Posts Tagged ‘Jang Group’

The News for the Prosecution

Sunday, January 1st, 2012

The News (Jang Group)Is The News (Jang Group) reporting on court proceedings or trying to influence an issue that is sub judice? This question must be asked in light of a report by Ahmad Noorani of 31 December, ‘Asma focused on army bashing, not maintainability of petitions.

The short, four paragraph piece in Saturday’s newspaper contains a sensational headline and opening paragraph which can only be read in a way that will influence the readers to believe that Asma Jahangir is anti-military – a dangerous accusation in these times.

Mr Noorani’s article appeared on the same page as another piece that terms the respected international human rights NGO ‘Human Rights Watch’ as taking ‘a highly objectionable and partisan position against the superior judiciary of Pakistan’ after Pakistan Director Human Rights Watch Ali Dayan Hasan expressed concern about the Supreme Court’s verdict. According to The News, the ‘highly controversial statement’ insisted that “all arms of the state must act within their constitutionally determined ambit and in aid of legitimate civilian rule”. Does Jang Group really find the Constitution ‘highly objectionable’?

Just below this piece, in fact, was another piece attacking Human Rights Watch, this time terming it as ‘a foreign organisation working in Pakistan under the cover of human rights’. In an utterly bizarre and inexplicable practice, The News then goes on to quote its source against Human Rights Watch – none other than Mr Ahmad Noorani!

The News goes on to attack the person of Human Rights Watch director Ali Dayan Hasan. After printing his statement:

“No one from the government approached me to issue this press release and it was issued by my organisation considering the fears and threats to constitution, democracy and human rights in Pakistan”

The News injected a rumour that “It was also being said that he had issued this press release on directions of the federal government”. As with very many Jang Group sources, these cannot be verified and The News offers no evidence to support the claims their mysterious ‘sources’.

It should be noted that the person who appears to behind a few of these biased and sensational articles, Ahmad Noorani, has a track record of reporting incorrect information and biased articles attacking the present government.

As the issue of the memo case is presently sub judice, journalists should report only the facts and not attempt to influence proceedings or to anticipate the course of the inquiry or predict the outcome. Let the court do its work. It does not need Jang Group prejudicing the courts statements and decisions and thereby undermining the very independence of the court itself..

Corruption, Perceptions of Corruption, and Media

Friday, December 30th, 2011

Is the government corrupt? Which department is most corrupt? How much of your answer to these questions is based on hard facts, and how much is based on what you’ve been told by the media?

On 25th December, in a report titled, ‘Military stands at number five among corrupt institutions’The News reporter Usman Manzoor wrote that “sources said military stood at number five among the 10 most corrupt institutions of the country.” Once again, Jang’s sources have let them down.

The actual report, which was released on 28th December, lists the military at number nine. And the report does not list “the 10 most corrupt institutions of the country” – it lists only the 10 institutions TIP asked about.

Unlike the previous surveys, this year the NCPS covers only the basic survey report to measure the perceptions, nature and extent of corruption being faced by consumers of the following ten public sector departments:

1. Police
2. Electricity Supply
3. Health Dept.
4. Education Dept.
5. Military
6. Justice / Courts
7. Revenue / Property Registration
8. Taxation
9. Customs
10. Tendering & Contracting

Local Government has been deleted from the survey, and Military has been added for the first time in the list of departments surveyed

After the report was released, Pakistan Today, however, carried the headline, ‘In the list of corrupt, military among top 10 and ‘independent’ judiciary also climbs’. While not as bad as the headline in The News, it is still factually incorrect.

If reporters had bothered to read as far as the first page of the Foreward, they would have learned that, of the ten institutions covered in the report, “The least two corrupt departments are Education and Military“.

We would not be so bold as to suggest that corruption is not a major problem in society. The media has a role to play in solving this problem by investigating and exposing corruption where it exists. But this requires more than rumours, gossip, and misleading reporting – it requires real journalism.

Oh, and if TIP really wants to stir a hornets nest, perhaps they should do some research on corruption in another institution – media.

The News vs. The News on nukes

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011

Nasr missile test image from The News (Jang) website

Is the government threatening the security of the country by cutting development of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme? Or is the government improving the security of the country by investing in a modern nuclear weapons programme? According to The News (Jang Group) the answer is yes to both.

In Monday’s copy of The News, Ansar Abbasi warns that Pakistan’s nuclear programme is not a top priority of the present regime, and that because nuclear development has not been funded properly, it “has been stopped”. According to Abbasi, an “informed source, who has been one of the top nuclear managers of Pakistan’s nuclear programme” (his initials wouldn’t happen to be AQK, would they?) explained that because of the policies of the present government, our nuclear programme is experiencing “technical roll back”.

This is a particularly interesting situation to be in since in May of this year, The News reported that Pakistan under the present government is on path to become the 4th largest nuclear state and is quickly outpacing other nations in both number of warheads and technology.

Former UN weapons inspector David Albright, reported that Pakistan appears to be building a fourth plutonium reactor at the Khushab complex, and is expanding plutonium separation capabilities at another site.

Another report, from a US think tank, says Pakistan now has 70 to 90 nuclear warheads, more than its rival India. This puts Pakistan on track to command the world’s fourth-largest nuclear weapons arsenal by the end of the decade.

The evidence suggests that Pakistan is trying to develop a second-strike nuclear capability. Pakistan has tested cruise and other missiles that can carry strategic warheads from land or even from submarines.

That hardly sounds like the defence policy of a government that is turning a blind eye to security. In fact, The News reported advancements in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme in April also when the military successfully tested the Nasr, a ballistic missile of Hatf series, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead can hit targets up to 60 km.

Strategic planners term the test a ‘new and very significant development’ since the missile falls in the category of tactical nuclear weapons. “This is a low-yield battlefield deterrent, capable of deterring and inflicting punishment on mechanised forces like armed brigades and divisions,” said an expert in the field of missile technology. “This takes care of the Indian Army’s obsession with finding space for limited war under the nuclear umbrella.”

Addressing the gathering at the undisclosed location, DG SPD Kidwai said the test was a very important milestone in consolidating Pakistan’s strategic deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum. He said in the hierarchy of military operations, the Nasr Weapon System now provided Pakistan with short-range missile capability in addition to the already available medium- and long-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles in its inventory.

The president and prime minister have congratulated the scientists and engineers for their outstanding success and warmly appreciated the successful test.

In November of this year, Ansar Abbasi himself reported that ‘Pakistan’s nuclear programme has made some extraordinary progress by developing one of the world’s smartest nuclear tactical devices’.

The defence budget increased 15.3 per cent in 2009, in 2010 saw a 17 per cent additional increase, and in 2011 ballooned by an additional 12 per cent. Since taking power, the PPP-led coalition government has increased defence spending by at least 44 per cent over the budgets under the previous regime.

Is Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme threatened by budget cuts made by the present regime? Years’ worth of reporting by Jang/Geo provide ample evidence that successive governments including the present one have dedicated a vast amount of resources to the nuclear weapons programme that have yielded great advancement in both the number of warheads as well as advanced tactical technologies. In trying to accuse the PPP of weakening Pakistan’s nuclear programme, Ansar Abbasi only exposes his own lack of credibility.

Jang’s “Special” Reporting

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)This has been a bad year for Muhammad Saleh Zaafir. The ‘Editor Special Reporting’ of Jang Group has been publishing one article after another of especially poor quality.

In January, Muhammad Saleh Zaafir wrote a bizarre conspiracy theory suggesting that President Zardari held a ‘mysterious meeting’ with President Obama, despite the fact that details of the meeting were available on the same day. Actually, the meeting was so not mysterious that photographers were even present.

President Zardari meeting with President Obama in January 2011

A few months later, the same Jang Group reporter was exposed when he claimed to have received detailed information from ‘highly placed defence sources’ that turned out to be nothing but a cut-and-paste from Wikipedia.

Today, Muhammad Saleh Zaafir is back armed not with conspiracy theories or plagiarism, but drawing room gossip. Don’t take our word for it, this is how Mr Saleh Zaafir describes it himself!

This was gossip in the Kenyan reception held on Monday evening.

The gossip he ‘reports’ is that Husain Haqqani “tried to escape” but was prevented by the PM. The former Ambassador responded on Twitter noting that “First they said I will not come 2 Pakistan. Now they say I am in some hurry 2 leave. Wrong both times :) ”.

It is important to note that Muhammad Saleh Zaafir has a long history of inventing and reporting false information. In fact, he was warned by the Supreme Court against this habit and made to publicly apologise in 2007.

Muhammad Saleh Zaafir, who is the reporter of the said news items, when confronted with the same, frankly and honestly conceded that he had made no effort to verify the veracity of the allegations levelled in the said news items before publishing the same nor did he have any proof in support of the contents thereof. He, however, added at the very outset that he had utmost regards and respect for not only the said hon’ble judges of this Court but for the entire judiciary; that he did not have even an iota of doubt about their integrity and character and that reporting the said news items was a grave mistake on his part.

Muhammad Saleh Zaafir needs to understand that ‘Special Reporting’ does not mean parroting drawing room gossips and cutting-and-pasting from websites, but actually taking the time to do some basic background research and fact-checking before filing an article.

New media circus same as old media circus

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Pakistan Media Circus

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.

Frankly, we were surprised by Sethi’s tone. This is, after all, the same journalist who strongly criticised exactly this behaviour just a few months ago.

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.

Ansar Abbasi, wannabe political advisor, gives himself away

Sunday, December 4th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)Ansar Abbasi is at it again with a front page column in The News (Jang Group) that offers little more than Abbasi’s personal frustration that PTI and PML-N are not joining forces against the present government. Having utterly ceased to even pretend to be a journalist, Ansar Abbasi is now fantasizing that he is political advisor to Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif. But in his advice to the opposition leaders, Ansar gives himself away.

Abbasi’s would-be political advice is especially humorous given Imran’s recent successes drawing crowds exceeding 100,000 to his jalsa in Lahore and showing legitimate growth in his party’s support since disappointing showings in past elections. Nevermind the facts, Ansar Abbasi is angry that “PTI leaders are more interested in the alleged corruption cases of Nawaz Sharif”. Abbasi is further enraged that “Imran Khan and his party did not issue any statement in support of the Supreme Court” despite the fact that later in the column he even admits that “The PTI’s spokesman Umar Cheema instead said that it was the PTI that had demanded in the very beginning to establish a commission under the Supreme Court to probe the matter”.

Meanwhile, Ansar Abbasi is also angry at Nawaz Sharif and his PML-N for focusing on allegations that “Khan’s siblings and other relatives are drawing heavy salaries from donations” to Shaukat Khanum and questions about “a residential plot allotted to the PTI chief by the then chief minister and incumbent PML-N chief on the former’s request”.

It seems that Ansar Abbasi is proposing his own NRO in which all allegations against political leaders should be set aside so long as they agree to attack the government. To begin, Ansar Abbasi would have Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif stop questioning each other and instead take the strategy of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, even though both political leaders appear to know better what they are doing than Ansar Abbasi. More to the point, it appears that Ansar Abbasi is not actually interested in the success of either PTI or PML-N, but simply takes the position of “the enemy of the government is my friend”. Obviously, this raises serious concerns both about Ansar Abbasi’s ability to provide objective, fact-based reporting and analysis and also whether Jang Group is pursuing a political agenda in giving someone like Ansar Abbasi front page coverage to air his personal opinions.

Hidden Hands in Pak Media

Sunday, November 20th, 2011

MI

A flurry of interesting pieces have begun to appear in the media today, all reporting about a secret meeting between DG ISI Shuja Pasha and Mansoor Ijaz in a London hotel room last month. While PMW is in no place to question the information presented in the news reports, we are troubled by many of the questions raised about the origin of these reports, and what that says about the “news” we are being fed.

Newsweek Pakistan quotes a source “who was privy to the meeting”. What source would be privy to a meeting between DG ISI and Mansoor Ijaz in a London hotel, I wonder? Probably not room service. The News (Jang Group) says that its story is based on “highly classified information obtained by The News”.

Newsweek Pakistan‘s piece certainly contain one of the funniest lines in recent memory. According to the reporter, Fasih Ahmed, his source “spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of offending the general”. And what did he say that he was so worried may offend the General? “Pasha seemed like an intellectually-sound man and while he grimaced and looked shocked at times, he did not give away how he intended to proceed, if at all, with the information provided to him.” Was this “source” really worried that describing a General as “an intellectually-sound man” would be risky?

PMW does not have access to “highly classified information”, nor do we have access to any sources with access to DG ISI’s private meetings in London hotel rooms (or anywhere else, for that matter). So we cannot comment on whether these reports are factually correct. We only comment on them here to raise the question of whether these news reports are based on information provided by a neutral source, or if they are provided by state agencies themselves.

If a neutral source has access to the DG ISI’s private meetings, we as a nation should be quite worried about our national security. On the other hand, if the agencies are providing the information to reporters themselves, why not do so openly?

ISPR is the official channel for communicating with the public. If the agencies are bypassing the official communication channels to provide information to reporters, it raises the question whether the intent of the leaked information is to inform or to influence. Provided the facts, we should be allowed to make up our own minds. We do not need hidden hands writing a script for us.

The News repeats “ludicrous” claims

Saturday, November 19th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)A curious article appears in The News today which claims that Jang Group researchers discovered that Mansoor Ijaz, the American millionaire at the center of the “memogate” controversy, had previously “negotiated between the United States and the Sudanese government in an otherwise failed effort to apprehend Osama bin Laden”. This is an old and well known claim of Mr Ijaz, and one that this blog researched when Mr Ijaz originally published his infamous opinion column in The Financial Times. While researchers at The News found quite a bit of information, what is curious is just what information they found – and what information they didn’t.

Despite their hard work, researchers at The News failed to discover news reports in the international media over the past two days that quote Clinton’s former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger terming Ijaz’s claims about his role in negotiations with Sudan as “ludicrous and irresponsible”.

The News‘s research staff didn’t even read this blog where we revealed that in 1997, The Washington Post reported that Mr Ijaz used his political connections to advance his financial interests in Sudan1.

Wealthy and well-connected, Ijaz was more than willing to pitch in. By Election Day in November, he had raised $525,000 for the Democratic cause, including $250,000 from his personal funds and $200,000 donated by guests at a fund-raising reception for Vice President Gore at Ijaz’s New York penthouse in September, according to Federal Election Commission records, White House documents and Ijaz.

Now Ijaz is trying to reap what he has sown. Having earned access to the Clinton administration through his fund-raising prowess, Ijaz has met with a succession of senior officials in the White House, State Department and Congress to further his business interests through changes in U.S. policy toward Islamic countries, particularly Sudan, a government long accused of sanctioning international terrorism.

Unfortunately, researchers at The News also forgot to read the report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States AKA The 9/11 Commission that says, “We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.”

What information was The News able to find? Apparently they could only find the testimony of Mr Mansoor Ijaz himself before US Congress. Testimony that was considered by the US government as too unreliable to be included in the 9/11 Commission Report.

It appears that US officials who have met Mansoor Ijaz have a habit of terming his claims as ludicrious, unreliable, and uncredible. It is quite unfortunate that The News either could not find or forgot to include in their report all of the independent, third-party information. It might have been a little more informative than only taking Mr Ijaz’s word.

1. Ottaway, David B. ‘Democratic Fund-Raiser Pursues Agenda on Sudan’. The Washington Post. 29 April 1997.

“No Information”

Saturday, November 12th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)Ansar Abbasi is back to his old tricks on Friday with an article for The News, ‘Foreign Office has no information if any expelled US official is now back’. The title of Abbasi’s latest piece says it all: “no information”. Nevermind that he had no information, Ansar Abbasi can always rely on conspiracy theories and political attacks to meet his deadline.

In researching his story, Ansar Abbasi spoke to officials at ISPR and Foreign Office, none of whom gave the Jang Group yellow journalist the dirt that he desired.

While the ISPR did not respond to The News questions about the return of the US officials or regarding the president’s statement as quoted by the US congressmen, the Foreign Office when approached said that it has no information about the return of many of those US officials who had left the country early this year.

Ansar Abbasi was undeterred by his inability to get any damning evidence about a new invasion of American agents from legitimate sources, and turned to his old reliable friends, unnamed “informed sources”. Could it be these are the same unnamed sources that the judiciary has termed ‘incorrigible liars’? It is certainly telling that he did not even bother to name these as ‘official sources’.

After desperately writing paragraph after paragraph containing “no information”, Ansar Abbasi concludes his piece with an attack on the government completely unrelated to the rest of his article.

However, the Gilani regime that is known worldwide for corruption and bad governance has yet to show any sign of improvement. Instead the state institutions are fast collapsing amid unconfirmed reports that the organisations like PIA are being deliberately pushed to death to pave the way for the launching of a new airlines to be owned by some top rulers and possibly named as Indus Airlines.

Even this unrelated conspiracy is based on “unconfirmed reports”. It seems that Ansar Abbasi cannot get anyone to provide any evidence for any of his conspiracy theories. Of course, none of this would be a problem if Ansar Abbasi would conduct objective research and report facts rather than inventing conspiracies and reporting anonymous rumours.

Despite having no information to report, The News published Abbasi’s piece at the top of page 2 as ‘National News’.

The News invents a new twist to revive a dead conspiracy

Thursday, November 10th, 2011

The News (Jang Group)We noted yesterday that Adm (r) Mike Mullen denied the claims of Mansoor Ijaz also known as Pakistan’s James Bond. Most media groups reported this development in a straightforward way. Pakistan Today reported that ‘Mullen denies secret back channel in US-Pakistan relationship’, Dawn reported that ‘Mullen denies receiving Ijaz’s letter’, and Express Tribune reported that ‘Mullen denies secret back channel in US-Pakistan ties’. But The News (Jang Group), apparently unwilling to give up such a juicy conspiracy, invented a new twist to keep the story alive. According to the unsigned article in Thursday’s paper, ‘Mullen’s ex-spokesman issues confused denial of memo’.

According to the unnamed reporter, rather than putting the issue to rest, Adm Mullen’s statement actually added more mystery as it “left the door of receiving the memo open through someone else”. This is a classic example of the logical fallacy ‘moving the goalposts‘ “in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded”.

What happens, for example, if Adm Mullen issues another statement that says, “Not only did I not receive any memo from Mansoor Ijaz, I did not receive it from anyone else either”. Will The News the claim that this is “confusing” and adds more “mystery” also? After all, he would have said he did not receive a “memo”, but what about an email or a telegram! Why did he not clarify that no carrier pigeons flew to his window with a note scrawled on a scrap of paper tied to its leg? Where does it end? If you’re unwilling to accept facts, you will continue to believe anything, no matter how untrue it is.

Mansoor Ijaz’s claims did not stand the test of basic common sense according to assistant editor at The News Mehreen Zahra-Malik,

Vintage AZ? Maybe, but definitely typical Islamabad, city of the faithful, where faith means believing in things when common sense tells you not to. Really, how would an attempt to sack the army top brass discourage a coup? Anyone who knows how difficult it is to keep a secret among three people knows how absurd is the idea that Zardari imagined he’d get away with this undetected. Plus, didn’t he himself give the generals the extensions they wanted? And why does our man in DC, the army-hating ‘US ambassador to Pakistan,’ need to be bypassed to pass on a message that is decidedly pro-US and unmistakably anti-army?

But try suggesting any of this to someone in the grips of AZ-phobia and this memo-reverie, and he’ll gently shake his heads and begin to walk you through the cherry-picked lumps of ‘facts’. The screaming mass of reason pointing in the opposite direction? – who cares. Try hard enough and you can possibly find evidence Nawaz Sharif masterminded 9/11. It would certainly make for a more interesting story, and that’s what Islamabad’s hackeratti is interested in: an interesting story.

And that appears to be what happened again – ignoring reality in the hopes of resurrecting an interesting story from the dead. Adm Mullen’s statement was not confusing to anyone who was more interested in the facts than inventing interesting stories. Mansoor Ijaz already stands discredited by his fanciful tale, The News would be wise not to follow suit.