Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Nation Front Page Article On Taxes Misleading, Lacks Evidence

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

The Nation (logo)The Nation‘s glaring front page article on proposed tax changes carries a sensational headline that is not supported by any evidence in the actual article. During a time of rising cost for essentials such as sugar, claiming that new taxes will further raise prices is certain to cause alarm.

The reporter Javaid-ur-rehman’s column begins with the sensational headline, “New taxes to trigger tsunami of price hike” and the paragraphs on the front page of the newspaper repeat this claim.

The Federal Cabinet on Wednesday accorded approval to the flood tax and Reformed General Sales Tax (RGST) Bill and to be presented in the current session of the National Assembly. However, many economic analysts believe that it would trigger a tsunami of price hike and inflation in the country.

But nowhere in the article do there appear statements from any economic analysts who state that the bill will cause any price increases. Actually, nothing in the article supports this idea.

The article does explain that the taxes would increase for individuals who earn over Rs.300,000 and business that earns over Rs.10 Billions each year. According to World Bank data on Pakistan from December 2009, GNI per capita (average income) in Pakistan is US$950, or Rs.81,082.5

Nowhere does the reporter explain how the tax policy will create such price increases if it only affects those who earn over three times the average income.

During a time of financial crisis especially, media should not create alarm about price hikes. Reporters should stick to the facts only and not try to influence political debates also. The article by Javaid-ur-rehman is misleading to readers because it makes a serious claim that is not supported by the evidence presented.

President Zardari Addresses SAFMA

Monday, November 8th, 2010

President Zadari addressed the 4th national conference of South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA) on Sunday during which he urged the media to take a more positive tone and assured journalists that his administration will not take a crack down on the media as previous governments have done.

The President acknowledged the struggle of media for the cause of democracy despite the difficult conditions in which journalists work.

He assured that next elections would be free and fair.

President SAFMA Pakistan Nusrat Javed and senior journalist Ziauddin also spoke on the occasion and pledged their support for continuity of democracy, rule of law, across the board accountability, fight against terrorism and extremism and for a free media and independent judiciary.

Ziauddin said media will always be in a confrontation with a government as it is watchdog for the interests of society.

Both Zardari and Ziauddin are correct. A free media will always be in some tension with the government because it is a watch dog that must keep the government responsible. But a watch dog that is always barking when there is nothing there is not good either. Both the government and the media have their responsibilities that must be held accountable. Government must be held accountable if there is any corruption and also journalists and editors must be held accountable if they are not reporting facts.

It is a positive sign of progress, we believe, that President Zardari and President SAFMA Pakistan Nusrat Javed can speak respectfully for each other about ways that each can do his job and still respect the work that the other is doing also.

Shaheen Sehbai's Fools Gold

Thursday, November 4th, 2010

Shaheen Sehbai's Fools GoldShaheen Sehbai appears to be challenging for ‘Best Drama Screenplay’ with his column for The News, “$260 billion gold mines going for a song, behind closed doors“. Sehabi’s front page article is filled with back-stabbing, conspiracies, and corporate intrigue. Unfortunately, it is lacking in any real investigative reporting.

From the beginning, Shaheen Sehbai takes such a sensational tone that he threatens to discredit any legitimate argument about oversight of discussions on the mine. For example, he writes:

Before these highly enticing visits of the mining tycoons to clinch the deals, which followed intense behind-the-scene negotiations and bargaining through middle men, some highly bizarre developments have been taking place, leaving experts and the rest of the mining world stunned, amazed and confused.

These companies want that the mining licences should be issued by Pakistan immediately after their exploration licences expire soon. But there are legal hitches and pressure is now being put through the backdoor to get the target.

In recent years, so many games have been played to keep Pakistan’s share in the enormous treasure to a bare minimum, thanks to some greedy politicians and bureaucrats who sold their country’s natural wealth.

This sounds like the plot of some film, not a piece of serious investigative journalism. Why not simply provide the evidence without all the spices also?

Actually, this may be the problem – all spices and no meats. Sehbai claims to have conducted a “deep study” of documents and interviews to back his claim, but he can name none of these documents.

Reading the piles of documents, statements, interviews and legal papers available with The News, the picture that emerges is one of a grand deception, loot and plunder that never happened before on such a scale and the facts, untruths, half-truths, attempts to sabotage, frauds and backdoor bribes, are all documented.

Considering Shaheen Sehbai’s own record of “untruths, half-truths, attempts to sabotage and frauds”, perhaps he will not be so offended if readers would like a little bit more explanation of these documents. In fact, if he is correct and he has evidence of “a grand deception”, why not publish this evidence like the New York Times published The Pentagon Papers? Or, if Mr Sehbai is concerned about his confidentiality, he could send them to the Wikileaks website.

Instead, he chooses to shroud his claims in a mystery. Only he can see the evidence, and we are expected to trust him.

But there is other evidence that counters Sehbai’s claims. Only last week, APP reported that the PM was holding public talks with a delegation from Chile – public and open talks – during which time he stated that Pakistan is conducting talks to ensure the best deal is reached for the Pakistanti people.

The Prime Minister said that Pakistan really wants foreign investment and intends to encourage the best firms and companies which can give the best results. It is with the same intention that the government has prepared investor friendly policies and opened up various sectors for the interested investors, he added.

The Prime Minister said that it was an encouraging sign that the foreign companies wanted to avail the investment opportunities in the mineral sector in Pakistan for their mutual advantage.

Pakistan has a vibrant private sector best suited for public-private partnership for the good of the people of both countries, he added.

The Prime Minister assured full support and fair deal in handling the Reko-Diq project and would provide all possible cooperation for early launching of this mega project.

Shaheen Sehbai also tries to claim that there is some trick being played by the mining company named ‘Tethyan’.

An Australian mineral exploration firm originally started the exploration and invested some $30 million but in 2006 sold the company to a Canadian and Chilean joint venture for $230 million. The old company was an Australian public company Tethyan Copper Prosperity Limited and the new company was named Tethyan Copper Company (TCC) of Pakistan. A trick game is being played in these cosmetic changes. The Canadians and Chileans, according to publicly declared information to their shareholders and regulators, took 37.5 per cent share each, while Pakistan only had the remaining 25 per cent.

But this is no trick. Actually, it is public knowledge that has been reported in the press.

Tethyan Copper – jointly owned by Canada’s Barrick and Chile’s Antofagasta – holds 75% of the project and the Balochistan provincial government owns the remaining 25%.

Sehabi next tries another sleight of hand trick by quoting stories about an Afghani mining corruption which has nothing to do with the Reko Diq mine.

According to a Washington Post report on Nov 18, 2009: “The Afghan minister of mines accepted a roughly $30 million bribe to award the country’s largest development project to a Chinese mining firm.”

Quoting a US official, the Washington Post said: “The alleged payment to Mohammad Ibrahim Adel was made in Dubai within a month of December 2007, when a big Chinese metallurgical group received the contract for a $2.9 billion project to extract copper from the Aynak deposit in Logar province. Aynak is considered one of the largest unexploited copper deposits in the world.”

What does this have to do with the story of Reko Diq? Nothing. Sehbai seems only concerned with making readers angry about mining and corruption so that they will assume that any Reko Diq agreement is also tainted with corruption, even if there is no evidence of such.

Sehbai pulls another sleight of hand later by saying that a company that owns some shares of Tethyan is “being accused on the web of some strange activities”.

The Canadian company, Barrick Gold, with 29 mines all over the world, is already being accused on the web of some strange activities. These include spills of cyanide, mercury and other heavy metals, police and legalistic repression of critics, threats to water resources on four continents and even food poisoning, as well as rape.

And this should tell the reader everything he needs to know about Shaheen Sehbai’s journalistic ethics. How can someone who claims to be a professional journalist write such slander? Surely Sehbai is aware that any living person can write anything on the web with no oversight and virtually no consequences. That he would include such as his evidence shows that he is willing to stoop to any lows to write a sensational tabloid article, not serious investigative news.

Sehbai even says that CM Balochistan was asked if he is being pressurized by Zardari, only to have the CM reply that the answer is no! Why does Sehbai report the CM’s reply “as an after thought”? Is it because he is trying to influence readers not to believe the CM’s own word?

Shaheen Sehbai may not believe the word of the CM Balochistan, but he is certainly willing to believe the word of his fellow “reporter” of The News, Ahmad Noorani even though this very site has proven before that Mr Noorani includes incorrect statements in his articles.

The Reko Diq mine is a project worth billions in investment for Pakistan. Certainly such an important venture must be taken with public discussion and transparent process so that we can be sure that Pakistan gets the best possible result and the most benefit for the people of this country. But public discussion and transparent process does not include sensationalism and fictions. The people deserve the facts, not Shaheen Sehbai’s drama screenplays.

'Auntie Talk' With Hamid Mir

Saturday, October 30th, 2010

Gossip AlertMr Hamid Mr writes in The News (Jang Group) today that President Zardari’s recent attendance at a diplomatic function honoring Turkey raised “disturbing questions”. Upon reading the column, however, it was only learned that Hamid Mir engages in more parlour gossips than a dozen busy-bodies.

Here are the so-called “disturbing” question according to Hamid Mir:

Despite all this political gossip, many Western diplomats were seriously trying to understand the unusual presence of President Zardari on the national day of Turkey. Some Foreign Office officials were telling them that it was not unusual because presidents had attended diplomatic functions in the Chinese and US embassies in the past.

A top government official informed The News that President Zardari had given a goodwill gesture to Turkey for its unprecedented help given to the victims of the recent floods. He also said Pakistan, Turkey and Iran had become partners in 6,566 km long railway line project worth $20 billion.

Many people were discussing whether Turkey was going to invest a lot in the power sector and was this the reason President Zardari graced the national day of Turkey but they were also asking what was the role of a president in a parliamentary democracy.

The presence of President Zardari in a very important diplomatic gathering raised many valid questions in the minds of foreign guests. They were asking their Pakistani friends that if prime minister had become powerful after the 18th Amendment, then why US President Obama is still calling and inviting President Zardari to visit Washington?

They were also asking whether President Zardari was giving signals to the diplomatic community of Islamabad that he was still the most powerful man in the government. They were asking where was PM Gilani? Poor Pakistanis had no answer to all these disturbing questions raised by their foreign friends.

These questions are not disturbing, and probably they were never even asked by anyone. Let’s think about this for one moment, shall we? Why was the President attending a diplomatic function for a close ally that is making some investments in our country? Do we really even have to ask such a question?

Why is US President Obama calling for Zardari to come visit if 18th Amendment made the PM more powerful? President Zardari may have returned some powers to their proper office as part of democratic reforms, but he is still ‘head of state’ and the head of the PPP. The office of President was not abolished. Why shouldn’t Obama invite Zardari for a chat?

These questions are not disturbing, they are banal.

But there is one disturbing thing reveal by Hamir Mir. The so-called ‘disturbing questions’ account for only the final paragraphs in a long column of many paragraphs. What is reported in the rest of the article? It is only the most stereotypical gossips you can imagine. Did someone move to the other side of the room and not shake Zardari’s hand? Was someone whispering in the corner? What did some PML-N say about some Minister?

Is Hamid Mir is auditioning for a new celebrity gossip show? Perhaps he can call his new show “Auntie Talk” because he reminds me of listening to my auntie sit around and gossip about the people in our neighborhood over tea with her friends.

Whatever his intentions, Hamid Mir has only embarrassed himself by writing such a gossip column. Whatever one’s political preference, it must be admitted that a real journalist could easily write a column about any world leader titled ‘Disturbing Questions’ that includes real questions of governing, diplomacy, and politics. For Hamid Mir, though, there is apparently only some parlour gossip. Disappointing, indeed.

Are There No Consequences In Pakistan Media?

Friday, October 22nd, 2010

Pakistan Media Noise Machine

American media is certainly not without problems, and no honest person will say that there is no bias or incorrect information published in American media. But media companies in that country do try to hold their employees to a certain high standard, and there are consequences when those reporters or TV anchors are caught violating those standards. Sadly, the standards in our own media seem to be completely missing.

We have written before about the cases of Janet Cooke and Stephen Glass – American reporters who were caught writing fake stories in order to boost ratings. These two and many others have been fired for what is considered an unforgivable act in American journalism. But it is not just faking stories that will ruin a career in journalism in other countries.

In the US, media companies have little patience for news journalists and anchors making outrageous statments. This week, American reporter Juan Williams fired by National Public Radio yesterday for making Islamophobic comments on the Fox News TV channel. Earlier this month, a TV anchor for CNN was fired after calling another TV anchor a “bigot” and making anti-Jewish statements during a radio interview. CBS News fired a popular radio talk show host after he made prejudiced comments about black women.

Now, let us review some recent incidents in our own media that have gone without even the slightest reprimand.

On 7 October, a reporter for The Nation, Syed Fawad Ali Shah, sent a message to popular press email list “Media Tribe” that says,

They know that the PPP aka wolkpack of looters headed by pirate prince Zardari came into power after licking the boots and …. of US officials and assured that they will have no objection over any US activity including attacks.

Journalist for Express Tribune and Aaj TV, Syed Ali Raza Abidi, is a popular Twitter user who regularly posts items that are political controversial including unsupported allegations against different political parties. For example, on 20 September he wrote:

MQM criticizes PPP openly – What is PPP afraid of? If MQM is carrying on Target Killings in Karachi – Prove it, and book em! #Pakistan

Then wrote one minute later:

But if PPP cannot prove it, then its THEM! for sure.

On 1 October, Syed wrote the following attack on Zardari:

Today President #Zardari spoke in #Sindhi, continuing his support for #Feudalism in #Pakistan – #Message #PPP #MQM #APML

How is this considered anything but political attacks? Are these Syeds supposed to be journalists or political operatives?

And they are not the only ones guilty of such acts. Jang Group sometimes seems to specialize in political attacks.

Ansar Abbasi’s attack on Pervez Musharraf was shockingly unprofessional, as we reported at the time. Also, Amir Mateen’s expose about Mian Nawaz Sharif was little more than a gossip column and attempt to insult the politician’s character, and yet The News published it anyway. Jang’s employee Shaheen Sehbai himself has a notorious record of publishing baseless and defamatory accusations.

Any of the above reporters would be severely reprimanded if not sacked outright in most countries, not for criticising a politician, but for being beyond the pale and engaging in character assassination instead of factual reporting. But here, for some unknown reason, there seem to be no consequences for such outrageousness. Actually, it seems to be rewarded.

Pakistan is a democracy and each person is entitled to his own opinions. Syed Fawad Ali Shah, Syed Ali Raza Abidi, Ansar Abbasi, Amir Mateen, Shaheen Sehbai and all the others can believe what they want to believe and say what they want to say. But free speech does not mean a free pass to do anything you want without consequences.

Ansar Abbasi is free to say whatever he wants, but he does not have the right to be paid by Jang Group for doing so. Therefore, if Jang Group, Express Tribune, Aaj, The Nation, and other media companies continue to employ people who make outrageous and politically biased statements without any discipline or consequences, it is reasonable to infer that these media companies are supporting those specific opinions. And if that is the case – if media companies are supporting a particular political opinion – they stop being news organizations and have actually become political propaganda machines.

Any profession has rules that must be followed. Police cannot arrest a man simply because they do not like his face. Judges cannot sentence a man simply because they do not like his family. Politicians cannot take money for themselves simply because they are in power. And journalists cannot be political operatives if they are also to be trusted to report the news.

Pakistan has a free media which should be a national asset. Instead, it is quickly becoming a noise machine.

Ahmed Quraishi, Most 'Weird' Pakistani Journalist, Takes Propaganda to New Lows – Turns Computer Glitch at WH into Conspiracy Theory

Sunday, October 17th, 2010

Ahmed QuraishiAhmed Quraishi seems to have an unnatural obsession with Ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani. It seems that Quraishi pays attention to little except following the Ambassador’s every move and trying to invent some conspiracy of one form or another. In his latest attempt, Quraishi distorts a computer error at the White House by suggesting that Haqqani was “denied entry” and “abandoned at the gate”. Legitimate news reports about the incident, however, tell a different story.

According to reports on CNN, the incident was caused by a data processing error that was sorted that evening.

The White House has another party protocol problem on its hands after as many as 30 diplomats were stopped at the White House gate and not allowed into a Tuesday evening party being held in the diplomats’ honor.

As many as 30 senior diplomats were denied entry initially, CNN was told.

Several ambassadors who spoke to CNN after the reception said they were barred from entering the reception for Chiefs of Mission and Charges d’Affaires because the information on their identification didn’t match the names and dates of birth on the check-in list. The ambassadors asked not to be named to preserve relations between their countries and the White House.

The party, an annual White House diplomatic reception, is a “must-attend” on the Washington diplomatic social calendar.

White House spokesman Ben Chang acknowledged that “a few” guests were delayed at the entrance to the White House due to “an error in processing their personal data.”

Ahmed Quraishi claims in his article that Haqqani was “denied entry to the White House” because he is not well connected in Washington. This is simply not supported by the facts of this story.

First, one must recognize that Haqqani was not denied entry. Actually, there were 30 Ambassadors who were asked to wait while the data error was sorted. Are we to believe that all of these diplomats are not well connected – including the Ambassadors from Russia and Saudi Arabia? It defies common sense to believe such a thing.

Also, according to the influential newspaper Foreign Policy, while the complete list of nations is not known, the error appears to have been related to the alphabetical order of the countries affected.

Ambassadors from Oman, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and several other countries were held at the door, while European diplomats from France and Finland were allowed in. This led several ambassadors to speculate that it was an alphabetical problem — countries with names in the latter half of the alphabet were somehow affected by a registration error. Neither the administration nor the State Department would provide a full list of the countries affected by the SNAFU.

One should also consider that having his entry to the event delayed, Husain Haqqani left. I fully expected someone like Ahmed Quraishi to praise the Ambassador for standing up for the nation’s honor? Surely if the Ambassador had stayed put like many of the other diplomats, Quraishi would have condemned him for allowing Pakistan to be insulted?

Furthermore, this latest conspiracy theory is actually a direct contradiction of one of Ahmed Quraishi’s usual themes which is that Haqqani is a US agent. Surely if Husain Haqqani was US agent, he would have been able to skip the usual protocols and avoid the problem altogether.

It seems that this is another situation in which an official is ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t', and political opportunists posing as journalists are standing in the wings ready to make whatever argument serves their agenda, facts be damned.

What makes the story even more weird is Quraishi’s apparent obsession with the Ambassador. In the past, Ahmed Quraishi tried to peddle the ridiculous idea that Haqqani gave a visa to American bin Laden hunter Gary Faulkner because he believed the man was an agent of CIA. He also accused Haqqani of providing lavish accomodations for the Foreign Minister on a trip to New York City, only to be shamed when it was discovered that the poor man was in Pakistan attending to his own mother’s funeral.

In fact, Ahmed Quraishi has been publicly embarrassed before when the influential newspaper Foreign Policy reported that Quraishi’s article of 2009 that claimed Haqqani was to be fired was a misrepresentation of the facts.

In the Nation article, however, writer Ahmed Quraishi, shown at right, states without evidence that the Pakistani source was “close to Ambassador Haqqani,” and states without evidence that Haqqani is “contemplating going public with embarrassing Pakistani official documents.” Neither allegation was part of the article in The Cable.

The title of Quraishi’s article goes even further in misrepresenting the reporting in The Cable, and reads, “If fired, Haqqani threatens to unveil ‘reams’ of Pakistan’s secrets.”

(Quraishi also mislabeled the author of The Cable as “Bill” Rogin; not sure where he got that one.)

Ahmed Quraishi’s obsession with creating conspiracy theories around Husain Haqqani is even more bizarre when one realizes that in the past Quraishi has called Haqqani “one of the best” Ambassadors in the world.

It’s time for political operatives to stop pretending to be journalists in order to hawk their insults, rumours, and conspiracy theories. It is especially ironic that these people who are always itching to humiliate Pakistan’s leaders are the same who claim to be self-appointed nationalists. One might ask that if they really love their country so much, would they please stick to the facts and stop peddling conspiracies invented only to insult the nation’s officials. That is not journalism, it is only political propaganda.

Ridding Ourselves Of Shireen Mazari's Mistakes

Wednesday, October 6th, 2010

The Nation (logo)In an opinion column published in today’s The Nation, “Ridding ourselves of the US“, Shireen Mazari makes several incorrect claims about incidents and statistics in the war against militants. While Shireen Mazari is certainly entitled to her own opinion about the war, she is not entitled to her own facts.

Shireen Mazari claims that drone attacks have killed more civilians than militants. According to Shireen Mazari’s column,

…we are unable to deal with our terrorism threat internally because we are following US diktat and using a military-centric policy which is simply creating more space for militants within the country. The drone attacks, killing more civilians than militants, are one glaring case in point.

Mazari provides no research to back up her claim, so it is not known why she says this. But Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann’s drones database at the New America Foundation (NAF) shows that more militants have been killed by drone attacks than civilians. Furthermore, the NAF research is transparent as to its sources and analysis:

The research on these pages, which we have created in a good faith effort to be as transparent as possible with our sources and analysis and will be updated regularly, draws only on accounts from reliable media organizations with deep reporting capabilities in Pakistan, including the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal, accounts by major news services and networks—the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France-Presse, CNN, and the BBC—and reports in the leading English-language newspapers in Pakistan—the Daily Times, Dawn, and the News—as well as those from Geo TV, the largest independent Pakistani television network.

Here are the estimated death counts:

Estimated Total Deaths from U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan, 2004 – 2010

Deaths (low) Deaths (high)
2010* 409 685
2009 413 709
2008 263 296
2004-2007 86 109
Total 1,171 1,799

*Through October 4, 2010

Estimated Militant Deaths from U.S. Drone Strikes in Pakistan 2004 – 2010

Deaths (low) Deaths (high)
2010* 383 625
2009 293 405
2008 106 134
2004-2007 78 100
Total 860 1,264

*Through October 4, 2010

Estimated Militant Leader Deaths from US Drone Strikes in Pakistan, 2004-2010

2010* 10
2009 10
2008 11
2004-2007 3
Total 32

*Through October 4, 2010. Included in estimated militants and estimated totals, above.

Later, in the same paragraph, Mazari claims that “there are the NATO incursions into our territory and targeting of even our military personnel”. While there was the well-reported NATO incursion into our territory, the claim of “targeting” is misleading.

An investigation of the incident has found that Pakistani soldiers fired warning shots at the helicopters, which returned fire. The US and NATO have apologized for the incident and pledged to work more closely with the Pakistani military and government to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

Shireen Mazari’s account could lead readers to believe that the US was intentionally and aggressively attacking Pakistani soldiers, which would be an act of war. This doesn’t make any sense. If the US military wanted to go to war with Pakistan, why would it provide so much support and supplies to the Pakistani military? And why would the US apologize and pledge to work more closely in coordination with the Pakistani military?

Mazari goes on to repeat the discredited conspiracy theory that the US is planning to steal our nuclear arsenal. Her evidence is a statement by an American conservative historian Arthur Herman. But Arthur Herman is not a member of the US government or military and would have no access to such sensitive information. He is simply describing a hypothetical ‘worst-case scenario’ based on no evidence.

Actually, the article that Mazari is referring to is an opinion column in an American newspaper New York Post which has been criticised by the Columbia Journalism Review who said, “The New York Post is no longer merely a journalistic problem. It is a social problem.” According to a survey conducted by Pace University in 2004, the New York Post was rated the least-credible news outlet in New York. The Wikipedia entry on New York Post includes a long list of controversies surrounding the newspaper.

Shireen Mazari then goes on to repeat another discredited conspiracy theory saying that Visas are being granted “with no proper scrutiny and with all normal procedures being abandoned”. Mazari provides no evidence for this claim, which would be a quite serious breach of protocol. Notably, Shireen Mazari does not accuse anyone by name of committing this act, possibly because she knows that it would be defamatory for her to do so. Instead, she merely states that it is being done which could possibly result in readers mistakenly believing that she has some evidence to back her claim.

Shireen Mazari has every right to believe that the US is the root of all of the country’s problems, but she must make this claim with facts and not inventions and conspiracy theories. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but facts are facts. Making statements to support a particular political agenda even when the facts are the opposite is not journalism, it is merely propaganda. Please, Shireen Mazari, stick to the facts.

Shireen Mazari Gets Failing Grade

So Much For Myth of US and Army-Backed Caretaker Government

Thursday, September 16th, 2010

Since the day one of the present government, certain media personalities have been predicting a coup of some form or another. Whether because of personal grudges, political opposition, or simply an attempt to be controversial there have been countless stories or examples of Wishful Journalism saying that the government will soon fall to a US-backed military caretaker government.

If anyone actually believed this myth, though, it’s over now.

Now US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke has stated quite clearly that the Americans will only support a democratically elected government in Pakistan.

Mr Holbrooke, who is in Pakistan visiting flood-affected areas, told reporters: “We will only support a civilian, democratically elected government.

In contradiction to many media reports, the American spokesman praised the government for its response to the floods.

Holbrooke was also very generous in showering praises on he Pakistani government in its response to the flood crisis, saying: “I think the Pakistan government has done a fantastic job so far – and we are here to help in any way we can.”

Asked if the US would continue to support the military, the US envoy repeated that they will only support the military if it is part of the present government.

The US envoy also added that the US was happy to work with the Pakistani army as long as it “is a part of this government.”

You will remember that Wishful Journalists like Shaheen Sehbai have been predicting for years that there will be a US-backed military caretaker government. This same story has had many names in the past two years: ‘Minus One Formula’, ‘Bangladesh Model’, ‘French Revolution’ and now finally a new name…nonsense.

Perhaps now the media fortune tellers can put away their crystal balls and do some actual reporting.

Good Advice

Saturday, August 21st, 2010

Naeem TahirNaeem Tahir offers some excellent advice for TV anchors in his column for Daily Times today.

I think what needs to be done is a careful presentation of the facts in a balanced way. Stop being so aggressive and interrupting everyone on the show. When you shout and speak more than the guest, you are projecting your prejudices and blocking the other point of view. If you believe that someone is hiding or misrepresenting the facts, then your calm and pointed questions will indeed expose him or her and the viewers will understand. Your aggression puts the viewer off. An anchor’s calm creates the benchmark for the tone of discussion. Please realise that viewers have already been educated, thanks to your efforts. Now they expect more. They look for an analysis of the situation. They want a dispassionate, thought provoking appraisal and a way forward. They expect public opinion to be motivated for short-term and long-term solutions. One anchor interviewed a Sindh ‘nationalist’ leader and probed his reservations about the present scheme of water management. Some positive thinking emerged. This was an example. While the nation has experienced this colossal natural tragedy and is prepared to avoid a recurrence, we need to focus on acceptable planning. If the civil government fails to rehabilitate, reconstruct and plan for the future, the media must take it to task.

Anchors have the power of communication beyond the reach of anyone else. It is the nature of your job that it is burdened with social responsibility. If you appreciate the good work of the armed forces, highlighting it is the right thing to do, but also encourage those who are sincerely mobilising. Build role models. Look at the causes and hold responsible those who have neglected the proper need for water management. Focus on developing a consensus on future strategy. Of course, expose corruption, mismanagement, apathy and incompetence. But be a role model yourself — of character, knowledge, investigation and decency.

How Media Missed Jihadi Orchestration of London Protest

Wednesday, August 11th, 2010

Outside Zardari’s appearance at the PPP rally in Birmingham, England, a crowd of protesters gathered to express their opposition to the president and his message. Inside, crowds chanted their support for the president. But there was another story that was missed by the press altogether.

This is a perfect example of how even reputable foreign and Pakistani news services can misreport stories about Pakistan when they do not receive the facts from the Pakistani media. Also, it shows how all media sometimes miss important facts when reporting a story.

BBC released a video about the protests at President Zardari’s rally, and noted that it was indicative of the political divide in the Pakistani public. The video featured a couple of men speaking in English and saying that they think that the president would have been better to stay in Pakistan during the floods, and a clip of Bilawal fundraising for flood victims in London.

But that wasn’t all.

The video shows scenes from the protests outside the rally filled with signs that say, “Save Pakistan from America” and “Khilafah Only Way to Stop America”. One might ask, what does America have to do with Zardari speaking to a PPP rally in the UK, or with the floods that are devastating the country? In fact, several shots from the video clearly show protesters waving Khilafah flags.

Jihadist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir protesting Zardari in London

Jihadist group Hizb-ut-Tahrir protesting Zardari in London

A commenter on this blog recently asked “Do the British Broadcasting Corporation and The Guardian not check simple verifiable facts that they report…And what possibly makes you think that these news services rely on Pakistani media sources, without any verification?”

Actually, there is a quite simple explanation. Many Western reporters may not be aware of such concepts like caliphate or even of organizations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Even our own reporters get caught up in a particular narrative – “People protesting Zardari decision” – and miss the evidence that there is perhaps another story there.

The fact the protests outside the rally were largely organised and manned by members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir was largely overlooked by the press, despite this organization being banned by a large number of countries including Egypt, Turkey, and Bangladesh. The group was banned in Pakistan by Gen. Musharraf until a decision by the Lahore High Court reversed the proscription.

In fact, Hizb-ut-Tahrir has orchestrated protests at previous appearances by President Zardari since he was elected, arguing that Pakistan’s government should be overthrown and replaced with Khilafah.

So while there is certainly a story about Zardari’s decision to attend diplomatic meetings in Europe during the flood crisis – a story that President Zardari himself has addressed – there is another important story that was largely missed by both the foreign and Pakistani media: The protests outside Zardari’s speech in Birmingham largely had nothing to do with Zardari’s decision to attend the rally, but more to do with a highly controversial jihadist group that opposes the concept of democracy and is working to overthrow the Pakistani government and install a new Caliphate.