There are many negative outcomes that can result from media providing misinformation and exaggerated claims: uninformed public, destablized government, and international embarrassment for example. But lately media has been playing a most dangerous game with exaggerated misinformation, namely the statement of Indian General Deepak Kapoor.
Gen. Kapoor’s statement, to be clear, was completely irresponsible and I do not defend his statement at all. But let us look at what was actually said, and how this has been interpreted in the media.
Gen. Kapoor said that he believed there was the potential for a limited war between India and Pakistan under a nuclear overhang. As both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers, there is obviously some “nuclear overhang” to any battle between the two. But the media immediately began to say that the Indian was threatening nuclear war, which has the obvious result of setting back any peace process and making unnecessary fear in the minds of the people.
Retired Air Vice Marshal and formed Ambassador Shahzad Chaudhry noticed this right away:
Just a couple of weeks back General Kapoor opined that a ‘limited’ war was possible under a nuclear overhang. The statement got morphed and misrepresented as if he had spoken of a ‘limited nuclear war’.
This same observation was again made recently by Abbas Rashid in his column, “The difficult road to peace.”
Consider, for example, the bolt from the blue delivered last November by none other than the Indian army chief about the possibility of a limited conventional war between the two countries under a ‘nuclear overhang’. It was a highly irresponsible statement and not one for him to make, in any case. It did not help that on our media it was more than once articulated as ‘limited nuclear war’ by talk show hosts and guests, underlining the need for a greater sense of responsibility and professionalism on the part of the media.
In many matters, media misinformation and exaggeration can be simply an annoyance. But when it comes to the delicate peace between two nuclear powers, the stakes are too high for the media to play to the gallery and exaggerate the statements of Indian generals, no matter how ridiculous they are. Mr. Rashid’s advice would be well considered by media commentators:
The media too needs to play a supportive role rather than focusing disproportionately on the negative aspects, and resist the temptation of playing to the gallery. The South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA) has been doing useful work in this context for some years now by facilitating extensive interaction between media persons belonging to the region, not least those from India and Pakistan. This has contributed to greater sensitivity to each other’s perspectives and concerns. But there is obviously a long way to go as was so clearly depicted by the media coverage in the aftermath of the Mumbai terror attacks of November 2008. In that context it is certainly good news that two large media groups in Pakistan and India have joined hands in a commitment to work for peace between the two countries. Both have extensive outreach and can also help in setting the tone for many others in the media whose role has not been particularly helpful.
