If Burmese people are ready for change in Burma, then we must question whether the exiled Burmese media is ready for change. The answer, I believe, should be a resounding “Yes!”

Over the past decade, Burma’s various media operating inside the country have been struggling to confront the regime’s draconian press laws, heavy-handed censorship and intimidation.

As we all know, Burma enjoyed media freedom and perhaps the liveliest free press in Southeast Asia in the 1950s and 1960s. Burma’s first constitution in 1947 boldly guaranteed citizens the right to express their opinions and convictions. Unfortunately, freedoms of expression and media were rather short-lived.

The first impact against journalism came soon after Gen Ne Win seized power in 1962. Press freedom in Burma gradually disintegrated thereafter, curtailed by Ne Win’s socialist regime.

Newspapers were nationalized and foreign news agencies were asked to pack their bags. Journalists and editors found themselves in prisons. During the 1980s, all forms of public expression and publications had to pass through Burma’s notorious Press Scrutiny Board, even though Burma’s second constitution, drawn up in 1974, guaranteed freedom of expression. However, that freedom, like all others, was subject to the capricious whims and draconian dogma of the “Burmese Way to Socialism.”

In 1988, Burmese citizens marched the streets calling for Ne Win’s resignation and an end to one-party rule. For a brief period the people of Burma witnessed a revival of press freedom—hundreds of pro-democracy bulletins, newspapers and pamphlets were published without going through the PSB. Burma’s state-owned newspapers surprisingly departed from the rose-tinted official line and an objective reporting style suddenly emerged. Alas, it was also short-lived.

The second major impact on press freedom in Burma came shortly after the bloody coup on September 18, 1988. The reporters and editors of the country endured another dark era, facing arrest, torture and lengthy imprisonments. “Burma is an enemy of the press,” said the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists in 2005.

Even then, they didn’t give up.

Over the past decade, a new group of journalists and reporters has emerged—the exiles. Burmese journalists who were formerly political activists, ex-political prisoners from 1988 and those affiliated with the pro-democracy uprisings established news agencies in Burma’s neighboring countries, such as India and Thailand. The Irrawaddy itself, set up in 1993, was a result of this defiant era.

Several Burmese journalists joined the BBC and the VOA Burmese services; the Democratic Voice of Burma was set up by exiled Burmese in Norway.

These Burmese media groups have come of age and have proven themselves powerful in shaping public opinion and accurately informing an international audience.

During the uprising in September 2007, the reporters based in Burma and “citizen reporters” highlighted the monk-led uprising and exposed the brutality of the regime; but these exiled media groups also played a crucial role too.

Chinese-made radios sold out in Burma as news-hungry people rushed to listen to news from abroad. Satellite dishes were immediately installed to receive TV broadcasts from abroad.

Meanwhile, as troops opened fire on the peaceful demonstrators, monks and nuns, “citizen reporters” equipped with digital cameras, cell phones and memory sticks bravely took to the streets to take pictures and gather news.

Before the regime shut down Internet connections, thousands of images and live footage came out of Burma. Powerful photographs and videos told the world the true story of how Buddhist monks and laypeople challenged the Burmese regime, and how the regime, in turn, responded with brutal force. The image of the murder of Japanese photographer Kenji Nagai in broad daylight was splashed around the globe, reviewed time and again on TV screens by the BBC, CNN and Al Jazeera.

Burma’s exiled media—previously scorned by the internationally press as the “dissident underground media” or the “opposition media”—dutifully and faithfully disseminated all the news and images they received from Burma.

The exiled Burmese media have proved to the world, through their professional integrity, skills and talent, that they can function as effectively as any other medium in the world. Equally important were the friendships and informal alliances that were forged between bloggers and professional journalists while sharing news and images.

But there is a boundary line. We have to be guarded and cautious as we stick to our task of maintaining high standards of professionalism by ensuring that we deliver accurate news and stories to our readers.

I remember seeing images during the uprising of the body of a monk floating in a river and a man killed by 10-wheel truck on the road.

These images widely published on the Internet created anger and sadness among Burmese and foreigners alike in the belief that the military had carried out these executions. However, we could not confirm the origin of these pictures and some veteran journalists claimed that these two pictures were, in fact, unrelated to the uprising. In the end, The Irrawaddy did not publish these pictures.

In another case soon after, the news of the death of late Prime Minister Gen Soe Win was published in some exiled publications. But we waited for confirmation. When he was finally confirmed dead, we released the news accurately.

This is the job that media professionals must adhere to—fact-checking, verifying sources and getting confirmation, before sending out accurate news to their readers.

The uprising in 1988 and the monk-led uprising in September 2007 were equally important in Burma’s fight for freedom, democracy and a better society. Nevertheless, technology, computers, Internet connections and cell phones have changed the dynamic of the recent unrest. The attention Burma received was massive; moreover, inside and outside media professionals found ways to cooperate and narrowed any gaps or mistrust. The result is that more and more young Burmese are interested in learning journalism since the uprising.

Significantly, the exiled media groups not only shaped public opinion but offered editorial guidance and analysis to an international audience: officials, policy makers, UN agencies, NGOs, think tanks and international publications. They raised awareness and reached out to a global audience.

These media groups overnight became reliable sources of information to many international media outlets.

It is hoped that the exiled Burmese media will maintain its professionalism, high standards of journalism and credibility, because they have a key role to play inside Burma once the country opens up.

Inevitably, the media will be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.