Writing for Express Tribune‘s ‘Media Watchdog’ blog, Corporate Solicitor Zain Umar claims that the newspaper has a ‘Goebbel’s vendetta’ against Imran Khan. After equating The Express Tribune to the Nazi propaganda minister in the very first sentence, he goes on lambast the newspaper for allegedly “publishing literally anything against Imran Khan” while “not a single write up of his is devoid of barbed shafts aimed at Imran Khan”. This is an increasingly common claim – that Imran Khan and PTI are the victims of media bias. But is this true?
It’s certainly not true for Express Tribune‘s official Blogs where it took no effort to find pieces by multiple authors who support Imran Khan and believe PTI will be a formidable force in the next elections.
Even editorials on Imran Khan are balanced, neither supporting nor opposing. It’s hard to consider lines like, “he will have to be taken seriously and his party’s electoral fortunes will most probably be far better than they have been in the past” as a ‘Goebbel’s vendetta’. So why do Zain Umar and many others like him believe that the media is targeting Imran Khan?
According to Imran Khan, the reason is Jews.
For those who do not understand Urdu, please allow me to explain. In this clip, Wajahat S Khan asks Imran Khan whether “the honeymoon is over” between the media and PTI since it seems that he is no longer dominating front pages as he did last year. Imran Khan begins to reply that he is fighting against two governments – the national government and the provincial government, both of which have large advertising budgets. Wajahat clarifies that he’s not talking about advertising, he’s talking about news stories. Imran Khan then replies that the problem is that the ‘Jewish lobby’ controls the global media. Wajahat reacts in disbelief, telling Imran Khan, “Don’t go there…” which shocks the PTI Chairman who doesn’t understand how someone can’t believe that the world’s media – including, apparently, The News (Jang Group), which Wajahat is holding in his hand – is part of a Jewish conspiracy against him.
Like most conspiracy theories, this one, too is made from fantasy and not fact. There may be some Jews who own some media groups in the world (Israel, for example), but there are also many Christians (The New York Times) and Muslims (The News/Jang) as well as people of many other religions as well. The fear that Imran Khan is the victim of a ‘Goebbel’s vendetta’ by the editors of Express Tribune is similarly fictitious, as is clear from the fact that the paper has regularly published pieces that were favourable to PTI and Imran Khan. Mr Umar can relax.
After spending the last year beating the dead horse of visa conspiracies, a new media report has turned to another conspiracy theory about an American invasion. Only this time, you might say they are beating a dead cow. A news report in PakistanToday includes the alarming headline, Is the US sending all its mad cows to us?. Rest assured, dear reader, this appears to be just another sensational ‘bull’ story.
The article quotes PAMCO former CEO Dr Hamid Jalil giving his opinion that because a case of ‘mad cow’ disease was discovered in a California farm by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Pakistan should stop import of live animals from the US. The report which appeared in Monday’s Lahore edition does not present any evidence that any diseased animal has been imported to Pakistan.
According to livestock and meat trade data available from the USDA website, America’s largest export market for beef is Canada followed by Mexico and Japan. In fact, Pakistan does not even make the list of the top 20 countries that import American beef, falling instead into the category, “Other countries”.
It should also be noted that the case of ‘mad cow’ was identified in the US specifically because they have put in place systems to monitor and trace diseases to the source. Despite the impressive growth in Pakistani beef production, we have not invested in similar systems of tracking and cataloguing livestock.
Dr Hamid Jalil raises a legitimate point about whether imports of American beef should be suspended until the USDA can confirm that the disease has been contained and does not pose a threat. This is something that scientists and can test and confirm so that the people are assured of the safety of any food imports. There is no evidence presented, however, that any infected cattle have been imported till date. Neither is there any evidence to support the conspiracy theory that US is targeting Pakistan with diseased cattle.
In the piece below published by Express Tribune, Abdul Majeed examines the claims of journalist Nadir Hassan who recently wrote that all the anti-American conspiracy theories of recent years have proven to be true. After careful examination, though, Majeed finds Hassan’s argument lacking. We wanted to highlight this piece for our dear readers for two reasons.
First is that it reflects well on Express Tribune that the editors are willing to allow alternative points of view to those projected by their regular columnists.
Second, it should be noted that Mr Abdul Majeed is not an investigative journalist by training but a medical student. This may have some advantage for his ability to see through conspiracy theories as he is trained in the scientific method which puts the greatest value on facts.
In the pre-scientific period, many believed that medical issues like seizure were caused by evil jinn and the patient would be treated by a mystic who would try to expel the jinn to cure the seizure. Following fact-based research during the scientific revolution, it was learned that seizure was actually a result of medical causes like abnormal brain activity, stroke, fever, etc etc etc. As a result of this emphasis on facts instead of superstitions, doctors were able to cure more people improve quality of life for the masses.
Do we need a scientific revolution in journalism? Till date many journalists continue to look for modern day jinn like ‘foreign hand’ and ‘Hindu-Zionists’ to explain all types of events rather than using the scientific method to find facts that can give a correct conclusion based on reason, not superstition.
I read an article written in The Express Tribune yesterday by veteran journalist Nadir Hassan, titled “What if the conspiracy theorists are correct?”. In his piece, he said that all anti-US conspiracy theories of recent years have proven to be true. He also expressed the view that it is possible to be both anti-US and anti-Taliban at the same time.
I was surprised at the lack of understanding displayed by the esteemed writer. Conspiracy theories, by definition, cannot be proven either right or wrong; as far as anti-US conspiracy theories are concerned, he just glossed over a few of them and justified them later as being true. Anti-Americanism and conspiracy mongering are not as simple and straightforward as have been presented by Mr Hassan.
I would like to share some of my thoughts about conspiracy theories, their origin and genesis. According to historian Dr Mubarak Ali:
“Myths gradually have lost their appeal in those societies where intellectuals produced new ideas, thoughts, and concepts to guide people. Myths flourish in those societies which are stagnant and rely on the out dated ideas”.
Such conspiracy theories and people who promote them are present across the length and breadth of this world. From the most civilised countries to the most downtrodden ones – conspiracy theories weave their web of lies with relish.
A primary factor responsible for the proliferation of myths and conspiracy theories is the pathetic state of our textbooks. In 2003, the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI ) published a report titled “The Subtle Subversion“ on the state of textbooks in Pakistan. The report drew the following conclusions with regards to to textbooks in Pakistan:
Insensitivity to the religious diversity of the nation
Nadeem Farooq Paracha and Fasi Zaka have also written about the rise of conspiracy theories and the way they shape our understanding of the world. In a television program on “conspiracy theories”, Nadeem F Paracha recalled that the film “Loose Change” (about the theories regarding 9/11) was broadcasted in Pakistan with much fanfare. In fact, there were three to four other parts of that documentary that were subsequently made, in which the earlier mistakes were rectified. Those “other” versions were never shown in Pakistan.
The above-mentioned conspiracy theories have never been proven correct, neither can they ever be. As far as anti-Americanism is concerned, a survey for international broadcaster al Jazeera by Gallup Pakistan found that 59% of Pakistanis felt that the greatest threat to the country was the United States. A separate survey by the Pew Research Center, an independent pollster based in Washington, recorded that 64% of the Pakistani public regards the US “as an enemy” and only nine per cent believe it to be a partner.
In one of his columns, Fasi Zaka, suggested that the kind of anti-Americanism found these days (among the middle-classes of the country) is extremely ill-informed. He wrote that a lot of young Pakistanis are basing their understanding of international politics by watching low-budget straight-to-video ‘documentaries’ on YouTube!
These so-called documentaries that Zaka is talking about are squarely based on re-hashed conspiracy theories that mix age-old anti-Jewish tirades and paranoid fantasies about Zionists, Freemasons and the Illuminati. Locally, all these are then further mixed with flighty myths about certain Muslim leaders, sages and events recorded only in jihadi literature and flimsy ‘history books.’
The aforementioned article also pointed out that Farhat Taj’s research is not based on actual statistics and that’s a controversial thing to say. Her book “Taliban and Anti-Taliban” should be read by Mr Nadir for clarification.
The writer further metioned Zaid Hamid and Ali Azmat; these two have said a lot of weird things, but if one or two of them turned out to be true, it must be regarded as an exception, not the rule. Let’s not forget that Zaid Hamid said in Episode 17 of his program, “Iqbal ka Pakistan” that long marches or democracy can’t bring any change in the country.
In episode 21 of the same show, he mentioned “Tsunami” as a political force. Ali Azmat claimed in another show that after 1945, all the musical instruments in the world have been tuned to a specific frequency that is destructive for cellular structure and cause mass hypnotism and crowd control.
These are just some very obvious examples of conspiracy-mongering by these two guys. (If anyone is interested, please take out some time to read a complete post-mortem of Zaid Hamid’s musings in “Iqbal ka Pakistan” here), merely the tip of the iceberg.
At the end, I just have one thing to say to the respected Nadir Hassan: I expect better from you.
It is hard not to take notice of the bold headline on the front page of The Nation on Friday: US setting up for Pak sneak-in. Are we on the verge of an American invasion? Should we be strengthening the borders and preparing for war? Or is this the latest case of media war hysteria and the well-worn drum of anti-american paranoia?
The first hint we have is the name of the reporter who filed this sensational story. Actually, the hint comes from the fact that the reporter has no name. Let’s next look at the names of the sources for the information in the report:
“it is said”
“knowledgeable sources say”
“According to sources”
“Observers say”
“It is said”
“It is learnt”
“sources say”
Here we have a front page report in The Nation written by no one that makes sensational claims about a threat to the national security based on information provided by no one.
Now let us examine the claims made by these ghosts.
According to the report, America’s plans for the period after their withdrawal from Afghanistan is to “sneak in” to Pakistan. And how is it planning to sneak in? The report claims that the US is adding new levels to its Embassy in Islamabad. We have no way of knowing if the US plans to expand the size of its Embassy here, but we do think this has got to be the least sneaky way of expanding its footprint in the nation.
Actually, the threat of this supposed Embassy expansion is curious itself. According to the anonymous reporter’s anonymous sources, “having nine levels enables the US snoopers to overlook most of the ministries and government offices’ buildings, including the Parliament House, the Presidency and the PM Secretariat.”
The Americans are sneaking in to build a taller Embassy so they can look out the window into government offices? This is the CIA’s greatest strategy to spy on Pakistan? Mashallah! We are saved!
Jokes aside, there are real threats to our national security, and these should be reported honestly and objectively so that the people understand why military and civilian leaders take the decisions that they do to protect the country. Filing silly anonymous reports about American conspiracies to build a taller Embassy so they can peek into government offices and publishing these reports as real news stories spreads confusion and conspiracies as the people are unsure what the real threats are and what are simply tall tales.
The latest version of the media’s ‘memogate’ parlour game has turned from who knew what and when about the infamous memo to who knew what and when about the US raid that killed Osama bin Laden in May. Mansoor Ijaz invented this new version of the game by first alleging that Husain Haqqani and Asif Zardari secretly knew about the raid before it happened. He provides no evidence, of course, and his claim flies in the face of all logic and reason, but since when have logic and reason been required rules for our media parlour games? In fact, already the field has expanded to speculation that UK High Commissioner Wajid Hasan also knows something he’s not telling, including a front page article in The News that asks, “Will Wajid Hasan be the next memogate victim?” But why limit the field to only PPP officials? Surely there are plenty of people who can be brought to dock on the same quality of speculation and innuendo.
Let’s begin with Ahmed Quraishi. On 6th May, Ahmed Quraishi was the guest on Voice of Russia‘s radio programme. During the interview he said that,
“At some level, maybe not the entire government, but at some level Pakistan definitely was on board with the United States before the operation was carried out and some of the logistics that were involved in that operation do indicate that it would not have been possible to carry out the operation in its entirety without a major, a good level of cooperation on the Pakistani side”.
Quraishi goes on to say that the Abbottabad operation “of course also vindicates the US intelligence community [and] the US military in Afghanistan”. Interesting.
Then on 10th May, Ahmed Quraishi further wrote that the operation that killed Osama bin Laden was a joint Pakistan-US victory. Here is how Ahmed Quraishi described the scene:
“Crucial and critical intelligence from Pakistan and the United States succeeding in pinpointing the location of al-Qaeda terror chief. ISI gave decisive leads on the trusted courier of bin Laden. The CIA and the US military put together a plan to take him out. By virtue of the more advanced American surveillance technology, Washington filled in the gaps and sealed bin Laden’s fate.”
Ahmed Quraishi then goes on to criticise the military for not explaining their larger role in the operation.
“Instead of ‘admitting’ failure, it was better for the army chief to object to CIA hijacking a joint victory and turning it into a one-sided victory and a one-sided attack on our military and ISI. And we could have certainly done without our foreign secretary quoting US national security adviser to confirm to our media that we did scramble some fighter jets in the end. The weak media management capabilities of our civilian and military bureaucracies are breathtaking.”
Neither is Ahmed Quraishi the only one who was making such statements. Let us take a moment to revisit the front page of The Nation on 3rd May, just after the raid:
The Nation front page of 3rd May 2011
The front page article by Sikander Shaheen quotes “top level official sources” saying that “200 Pakistan Army men provided ground support” for the operation while “four helicopters of the Pakistan Army hovered over the fortress-like hideout of al-Qaeda chief at Thanda Choh”. Shaheen goes on to quote “military sources” that “US dignitaries thanked the military leadership of Pakistan on intelligence sharing and the successful operation”.
It seems that perhaps not only Ahmed Quraishi but Sikander Shaheen, military and intelligence leadership, 200 jawans and four helicopter pilots should be under suspicion.
Let us be clear: We have not seen any evidence that Ahmed Quraishi, Sikander Shaheen, Wajid Hasan, Husain Haqqani, Asif Zardari…or anyone else had any advance knowledge or was privy to any secret information about the raid. During the aftermath of the raid, there was great confusion and many people were making guesses about what happened. Because of this, it is easy to take even the words of a democrat like Wajid Hasan or a hyper-nationalist like Quraishi and twist them to create suspicion. But that is not journalism.
The White House has categorically denied Mansoor Ijaz’s claims that anyone knew about the Abbottabad operation, and headlines speculating about whether one or another government official may have had secret knowledge of the American operation are completely irresponsible. Rather than carrying out witch hunts against government officials based on speculation and innuendo, perhaps it would be better if journalists thought about who was feeding them false information following the raid and who is feeding them information now.
On Tuesday, President Zardari left for Dubai to receive medical treatment. Within minutes, the media circus began and rumours of a coup began to circulate. While no one has yet to provide a single piece of evidence suggesting that Zardari will resign or a coup is imminent, the story continues to dominate media headlines.
Part of the reason may be attributed to the way government officials like to give out as little information as possible, opening the doors to speculation. Arif Rafiq, a US-based consultant on Middle East and South Asian political and security issues, wrote on The Pakistan Policy Blog yesterday that Farhatullah Babar’s statement was clearly not the whole truth, which resulted in some journalists jumping at the opportunity to attack the president. This theory was echoed by Tariq Butt in The News the next day.
While a lack of fully forthcoming statements is a problem, especially in politics, it does not excuse reckless and irresponsible behaviour on the part of the media. Official spokesmen have a responsibility to give the press true and accurate information. But if they don’t, it does not give journalists license to simply make up whatever they wish were true.
One of the reasons the rumours took on such a life was that they were being reported not only by the well-known anti-Zardari types, but even those such as Najam Sethi whose show on Tuesday night helped fan the flames of rumour and speculation.
Some well-known journalists have been predicting the end of the Zardari regime for over a year now by regularly giving D-Day deadlines. But President Asif Ali Zardari continues to defy their hollow predictions, prompting Javed Hashmi to wisecrack that a PhD in politics may be required to fathom his brand of politics. Considering how very consistently wrong they have proven to be, one may be forgiven for wondering whether it is lack of intelligence or scarcity of credible sources that lies at the root of their helplessness and rage. Or is it plain wishful thinking and personal vendettas that are masquerading as serious front-page political analyses?
Given that this was an unusual deviation for Sethi, and his claim to have been receiving word from ‘sources’, the rumour was given credibility. And yet, as the days go by, any actual substance to the rumours remains elusive, and the story has shifted from reports of speculation to reports about reports of speculation. Is there anything sillier than media reporting about how it’s reporting about rumours?
That’s not to say the rumour-mongering has stopped. Multiple newspapers including Dawn and The News reported on Thursday that a US magazine (Foreign Policy) claimed that President Zardari “may resign from office on account of ill health”. The News featured the story prominently on the front page. Despite the sensational headlines, the article they are reporting about actually says something quite different.
The original article by Josh Rogin does not report that the president may resign over ill health – that was only one speculation by an unnamed former US official. Actually, the article’s greater speculation is whether the military is plotting a coup against the government. But again, even in the Foreign Policy article, this is only rumour and speculation.
Moreover, what our media is not reporting is that the same magazine updated their article to say that the president will not resign, and that “The rumors of a silent coup are sometimes a way of trying to effect a silent coup”. Additionally, Foreign Policy published a new report yesterday saying that “Zardari won’t resign”. Will Jang consider this worthy of front page news also?
As the actual story of the president’s health condition and treatment lay to rest rumours of coups and resignations, responsible journalists should take note of what ‘sources’ were giving them what information. There they might find a much more enlightening story than the silliness we’ve been fed over the past few days.
It is unfortunately more common that our reports examine inappropriate and unprofessional behaviour by our respected journalists. Occasionally, however, there are moments that make us proud to be associated with the profession and we do like to recognise these as well. After a week of media circuses, we are pleased to be able to once again post some praise, this time for the responsible manner in which Mujib Shami handled the memogate story on Nuqta-e-Nazar.
What is important to note is that in his handling of the issue, Mujib Shami’s main point is not that one side or the other is correct or incorrect, but that too much of the media reports have been based on conjecture and assumption. For example, consider the way the conversation starts:
This entire case has rested on conjectures or assumptions. The conjecture is that Mansur Ijaz wrote a memo and that the letter was delivered and once delivered action was taken. But the alleged memo, what does it have? It asks Mike Mullen to immediately contact Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and warn him that he should not dare to overthrow the democratic government in the country. And that if Mullen gives this warning to Kayani and to Mr Shuja Pasha and they stop and the democratic government survives then the government will do the following for you. But since memo is unsigned we dont know who wrote the memo.
Now tell me, did Mike Mullen call Kayani?
No.
Did Mullen warm him?
No, he didn’t.
Did they stop because of the warning? Were they going to do a coup?
That is a conjecture. They were not going to do a coup.
When all these are conjectures/assumptions then I am worried that where are we going, what are we doing and what kind of a country have we become?
This last line may be the most important line spoken on television in decades. When we start to treat conjecture and assumption with facts, where can we possibly go as a nation?
Actually, such behaviour has direct consequences on the ability of the nation to function. As Shami points out quite clearly.
That people got after Husain Haqqani so in a way it was important for the government to remove him because they felt that he would not be able to work in such a controversial environment. But please remember that an inquiry has to still take place. Now this is very interesting that the resignation has been taken even before the inquiry.
What if an independent inquiry clears Husain Haqqani’s name? Then an innocent man will have been forced to resign because of a media circus.
This is a serious consideration as we have written before that media coverage of the issue so far has been dominated not only by speculation, but that much of that speculation has turned out to be incorrect.
Once again, Shami lays this all out perfectly.
If Husain Haqqani had to run away from the country why would he return? Even before he returned our media started saying that he wont return. And the Indian papers said that he has sought asylum in US. Then we asked him to resign, he resigned. And when he Tweeted that he has resigned there were counter assertions by the PM house that he had not offered but was asked to resign. So petty are people…
So petty, indeed. Rather than help the people cut through the confusing mess of conjecture, assumption, rumour and innuendo, too many of our most popular media personalities are jumping at the opportunity to give their own opinions and add to the controversy. As Mujib Shami correctly notes, too much of what we believe is because we are not being told facts, but conjecture and assumptions. He is not saying that one side or the other is correct, he says quite clearly “please remember that an inquiry has to still take place.” Husain Haqqani has resigned, and there is a new Ambassador Sherry Rehman. Contrary to media assumptions and speculation, Husain Haqqani has returned to Pakistan and has turned over his Blackberry for investigation. An inquiry is being prepared and the facts will come out. This is what the media should be reporting – facts, not conjecture.
When the cameras are turned off, many people find Mansoor Ijaz’s story thoroughly questionable, but there are still some questions remaining and no one wants to pass up the opportunity presented by such a sensational story. The problem is, writing exciting and controversial stories isn’t be the basis legitimate news programmes. Such stories are for drama serials.
Appearing on NDTV yesterday to explain his view to Barhka Dutt, Mansoor Ijaz’s answers actually raised more questions about his allegations in the ‘memogate’ controversy.
Mr Ijaz begins by saying that the international media should be asking “what the government is trying to cover up”, which is a strange way to begin the interview – we know what Mr Ijaz claims that government is trying to “cover up” because Mansoor Ijaz is the one who made the allegations to begin with. From there, the interview only got more bizarre.
Talking to Barkha Dutt, Mansoor Ijaz claims that he was approached about the memo because his anti-ISI beliefs made him “a plausibly deniable channel…and I agreed,” said Ijaz. “I knew that if something went wrong, there would be a need for plausible deniability.” Barkha picks up on this logical disconnect, and presses him on it. If he understood and agreed that this was a confidential process and that he would be denied if word got out, why did he reveal the story in a newspaper op-ed, and why does he act surprised when it is denied?
According to Mansoor Ijaz, he publicly revealed his alleged role in the ‘memogate’ affair because it added authenticity to his op-ed for The Financial Times. This raises another obvious question: If Mansoor Ijaz is as credible and trusted among American officials as he claims, why would he need to include some anecdote about his involvement with Pakistani officials in order to grant authenticity?
But that’s not the only strange thing about his new explanation. Mansoor Ijaz wrote an almost identical op-ed on 2nd June that also terms the ISI as “the enemy” and alleges a secret ‘S-Wing’ that is responsible for breeding terrorism – but he did not then feel the need to include any stories about secret memos.
Here is what Mansoor Ijaz wrote about the ISI on 2nd June:
The enemy is the ISI—it runs Pakistan from the shadows like a puppet master. The ISI is a danger to civilized societies everywhere, because it nurtures and breeds hatred among Pakistan’s Islamist masses, and then uses their thirst for jihad as a foreign policy sledge hammer against Pakistan’s neighbors and allies, often for no purpose besides just creating chaos.
And here is what he wrote about the ISI on 10th October:
The enemy is a state organ that breeds hatred among Pakistan’s Islamist masses and then uses their thirst for jihad against Pakistan’s neighbours and allies to sate its hunger for power. Taking steps to reduce its influence over Pakistan’s state affairs is a critical measure of the world’s willingness to stop the terror masters at their very roots.
Here is what Mansoor Ijaz wrote about the alleged ‘S-Wing’ on 2nd June:
The finger of responsibility in these recent events often points to a shadowy outfit of the ISI dubbed the S-Wing. A notorious group of operatives, the S-Wing is made up of active ISI officers, recent retirees, and plain-clothes civilians with highly specialized training—all dedicated to protecting and preserving Pakistan’s territorial integrity using any method, at any cost, with no regard for collateral damage. As black-ops units go, it is about as thuggish and ruthless as is possible, without being a criminal organization.
That is why the S-Wing should be declared a sponsor of terrorism under the “Foreign Governmental Organizations” designation by the U.S. State Department. It no longer matters whether the ISI is willfully blind, or explicitly complicit, in the murderous plots attributed to the S-Wing, which the ISI routinely denies any knowledge of or responsibility for. S-Wing must be stopped dead in its tracks before immeasurable harm comes from the missionary zeal of its agents, no matter how misguided their mission may be.
And here is what he wrote about the alleged ‘S-Wing’ on 10th October:
Questions about the ISI’s role in Pakistan have intensified in recent months. The finger of responsibility in many otherwise inexplicable attacks has often pointed to a shadowy outfit of ISI dubbed “S-Wing”, which is said to be dedicated to promoting the dubious agenda of a narrow group of nationalists who believe only they can protect Pakistan’s territorial integrity.
The time has come for the state department to declare the S-Wing a sponsor of terrorism under the designation of “foreign governmental organisations”. Plans by the Obama administration to blacklist the Haqqani network are toothless and will have no material impact on the group’s military support and intelligence logistics; it is S-Wing that allegedly provides all of this in the first place. It no longer matters whether ISI is wilfully blind, complicit or incompetent in the attacks its S-Wing is carrying out. S-Wing must be stopped.
Actually, the point of both pieces is the same – to declare the ISI and its alleged ‘S-Wing’ unit as the world’s terrorists. The only real difference is that in October, Ijaz added the dramatic story of the secret memo. This raises the question of what changed between 2nd June and 10th October that Mansoor Ijaz felt he needed to add an anecdotal story to back up his claims?
Meanwhile, it should also be noted that during the same timeline that Mansoor Ijaz claims he was working with Husain Haqqani to deliver the memo to American officials, Husain Haqqani was very publicly defending Pakistan and the ISI.
“President Obama has answered the question about Pakistan’s role. It wouldn’t have been possible to get Bin Laden without Pakistan’s help. People are piling on this one, but the fact is, it is very plausible for someone to live undetected for long periods of time.”
“What I find incredulous is the notion that somehow, just because there is a private support network in Pakistan, the state, the government and the military of Pakistan shouldn’t be believed.”
On 4th May, Husain Haqqani spoke offered a strong defence of Pakistan’s security services when speaking to Barkha Dutt on NDTV.
And on 8 May, Husain Haqqani appeared on ABC News where he stated that:
If any member of the Pakistani government, the Pakistani military, or the Pakistani intelligence service knew where Osama bin Laden was, we would have taken action. Osama bin Laden’s presence in Pakistan was not to Pakistan’s advantage… As the national security adviser said, a lot more people have been arrested in Pakistan, including Al Qaida people, than in any other country. So Pakistan did not have a policy of protecting these people.
This raises yet another question: If Mansoor Ijaz really was working with Husain Haqqani, his partner in the conspiracy was undermining the credibility of the scheme day by day. How could American officials take seriously the offers made in Mansoor Ijaz’s memo while the Pakistani envoy was in the media defending the very group that Mansoor Ijaz was terming as terrorists?
Here is what we can confirm so far. Mansoor Ijaz is an “ultra-wealthy” and politically connected American businessman who believes that Pakistan’s intelligence agency is made up of terrorists and enemies, and he wants the American military to strike against them. We know that in May he delivered a memo to some American officials, and that the Americans “did not find it at all credible and took no note of it.” In June he wrote an op-ed making his allegations against the ISI public, but it seemed to get little attention. In October, he wrote another op-ed making the same allegations, only this time he added a sensational story about a conspiracy within the Pakistani government, and suddenly his name became front-page news. We also know that several weeks ago he held a secret meeting with DG ISI to discuss his evidence against the civilian officials.
The rest of the story remains pure speculation. Did Mansoor Ijaz and Husain Haqqani talk via email and BBM? Perhaps, but it is also likely that Mansoor Ijaz is not the only wealthy Pakistani-American in the Ambassador’s contacts. It is the job of a diplomat to cultivate relationships with influential and well-connected people. Did President Zardari authorize the memo or its contents? Actually, there has been nothing to suggest that he knew anything about it. And why, if Mansoor Ijaz believes the ISI are terrorists, is he working closely with the ISI to make his case?
Husain Haqqani has requested a full inquiry to clear his name, and has offered to turn over his Blackberry and his computer for a forensic investigation. Hopefully we will have more facts soon. In the meantime, media interviews and talk shows are only fueling speculation and creating more questions than answers.
It has been one year since the media caused a national crisis by inaccurately reporting that the government was plotting to withdraw notification to reinstate the judges sacked by Musharraf. Unfortunately, it seems that journalists and TV anchors did not learn from this ‘moment of shame’ and are once again causing alarm by rushing to report unsubstantiated rumour without conducting the proper background checks. We cannot even call out one or another media group as the sad truth is that so many were guilty that the entire profession has been stained by the event.
We are referring, of course, to reports that created a stir on Wednesday night when media groups rushed to report the resignation of Ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani. As the evening progressed, the reports escalated. Not only had the Ambassador resigned, but he had already moved out of the official residence. Then we were told that not only had he resigned and moved out of the official residence, but he was not returning to Pakistan. As it grew later there were even reports that Haqqani had applied for asylum in the US! The media frenzy had reached a full peak.
Of course, not one single one of these reports was true. It was all lies and fabrications invented by reporters and their sources and given the green light by unquestioning editors and producers.
Following the media’s false reporting of a conspiracy against the judiciary last year, Farrukh Khan Pitafi wrote the following:
In the golden days of journalism, we were taught not to carry any report unless there was prima facie evidence or at least three separate sources available. In the case of a breaking story or report of critical importance, this rule was relaxed to either two independent sources or word from the horse’s — in this case the prime minister’s or the law minister’s — mouth. As evident however, none of these precautions were taken, nor was any patience shown for such details to emerge. Innocent until proven guilty is the universal principle in case of unsubstantiated allegations. However, in this particular case it was deemed fit to consider the government guilty until proven innocent.
Unable or unwilling to find anyone at the Embassy in Washington or the presidency to confirm the rumours, our media not only ran with the story, they ran riot with it. Were the false reports necessary?
By 1:30am, Dr Firduas Awan was available to give a statement that the government had received a letter from Ambassador Haqqani offering his tender resignation by saying that he did not want to be “a distraction from the major challenges facing our country and our government”, but that no decision had been made to replace anyone. It was less than 24 hours later that Geo was able to contact Ambassador Haqqani by telephone to get his statement on the air.
Imagine if the news channels had simply taken the time to check not with their ‘reliable sources’ who every time prove embarrassingly unreliable, but with the actual people involved in the story. It would have prevented confusion, misinformation, and the continued humiliation of the media as incompetent and untrustworthy.
As the dust begins to settle, it is worth once again revisiting the recommendations of Farrukh Khan Pitafi.
The best practice would be to ask the concerned reporters or the channel managements to produce the evidence. It is important not to confuse a source with evidence. Even when we have sources we are not supposed to air an item without our own satisfaction. And in any case, no source will ever accept that it had generated such information in the absence of recorded evidence. If media outlets do not produce evidence they should be fined and asked to ground the reporter for a bit. This is about the only civilised way.
Now let us focus on the source of the problem in the heart of darkness. Apart from the culture of cynicism that has mushroomed around the current government and for which the government’s poor media policy is to be blamed, the institution of a professional editor is almost extinct in this country. In the presence of owner-editors the assurance of content quality and adherence to media ethics becomes impossible. Our profession has become highly complacent and in a conflict between the business owners and a professional editor, most journalists wish to stand with the former. Had there been professional editors in place, even if unverified information was produced, it would not have made it to the screen or print. Also the professional editor, given the damage caused, would have sacked someone.
Of course, there is the issue of talk show hosts-anchorpersons and their reckless attitude. It must be recognised that since each anchor-host is responsible for the content of his program, he/she is usually expected to act as an editor for the content. But remember in the heat of live programming there always is the chance of some inappropriate behaviour. A professional editor as the media’s conscience should always be there to remind the anchor and to issue the corrigendum. Yet these are mad times and even at stations with elaborate infrastructure, a tendency of getting carried away has been witnessed.
Getting carried away has become not only a tendency, but an addiction. It is time to break the habit.
As government and military officials look more and more to China, members of Pakistan’s journalism community should take notice of certain recent developments. Chinese authorities announced this week that they are tightening regulations governing journalists, specifically, rule that require reports to fact check and have actual evidence before publishing sensational claims and conspiracy theories.
The new rules also require journalists to produce at least two sources for any “critical” news reports and to personally conduct interviews when gathering information.
False reports must be followed by corrections and apologies, the statement said, and serious violations could lead to the suspension or even the revocation of a news outlet’s government-issued license.
“False reports not only seriously hurt the interests of the parties involved, but also seriously undermine the credibility of the news media, or even seriously affect the social and economic order,” the agency stated in a question-and-answer article released by the state news agency Xinhua.
Because this blog does not support government restrictions on reporters, we hope that our colleagues in the journalism profession in Pakistan will implement a code of conduct to ensure professionalism voluntarily. The Zardari-Gilani government has demonstrated that it will allow all sorts of malicious rumour-mongering and conspiracy theories to be published without using the power of government to take revenge on the media, but no one can know if the next government will be as patient.
PDF 
