پاکستان میڈیا واچ جنگ گروپ کی دوغلی اور مکار اردو اور انگریزی اخبارات کی مختلف رپورٹنگ تو سامنے لا ھی چکا ھے۔ اب ملاحظہ فرمائیں روزنامہ ایکسپریس اردو اور ایکسپریس ٹریبیون انگلش کی رپورٹنگ میں فرق۔
سب سے پھلے ایکسپریس ٹریبیون انگلش کی یہ مکمل رپورٹ دیکھیے۔ اس بات کا دھیان رھے کہ اس انگریزی کالم میں کھیں بھی نام نھیں بتائے گئے اور یہ صاف صاف لکھ دیا گیا کہ چمکانی پولیس اسٹیشن نے اس واقع کی تصدیق نھیں کی ھے اور انھیں اس واقع کے بارے میں علم نھیں۔ اسی خبر کا ایک حصہ نیچے ملاحظہ کیجئے۔
اب اسی موضوع پر ایکسپریس اردو اخبار کی کلپ ماحظہ فرمائیں۔
جیسے کہ قارین ملاحظہ فرما سکتے ھیں ایکسپریس اخبار اپنی اردو پڑھنے والے قارین کو کچھ اور اور انگلش پڑھنے والے قارین کو کچھ اور خبریں پیش کرتے ھیں۔
اردو اخبار میں ان چار امریکی باشندوں کو فوجی قرار دے دیا گیا ھے اور ان کے من گھڑت نام تک بنا کر پیش کئیے گئے ھیں۔ اردو اخبار تو یہ خبر دیتا ھے کہ ان امریکی فوجیوں مایک کا نام کرنل پاول ھے اور ایک کا نام لیفٹیننٹ جان لیوی ھے۔ واضح رھے کہ یہ نام من گھڑت ھیں اور اردو ایکسپریس اپنے قارین کو بلا تصدیق غلط انفارم کر رھا ھے۔
یہ بات بھی واضح رھے کہ اردو اخبار میں یہ بھی نہیں بتایا گیا کہ چمکانی پولیس تھانے نے اس واقع کی تصدیق نھیں کی اور نا ھی اس موضوع پر کوئی پریس سٹیٹمینٹ دی ھے۔ روزنامہ ایکسپریس اخبار نے یھان تک خبر دی کہ صوبائی حکومت نے دفتر خارجہ کو آگاہ کر دیا ھے جب کے ایسی کوئی بات نھیں ھوئی۔ جب چمکانی پولیس تھانہ ھی تصدیق نھیں کر رھا تو صوبائی حکومت کو کیسے کوئی خبر مل سکتی ھے۔
صاف اور شفاف رپورٹنگ پاکستانی عوام کا حق ھے اور ایکسپریس کی دوغلی رپورٹنگ پاکستانی عوام سے انکا یہ حق چھینتی نظر آتی ھے۔
محر بخاری اپنے پروگرام کراس فائر میں مختلف قابل سیاست دانوں اور پالیسی میکرز کو بطور گیسٹ بلاتی ھیں۔ لیکن جس طریقے سے وہ اپنے مہمانوں سے گفتگو کرتی ھیں وہ نہایت شرمناک ھے۔
محر بخاری کے کل شب کے پروگرام کو دیکھنے کے بعد کچھ یوں محسوس ھوتا ھے کہ وہ اپنی بدتمیز طرزعمل اور غیر ذمہدارانا پروگرام ھوسٹنگ پر فخر محسوس کرتی ھیں۔ پروگرام میں مہمانوں کو بولنے دینے کے بجائے محر بخاری نے کئی بار ان کی بات کاٹی اور نا صرف بات کے دوران ہنسیں اور دانت نکالے بلکہ بدتمیزی سے منہ پھٹ جواب بھی کئ بار دئے۔ پروگرام نیچے ملاحظہ کیجئیے
اگرچہ اس انداز میں گفتگو محر کے لیے کوئ نئ بات نھیں ھے اور محر بخاری کے اس رؤیے کو پاکستان میڈیا واچ پہلے ہی ایکسپوز تو کر چکا ھے مگر سوچنے والی بات یہ ھے کہ اس طرح کے طنز آمیز روئیے سے نا صرف وہ اپنے گیسٹ کے بڑکپن کو اور واضح کر رھی ھیں بلکہ اپنی بھی بے پناہ بے عزتی کروا رھی ھیں۔
سچی اور ٹرانسپیرنٹ رپورٹنگ کا تقاضا ھے کہ کسی بھی بحث میں دونوں طرف کی بات بلا کسی کی طرفداری کئیے سنی جائے اور باقاعدہ گفتگو کے بعد ایک مجموعی حل پیش کیا جائے جس پر سب پارٹیاں آمادہ ھوں۔اور ایسے نہ ھو کے بات مکمل ھونے سے پہلے ھی یا تو کاٹ دی جائے یا پھر اس بات پر ھنسنا شروع کر دیا جائے۔
اتوار کے جنگ اخبار کی سرخی کو دیکھنے کے بعد جنگ اخبار کی کھوکھلی رپورٹنگ کھل کر سامنے آ جاتی ھے۔ اتوار کی سرخی نیچے ملاحضہ فرمائیے
اگر غور کریں تو پتا چلتا ھے کہ صارفین سے ایک نھیں بلکے کئی جھوٹ بولے جارھے ھیں۔ سب سے پھلی کوتاھی ھے بنا تصدیق یہ خبر چھاپنا کہ جاںبحق ھونے والے امریکی سیل امریکی اسپیشل فورسز کا وھی دستہ تھا جو کہ ایبٹ آباد ریڈ میں ملوث تھا۔
جنگ گروپ کھانیاں گھڑنے میں اس حد تک مہارت رکھتا ھے کہ اس نے اس سراغ رساں کتے اور اسکے ٹرینر تک کو خالق حقیقی سے جا ملوایا جو کہ اسامہ بن لادن آپریشن میں موجود تھے۔
اس کے علاوہ عوام کے ساتھ کھلم کھلا جھوٹ بولنا اور ان کے دینی جزبات کے ساتھ کھیلنا بھی جنگ گروپ کے لئے کوئی بڑی اور نئی بات نھیں۔
اس خبر میں جنگ اخبار رپورٹ کرتا ھے کے امریکی ہیلی کاپٹر گرنے کے فورن بعد نیٹو نے طیارے بلوائے اور آٹھ بے گناہ لوگ جاں بحق ھو گئے۔ جنگ اخبار اس حد تک جھوٹی رپورٹنگ کرتا ھے کے ان من گھڑت جاں بحق ھونے والوں کی نشان دھی بھی کئیے دیتا ھے۔ ان میں سے ایک آدمی کو مسجد کا امام بنا دئیا۔ایک کو اس کی بیگم اور باقی چھ انکے من گھڑت بچے۔
یہ تمام باتیں جھوٹ اور من گھڑت ھیں اور اصلیت نیو یارک ٹائمز اخبار میں چھپ چکی ھے۔ لیکن جنگ اخبار اپنی عادت سے مجبور ھے اور جھوٹی رپورٹنگ کی روایت کو برقرار رکھے ھوئے ھے۔
اب یہ سرخی جو کہ اسی دن کے اخبار میں چھپی ھے نیچے ملاحضہ فرمائیے
پاکستان میڈیا واچ نے چونکہ یہ بات پھلے واضح کر دی ھے ھم اس موضوع پر صرف یہگزارش کریں گے کہ طالبان نے اس حادثے کی ذمہ داری لی ھے۔ اس میں کوئی شک والی بات نھیں اور اسے ایک کانسپرسی تھیوری بنا کر عوام کی نظر میں پیش کرنا تاکہ وہ گمراہ ھوں ایک بڑی ھی نیچی اور گری ھوئی بات ھے۔
ان سب باتوں اور اس کے علاوہ جنگ گروپ کی روزمرہ کی رپورٹنگ سے اس بات کا اندازہ ھوتا ھے کہ جنگ گروپ نے عوام کو دھوکے پر دھوکہ دیتے چلے جانے کی حامی بھری ھوئی ھے۔ شاید جنگ گروپ کو یہ نھیں پتا کہ عوام پاگل نھیں ھے اور اس کو دو جمع دو کرنا آتا ھے۔ شاباش۔ لگے رھو جنگ بھائی۔
In a curious turn of events during the past week, the Western media has suddenly become the most reliable source for information about the war on terror. Beginning with a Reuters (UK) report that the US is refusing to leave Shamsi airbase, media groups have begun once again pointing to American media as the paragon of truth, when these same media groups at other times term the American media as untrustworthy propaganda.
An article from the American Miami Herald newspaper claims that CIA is still launching drone strikes from Shamsi airbase. This article was dutifully quoted by Pakistani newspapers as proof of “the desire to please the US which is causing ministers of the same government making apparently contradictory statements”.
The historical precedents of White House “lies” in the chronicles of US military aggressions against nations all over the world are incredibly numerous and documented. The American media has always supported the political establishment. Indeed, we must not forget that there has never been credible evidence of Afghan or bin Laden’s involvement in New York’s 9/11 attack. For all practical analysis, 9/11 seems to be an inside job, a Bush administration’s pretext for the Iraqi and Afghan invasion – the American determined global policy doctrine to extend its capitalist corporate interests all over the world.
This is not unusual. Western media is regularly termed by anchors and journalists as propaganda, mouthpiece for American hegemony, and unreliable when it carries reports that are critical of Pakistan or do not fit a particular narrative of US aggression. But when the reports support this narrative, suddenly the Western media becomes the most trusted source.
A new report in American media quotes a ‘prominent former militant commander’ who says that the Pakistani military is supporting militant groups. As usual, this source only spoke “on condition that his name, location and other personal details not be revealed”. Will the media groups that accept anonymous claims in Western media about Shamsi airbase accept anonymous claims in Western media about military complicity with militants also?
In both cases, the Western media reports are based on anonymous sources that are contradicted by other sources who are willing to speak openly. Also, in both cases there are reasons to be skeptical of the claims of these anonymous sources – would a militant commander not want to sow doubt between US and Pakistani militaries as a strategy to ‘divide and conquer’? Somehow the American journalist did not seem to think of this obvious problem.
Both claims could be true, and both claims could be false. We do not have any proof at this point with which to judge the claims of these unknown sources other than their own word. But now knowing who these sources are, how can we accept their word only? We simply cannot know if one source or the other is telling the truth or playing a propaganda game with the media. That does not mean that we should accept the ones that fit our pre-determined beliefs while dismissing the other because it is inconvenient.
آج کے جنگ اخبار کی سرخیاں دیکھنے کے باد اس بات کا اندازہ ہوتا ہے کہ ہم پاکستانی صرف وہ باتیں مانتے ہیں جو ہم ماننا چاہتے ہیں۔ آج کی ایک سرخی نیچے ملاحذہ فرمایے
اب ایک دوسری سرخی ملاحظہ فرمائے جو کے اسی صفہے کے کافی نیچے ہی چھاپی گئ
ان دونوں سرخیوں سے اس بات کا صاف پتا چلتا ہے کہ جنگ گروپ کا عوام کے اس طراح ک خیالات تشکیل دینے میں ایک بڑا ہا تھ ھے۔ ایک طرف یے خبر ہے امریکی شمسی بیس چھوڑنا ہی نہیں چاہتے اور دوسری طرف یے خبر یے کے جرنل اباس صاف صاف کہ رہے ھیں کہ امریکی فوجی اپنا بوریا بستر سمیٹ کر جا چکے ھیں ۔ اور اب یے بیس آپریشنل نہیں ھے۔
سوال اب یے پیدا ھوتا ھے کہ پھلی خبر کو ایک بڑی سرخی اور دوسری کو صفحے کے نیچے ایک چھوٹی سرخی کی صورت کیوں دی گئ؟
The United States is rejecting demands from Pakistani officials that American personnel abandon a military base used by the CIA to stage drone strikes against suspected militants, US officials told Reuters.
This news is certain to confirm the fears of many that the US is sinking its talons into Pakistan and refusing to let go. But later in the same article, officials said that actually the Americans are vacating the base.
“They are vacating it,” the official insisted. “Shamsi base was for logistic purpose. They also used it for drones for some time but no drones have been flown from there.” The official said no base in Pakistan was presently used by the Americans for drone operations. But he did not give a precise date for when drones supposedly stopped operating from Shamsi.
Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan on Thursday said news of Pakistan demanding the United States exit Shamsi Airbase was bogus and had been created by the media, Express News reported.
Speaking to the media in Lahore, Awan said that she was a member of the Defence Committee and nothing of this sort was discussed during the meeting.
ISLAMABAD: A senior Pakistani intelligence official told CNN on Friday that United States military personnel have left Shamsi Airbase in Pakistan’s Balochistan Province.
This was also confirmed by American officials.
A US military official who did not want to be identified told CNN, “There are no US forces at Shamsi Air Base in Balochistan.” He did not respond at the time or writing to queries as to whether US personnel had been based there in the past.
Therefore, this is what we have learned from the media:
Americans are at Shamsi airbase and also are not at Shamsi airbase.
Pakistan has demanded Americans leave Shamsi airbase and also has not demanded Americans leave Shamsi airbase.
In other words, whatever you already believe, there is a media story that will support it. Whatever are the actual facts, though, we still do not know.
Pakistan is a strange country; the people who garner maximum news coverage are often shady. If January was the month of Mumtaz Qadri, then February and March definitely belonged to Raymond Davis and the man who hogged all the headlines across the globe in May was Osama Bin Laden. Last but not the least was Illyas Kashmiri who was killed in a drone strike in June.
It is even stranger that though all four of them were shady characters – murderers to be precise – the response of the popular media to their deeds, lives, and reasons have ranged from high praise to utter ridicule. While Davis was lynched by our media for killing two Pakistani men, Qadri was praised by a certain section of media as the saviour who, by shedding blood of another human being, has somehow restored balance in the universe and saved the religion, humanity and galaxy. The kind of debate bin Laden and Kashmiri spark is the stuff of legends. People have called them terrorists, warriors, messiahs and everything in between depending on their ‘ideological’ and ‘idiological’ leanings.
But the strangest common factor in all the cases is that the popular media has developed the narrative and catered to the incidents surrounding these characters on the basis of religion. All the discussions and responses on the subject have been based, not on the news worthiness of the issue, but on the perceived religious reasons for the actions of the perpetrators and on the basis or lack of their religiosity.
Qadri was hailed as a hero because he was defending his faith. Even his critics were at pains to point out that he was mislead because the religion was not interpreted in its true spirit by who so ever was inspiring him. The only person, Sherry Rahman, who actually said that this law needed to be amended, had to stay cooped up in her house for the fear of her life. The fact that a man was killed was either ignored or the victim was blamed for his own death. The focus of the discussion stayed on religion and religion inspired laws and how essential they are to the survival of this society. The condemnation of that murder was subdued because vociferous denunciation would have challenged the religiosity of the narrative. Even before the death of the slain governor, one anchor decided to act as the prosecutor, jury and the judge and held a public trial of Governor Salman Taseer. With media pandering to the dictates of the overtly religious groups, presenting secular arguments in mainstream media is neither desired nor is considered safe.
Davis, an American guilty of the same crime homicide, was labelled the devil incarnate because he was an infidel who killed two Muslim men in the land of pure. The fact that it was Federal Shariat Court supported Qisas and Diyat Law that saved him in the end was again ignored. No one either wrote or spoke against the law in the popular media. The fact that perpetrators of the same crime can have different punishments depending upon their social standing and the amount they are willing to shell out to stay out of the prison and that the law actually supports the criminal with a sizeable bank account are largely ignored by our esteemed media persons and anchors.
Apart from these cases, the television debates usually centre on the quest of making the country a “true’ Islamic state instead of a working state. How many times have we seen sanctimonious anchors and so called experts discussing whether a legislation or a verdict by the courts is religious enough or not. Hardly have we seen any debate on whether a course of action is workable or not, which basically gives sanction to bad governance.
Whether a reader is Muslim or non-Muslim, the news should be the news. Religious programming has its place just as other types of programmes, but one should not mix drama or comedy with news reporting and neither should religion be mixed in also. Please…stick to the facts.
Director of ‘Kyonkay Saas Bhi Kabhi Baho Thi’ is very frustrated this week since his hit has been overtaken by an even bigger pukka drama. This week, Smriti Zubin Irani has been replaced by Shireen Mazari in the imaginations of aunties across the nation following her fateful encounter with an American at an Islamabad restaurant. A profanity filled version of this story first appeared on the website of Ahmed Quraishi, a former journalist who has written recently defending faked and manipulated news as a tool to push an ideological agenda. But look at the way neutral observers characterise the incident:
“The guy backed his chair and bumped into her. She tore into them. They just wanted to pay their bill and get out, but the restaurant wouldn’t let them pay because of the incident,” he said.
According to the version published on Ahmed Quraishi’s website, Shireen Mazari claimed that, “The man was somewhat bulky with a military build, which made him look intimidating”. But a photo of the supposed American was featured with the story on Ahmed Quraishi’s website and shows not a man with a “bulky military build”, but rather a man that appears to be shorter than the Pakistani man who came to his defence.
Actually, there are a few other problems with Mazari’s version of the story. She says at the beginning that “the American stood up at one point and banged his chair into hers. His action appeared to be deliberate”. But later in the story, she says that after she was yelling insults at the man he said, “Oh you are the lady who…” before she cut him off and told him to get out of the country.
This means that when the man allegedly rammed his chair into Mazari’s chair, he did not even know who she was. To believe Mazari’s version, one would have to accept that this man decided out of thin air to bang his chair into the chair of a random woman for no reason. Actually Ahmed Quraishi and Shireen Mazari would like you to believe that she “has been targeted for her criticism of US military and intelligence presence in Pakistan”, but that would mean that the man recognised her which he obviously didn’t according to Mazari’s own words.
If this is the case, did Shireen Mazari start a fight simply to write an anti-American drama in which she is the victim? What actually happened on that day is hard to know for certain. Clearly Shireen Mazari feels wronged, though there is no evidence that the man acted deliberately or meant any insult to Mazari. Rather it appears according to her own story that she assumed the worst because of her intense anti-American emotions. Also, her saying that “Yes I am one of those Pakistanis who want you out of this country” makes one wonder how Mazari believes any of the millions of Pakistanis living in America, UK, or EU should react if a racist xenophobic tells them to “get out of this country”.
What we do know is that this drama has done more to cast Pakistan in a bad light than it did any nameless Americans who had the misfortunate experience of dining in the same place as Shireen Mazari. According to an article about the incident published in The Telegraph:
Scurrilous websites and some mainstream newspapers delight in blaming America for every misfortune to befall Pakistan – from last year’s devastating floods to terrorist atrocities. Conspiracy theories, alleging CIA plots to destabilise Pakistan, are common currency on the nation’s evening talk shows.
Picking fights with foreigners so that you can report the incident on ‘scurrilous websites’ and conspiracy prone talk shows serves neither the interests of journalism nor the national interest. But this incident does pose important questions for the producers and anchors who invite Mazari to discuss matters of foreign policy. Can she be considered an objective or trustworthy analyst, or is her thinking so painted red by her anti-American emotions that she will see insults where none exist?
One thing is certain – Shireen Mazari should leave such dramatic plots to the cast of Kyonkay Saas Bhi Kabhi Baho Thi.
Today we mourn the loss of a colleague Syed Saleem Shahzad whose body was found in Sarai Alamgir on Tuesday. Innallila wa innalaha rajaoon. This tragedy is sadly reflective not only of the conditions in the country, but the particularly dangerous conditions for journalists who risk their very lives to shine a light on the truth.
It must be noted that Saleem Shahzad is the fifth journalist killed in Pakistan this year alone. Preceeding his death the profession has also lost Ilyas Nizzar (Darwanth), Zaman Ibrahim (Daily Extra News), Wali Khan Babr (Geo) and Nasrullah Khan Afridi (PTV). Last year, Pakistan was declared most dangrous country in the world for journalists. 16 journalists were killed.
Like his colleagues, Saleem Shahzad dedicated his life to his country by investigating and reporting on the ills of society so that they can be exposed and corrected. Saleem Shahzad’s last article published was a behind-the-scenes account of the terrorist attack on PNS Mehran. This was the first of a two-part series, the next piece to be on recruitment and training of militants.
According to a report by Saleem Shahzad’s newspaper Asia Times, “Shahzad had on several occasions been warned by officials of the ISI over articles they deemed to be detrimental to Pakistan’s national interests or image.” Omar Waraich of TIME reports that Human Rights Watch has been able to confirm that Shahzad was being held by ISI.
“We were informed through reliable interlocutors that he was detained by the ISI,” says Hasan. Those interlocutors, he adds, had received direct confirmation from the agency that it was detaining Shahzad. In any case, Hasan says, “in a high-security zone like Islamabad, it is only the ISI that can effect the disappearance of man and his car without a trace.”
Such a report is troubling, but does offer a place to begin looking for those responsible. First, though, we should not make assumptions but carefully investigate and let the pieces fall as they may. If Shahzad was released from ISI custody, the agency should have some clues as to who may have grabbed him after his release. If Shahzad was not released from ISI custody, then those responsible should face justice. We agree with the conclusion of Omar Waraich:
The principal threats, human-rights campaigners say, come from military-intelligence agencies and Islamist militants. “As a consequence, it is becoming difficult for journalists to perform their basic professional duties in the context of a war between the Pakistani state and the militants,” Hasan says. “Both parties target journalists, arbitrarily and with brutality.” Human Rights Watch has called on Pakistan’s government to locate Shahzad, return him safely to his home and hold those who held him “illegally” accountable. “To date, no intelligence personnel have been held accountable for frequently perpetrated abuses against journalists,” laments Hasan. “Tolerance for these practices has to end, now.”
As we remember our fallen colleague, the greatest monument to his memory and his legacy will be to end the threat to journalists in Pakistan.
We have written before about cases of media silence and self-censorship, and two recent pieces again raised this question in our minds, so we present it to you today for your consideration. Recent media hot topics include Raymond Davis, ZAB reference, and HEC. But the media has also been strangely silent on other issues. One of these issues is the state of human rights in Balochistan.
The Pakistan media has adopted double standards while covering Balochistan. This attitude has not only left the people’s problems under-reported but it has also incensed the foreign journalists and investors who wanted to learn more about the ground situation in Balochistan.
One such article that highlighted the blackout of more important issues in the Pakistani media appeared in the US journal Foreign Policyon March 31st in which the author Ahmed Rafay Alam pointed out that the death of at least 43 miners in the outskirts of Quetta was not covered by the Pakistani media. Instead, the national media was engaged in covering relatively unimportant issues only to keep the whole country ignorant about the explosive situation in the country.
The author of the Foreign Policy article wrote: “The role of the media in bringing this incident [of miners' death in Quetta]to public attention also deserves a look. The near-total media blackout of this most recent incident has less to do with censorship of any form than with viewing dynamics. Milk, soaps and mobile phones (rather than coal) are sold in Pakistani cities, and urbanites don’t care what going on in the districts. The media contents itself to whip up public emotion over issues related to “national honor” as in the cases of Raymond Davis and Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, ignoring serious but less sexy issues like mine safety. Yet working conditions in Baluchistan are unlikely to improve without the media reporting on them.”
This argument was further expressed by Pakistan representative Human Rights Watch Ali Dayan Hasan in an interview with Raza Rumi for The News on Sunday.
TNS: Is there sufficient international and domestic focus on human rights situation in Balochistan?
ADH: Unfortunately there is not. The Pakistani media does not report on the brutal realities of Balochistan in any meaningful manner. Despite the fact that the province is of great strategic interest to the world, its people suffer from persistent, systemic and widespread human rights abuse both by state authorities and at the hands of non-state actors. It is time Pakistanis and the world paid attention.
Media watchers and all Pakistanis should ask if media is performing its proper role to society by focusing incessantly on allegations of ‘Sindh Card’ and conspiracy theories while the citizens are abused by militants and suffering real problems.
PDF 
