International Journal of Communication 10(2016) Burmese Media in Transition 187 we are quite satisfied that we built in some major changes” (personal communication, July 6, 2014). In July 2015, the MoI finalized bylaws for the media law that promise journalists greater access to information but also provide authorities with means of controlling reporting on contentious issues. At the time of this writing, both the broadcasting law and the public-service media law have been halted, pending further review. Concerns include a proposed Broadcast Council comprised of six ministries, including the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of the Interior (Toe Zaw Latt, personal communication, July 11, 2014). Also, the government’s draft public-service media law specifically names the state-run daily newspapers and broadcast outlets as the future public-service media rather than laying out criteria and allowing interested parties to apply. A related concern is the government’s control over infrastructure, such as the broadcast outlets, and national distribution networks and discounts for newsprint and ink. Also, state-run media employ civil servants paid with tax dollars and yet compete in the same market as the private media with no such salary subsidization. For all these reasons, critics argue, the government should disengage from media work entirely. Visions for media in Myanmar vary among the different stakeholders in the reform process. Journalists push for freedom to report freely without fear, many taking risks by protesting publicly. Ethnic media journalists struggle for recognition and ways to express the concerns of their people, both in media content and in decision-making bodies. The ethnic media consortium Burma News International, for example, has had to lobby on its own behalf for inclusion in several large media development conferences held in recent years, and it continues to lobby for ethnic media representation on the press council and other official bodies. These journalists would like to see an inclusive, diverse media, including publicservice and community media. The military has made clear its interest in limiting media debate on sensitive topics. Despite promises to be more forthcoming with the press and an increase in press updates, the military provides little usable information for journalists and rarely offers contact information for follow-up. In May 2015, the military threatened media with lawsuits if they printed or aired statements by the blacklisted Kokang rebels. Criticism of the military is dangerous, as demonstrated by the June 2015 case in which news photographers in parliament showed a military lawmaker voting on behalf of absent colleagues. In response, journalists were first denied access to lower house parliamentary chambers, then to the upper house, and informed by then speaker Shwe Mann that the request to block access came from the military (Zaw, 2015). The denial of access was announced just hours after the MoI jointly celebrated World Press Freedom Day with UNESCO in Yangon. The official line, expressed through Information Minister U Ye Htut, is that the government is committed to media diversity, as evidenced by the draft of the broadcast law that includes provisions for private, public, and community media; the commitment to transform state-run media into public-service media, whose content will include ethnic issues and ethnic programming; and provisions in the draft public-service media law to provide financial and technical support for ethnic media. These are significant commitments if they can be successfully operationalized into practical bylaws and enforced. However, as already mentioned, the government is expecting that the state-run media alone will be transformed into public-service media, despite the fact that ethnic media groups and DVB-TV have also expressed interest.