ebe03b28da4293" data-rendition-name="original" width="960" height="720" loading="lazy" alt="Langtang cheese"> </figure>  Gyalbu remembers sleeping outdoors with his father, under the stars and gazing at Langtang Lirung luminescent in the moonlight. After the milk was boiled, he helped carry it down in 40 litre churns to Kyangjin for processing.&nbsp; The plant was handed over to the state-run Dairy Development Corporation (DDC). Norbu Lama retired, but cheese making was too ingrained in him. So he bought a dozen yaks and Gyalbu helped him sell the milk. At 18, Gyalbu joined the cheese plant, and 32 years later, he is still there – now manager. “I had learnt everything from my father, so it was easy for me,” Gyalbu recalls. “Trekking boomed in Langtang and there was high demand for cheese. It raised the income of farmers.” 2015 EARTHQUAKE&nbsp; But all that came crashing down just before noon on 25 April 2015 when the earthquake triggered an avalanche that buried Langtang &nbsp;village. More than 300 people, many of them trekkers, were killed. “My father was grazing yaks, and we found him five days later, thrown off by the avalanche. My mother was buried in the ruins of her home,” Gyalbu says. Fortunately, his wife and three children in Kyangjin were safe in their damaged house.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260221070240_7c0d512514280965aa72511100a2bda4e515c52c6e6428665dc7dd88c62c7ebf.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260221070240_7c0d512514280965aa72511100a2bda4e515c52c6e6428665dc7dd88c62c7ebf" data-rendition-name="original" width="882" height="661" loading="lazy" alt="Langtang cheese"> </figure>  Twenty-seven herders and 400 yaks also perished. The cheese plant was flattened. Even before the disaster, an ageing population, out-migration, and better education meant that fewer Langtangpa were interested in cheese-making. The DDC’s mismanagement also took its toll, and at Rs80 / litre, it was not feasible to herd yaks anymore. The Swiss stepped in again to help rebuild the plant on condition that the price of milk be raised. The DDC agreed to pay up to Rs110/litre depending on fat content, and that price has remained the same.&nbsp; Gyalbu Tamang was in Kathmandu this week, trying again to convince the DDC to raise the price of milk to make cheese-making a worthwhile occupation for the younger generation.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260221070240_61f302b28a3051006fedba92ac1a88ffab13a1ffb3154603bfc6693aee8fca5d.jpg" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="20260221070240_61f302b28a3051006fedba92ac1a88ffab13a1ffb3154603bfc6693aee8fca5d" data-rendition-name="original" width="960" height="720" loading="lazy" alt="Langtang cheese"> </figure>  There are only three yak ranches left and the numbers of yak, nak and dzo have shrunk. In its heyday, Langtang used to produce 5,000kg of cheese per year. Today, it is down to 800kg. The cheese is sold in Kathmandu for about Rs2,000 per kg, but the plant has no savings to upgrade its 80-year-old equipment. “We are on our own, there is not much help from the government or Langtang people overseas,” laments Gyalbu. “I do not know what the future holds, but I will keep making cheese as long as there is milk, and as long as I am able.”&nbsp;

Langtang Emmentaler

Of the nearly 19 million eligible voters in next week’s election in Nepal, an estimated 5 million are abroad and cannot cast their ballots. Many others within Nepal must travel to their home districts, and might decide not to because of the cost.
Flights into Kathmandu these days are full of global Nepalis returning just to vote, but almost as many are leaving for overseas jobs. Most of those coming or going are in the 20-40 age group, and a majority want Nepal to see a change in leadership.
Bangladesh held an election this month in which citizens overseas could vote by mail.&nbsp;
“Bangladesh made maximum use of technology not just for campaigning but also for polling itself. We could have also managed this, so people within Nepal did not have to travel to their home districts to vote,” says Mohna Ansari, former head of Nepal’s National Human Rights Commission who was an election observer in Bangladesh.
A 3-day holiday has been declared so people can travel to their home constituencies to cast ballots. Even if there was not enough time to manage ballots for overseas Nepalis, it could have been done for Nepalis within Nepal.
Former Chief Election Commissioner Bhojraj Pokharel reckons that physical voting in countries with a large Nepali diaspora would have been a logistical nightmare, but in the PR system, using electronic voting machines or paper ballot could have been piloted in some places. It is not possible to manage the entire voting process until we introduce the internet voting system.
“First of all, there needs to be political will to bring the policy and be ready to undertake that level of investment and it is not a one-time cost,” Pokharel says. “A government formed by the GenZ could have atr least issed an ordinance ensuring this right, piloted out-of-country voting where possible, which could have built pressure for the future Parliament and the government. It would have given people hope. It is a lost opportunity.”
All major political parties called for voting rights for global Nepalis in their manifestos, but these very leaders blocked legislation allowing it despite a 2017 Supreme Court ruling out of fear that it would be anti-incumbent.&nbsp;
<h2>Why so late?</h2>
Bangladesh delivered election results in just one day, but the final results of Nepal's last local polls in 2022 including that of Kathmandu constituencies took nearly a month.
Acting Chief Election Commissioner Ram Prasad Bhandari said this week that the results of the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) ballot counting would “likely” be published within 24 hours of the poll closing at 5PM on 5 March. But many are skeptical.
“I wonder if we lack the capacity or know-how to announce results as quickly as possible,” says Mohna Ansari.
Former Chief Election Commissioner Pokharel says manual ballot paper counting in Nepal is inherently slow because of the large numner of political parties and/or candidates on the ballot, the counting mechanism, the political behaviour of the candidates/parties and some managerial issues during counting.
“Our present policy is to count all the ballot papers at the returning officers' officies, located at the district headquarters. It requires collecting ballot boxes safetly first. This takes time, and there have been cases of ballot boxes being damaged or stolen during transport. In a few highly difficult, geographically remote polling centres, we use a helicopter or transport. But sometimes, accommodating the party and candidates' representatives remains challenging,” explains Pokharel. A solution could be counting ballots at the very booths where they are cast.
Another reason for the delay is simply the number of political parties, and the need for each ballot paper to be examined by booth representatives for consensus. In close races, the smallest difference can lead to tense situations, further delaying results, even though counting centres are protected by metal fencing so there is no disruption.
After this, then it is the turn of Proportional Representation (PR) ballots to be counted. Weeks pass by the time the results of candidates and parties are tallied and verified. But the most common delay is because election officers think ballot counting is a nine-to-five job.&nbsp;
“The efficiency of poll station officers is most important, and they are incentivised for this,” says Ansari, adding that counting can even start within an hour after voting closes.
In remote areas, local resources could be mobilised to make counting quicker, but there is a crisis of trust, adds Ansari.&nbsp;
That could be easily solved with electronic voting which the EC implemented in the 2008 polls but discontinued because political parties felt the machines could be hacked or manipulated.