Posts Tagged ‘The Nation’

« Older Entries

Media Priorities

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010

Today we began what we believe will be an interesting experiment in observing media priorities. We started by looking at what different newspapers found to be worthy of front page coverage and also the topics of each paper’s editorials. The results might surprise you…but probably not.

Yesterday, Pakistan suffered a serious attack in which at least 33 people have been killed and hundreds more wounded. The attacks targeted a Shi’a procession in Lahore. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi claimed responsibility for the attack almost immediately.

With this recent tragedy still fresh in the nation’s consciousness, we wanted to know what the media companies thought was important today? First, let’s take a look at the front pages of several newspapers:

Dawn Front Page 2 Sept 2010 The News Front Page, 2 September 2010 The Nation Front Page, 2 Sept 2010
Judging by column space, the most important story seems to be what a good deal you will get from the media companies’ advertisers. Okay, yes, newspapers do require advertising to keep subscription fees low. But it is worth noting still that The Nation has more advertising than actual reporting on the front page, though Dawn and The News are not far behind.

What’s more interesting, though, is what each newspaper thinks is most important to report on the front page. The Nation has a few stories about the attacks in Lahore, but devotes at least as much space to stories about Supreme Court’s hearings on the 18th Amendment, US-Pakistan strategic talks, NAB, and inflation.

Dawn devotes the majority of its print space to coverage of the terror attack in Lahore, with the next biggest stories being flooding and the Sialkot lynching.

The News devotes about equal space to the Lahore attacks as they do advertising, but the majority of column space is for stories about floods and politics.

Editorial Pages

Editorial pages are where the official position of a publication is printed. The following topics appeared today.

The News

  • Sialkot Murders
  • 18th Amendment and appointment of judges
  • School reading curriculums

Dawn

  • Taxes
  • Criticism of US treatment of military officers
  • Objectives resolution

The Nation

  • Criticism of US treatment of military officers
  • Oil prices
  • Criticism of government handling floods

It’s interesting, I think, that none of these three major newspapers had any editorial condemning the Lahore attacks. Surely they will make some statement at some point, but why was it not a priority? That’s not to say that school reading curriculum and oil prices are not important, but why did the news organizations decide those were more important than making a statement on the killings?

American intellectual Noam Chomsky has spoken for decades about what he calls “manufacturing consent”. He describes the way that major media organizations decide what is worthy of discussion, and that this has an influence on the way that society evolves.

It’s basically an institutional analysis of the major media, what we call a propaganda model. We’re talking primarily about the national media, those media that sort of set a general agenda that others more or less adhere to, to the extent that they even pay much attention to national or international affairs.

Now the elite media are sort of the agenda-setting media. That means The New York Times, The Washington Post, the major television channels, and so on. They set the general framework. Local media more or less adapt to their structure.

And they do this in all sorts of ways: by selection of topics, by distribution of concerns, by emphasis and framing of issues, by filtering of information, by bounding of debate within certain limits. They determine, they select, they shape, they control, they restrict — in order to serve the interests of dominant, elite groups in the society.

Mr Chomsky was, of course, writing about the media in his own country, but the same theory pertains to our media as well. This is not a judgment against the media, but it is something to be aware of. Not only does the content of reporting shape the way people perceive certain issues, but the decision about what is newsworthy is a very powerful part of media. Thus, you should ask yourself – are the media’s priorities my priorities? Or are they different?

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Daily Times, Dawn, The Nation, The News | 2 Comments »

Selig Harrison and Pakistan Media

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

Selig HarrisonA column in the New York Times newspaper by American commentator Selig Harrison has raised quite a bit of media attention around a conspiracy theory that the government is giving Gilgit Baltistan to China, a claim publicly denied by the Foreign Office. As with most conspiracy theories of this magnitude, a little basic research demonstrates that Mr Harrison and his claim of Pakistan ceding territory to China are unreliable.

While it took me all of 15 minutes to discover that Mr Harrison’s reputation precedes his remarks in the US, our own media seems to be more than willing to repeat the wildest conspiracies without the least effort in fact-checking. More troubling is that the Mr Harrison’s conspiracy seems to have been fed to him in part by Pakistani media.

The first suspicion I had about Mr Harrison’s claim was that it was simply too outrageous to be believed without some proof. Of course, Mr Harrison provides none in his column.

Most troubling, as I said, is that Mr Harrison’s claim appears to be based at least in part on rumours by unnamed journalists. He says that his sources for this conspiracy theory are:

…reports from a variety of foreign intelligence sources, Pakistani journalists and Pakistani human rights workers…

First, what foreign intelligence sources? While it would certainly be in keeping with journalistic practice to hold confidential the name of an informant, it is not unusual to at least report what agency the informant is associated with. Without playing into alternate conspiracy theories, it is well documented that intelligence agencies partake in disinformation campaigns designed to sow discord in targeted nations. Considering the location in question, is it not important to know which foreign intelligence agency is making these claims?

Second, it is quite troubling that some representatives of Pakistani media have been feeding such stories to foreign reporters. Considering Mr Harrison’s background (as we will explain below), it is worrisome that these Pakistani journalists went to Mr Harrison to promote their story. Certainly Mr Harrison will refuse to expose who these Pakistani journalists are, which is too bad. While there is reason to protect the identities of “whistle blowers” against official corruption for fear of their safety, there is little public good gained by allowing journalists to spread unsubstantiated rumours.

But let’s look at Mr Harrison’s claims directly. Many of Mr Harrison’s claims are nothing more than hysterical conjecture.

Mystery surrounds the construction of 22 tunnels in secret locations where Pakistanis are barred. Tunnels would be necessary for a projected gas pipeline from Iran to China that would cross the Himalayas through Gilgit. But they could also be used for missile storage sites.

I could not help but think of the famous American claims about Iraq’s “aluminum tubes”. The idea that China, which shares a border with China, would need to store missiles under Gilgit-Balochistan makes no sense. Unfortunately for Mr Harrison’s conspiracy theory, though, building tunnels for a gas pipeline would be a perfectly reasonable explanation for an increased presence of Chinese workers in the region. It’s just not quite as scary.

Of course, this is not the first claim that Mr Harrison has made about the break up of Pakistan. The Pakistan Policy Blog noticed this trend of Mr Harrison’s back in 2008, noting that “Selig Harrison has made a career of predicting the imminent break-up of South Asian states”. In 2006, Mr Harrison reported for the French newspaper Le Monde Diplomatique that Baluchistan and Sindh were preparing to quit the nation.

While there is no denying that we have seen groups of separatists and ethnic strife in the country (what country has not experienced such?), Mr Harrison’s reports consistently take on a tone of imminent national dissolution that is simply not supported by the facts. Four years after Mr Harrison’s prediction in the French media and no such calamity has occurred, of course. Yet Mr Harrison continues to predict the breakup of Pakistan. Perhaps he believes that if he simply wishes hard enough, it will come true?

Joshua Foust, a respected American journalist and intelligence consultant on South Asia, wrote a scathing profile of Mr Selig Harrison in 2008 in which he calls Mr Harrison’s writings on Pashtunistan, “silly, over-hyped nonsense” and says,

As it is, Harrison casts a very unconvincing shadow on the discourse over the Pashtunistan issue. It merits serious discussion—separatist movements always do. But placing them in their proper context, both historically and socially, is just as important as making a case you’ve been trying to make for years. As it is, Harrison seems to rely on mischaracterization, hyperbole, and “the soft bigotry of low expectations” (to borrow a phrase and avoid slinging charges of Orientalism)—hardly the stuff of a world-renowned regional expert. I hesitate to accuse Harrison of wearing ideological blinders, as I can’t really figure out what his ideology is, simultaneously blaming the West for subjugating the Pashtuns while granting them unlimited power to unite, declare independence, and bring down that very same West.

But that’s par for the course for most writing these days on Pashtuns, and even on Afghanistan. It just doesn’t add up. My question here, though, is the same as it was for Ann Marlowe: who the hell keeps paying him to write? I have to assume it is simply the ignorant, those more aware of his reputation than his recent scholarship, without the means to fact-check what he writes so long as it confirms their biases. That is a major loss to the field, that rigor. But, as with the curious longevity of Thomas Johnson (whom, ironically enough, Marlowe has called “brilliant”), it doesn’t seem to be that unoriginal, either.

Today, of course, Mr Harrison is not talking only about a separatist rebellion, but he has added a twist by claiming the government is “handing over de facto control of the strategic Gilgit-Baltistan region in the northwest corner of disputed Kashmir to China”. His evidence? Chinese PLA workers building roads and bridges.

Mr Harrison’s column, it is important to note, appears on the Opinion page of the New York Times. It does not even pretend to be an objective or investigative report, nor should it. Mr Harrison makes clear his position when he writes,

What is happening in the region matters to Washington for two reasons. Coupled with its support for the Taliban, Islamabad’s collusion in facilitating China’s access to the Gulf makes clear that Pakistan is not a U.S. “ally.”

This is a position in direct conflict with the official positions of the US and Pakistan. It is simply Mr Harrison’s opinion, and possibly an attempt to change the direction of Pakistan-US relations. Something, it seems, he has been trying to do for years.

An opinion column with no evidence, a discredited author, and sources from unnamed foreign intelligence agencies. One has to ask why the Pakistani media has been so ready to republish such rubbish. In fact, The News republished the piece in full today. The Nation makes note of the author’s “obsessive anti-Pakistan posture”, but then reproduces most of the author’s claims.

Worse still, who are the members of the Pakistani media who are feeding such conspiracy theories to foreign journalists? This blog has been criticized in the past for suggesting that there is a cycle in which Pakistani conspiracy theorists posing as journalists feed outrageous stories to the international press, who then repeat them, giving them the credibility needed to be repeated yet again in mainstream Pakistani media. But we see here an example of exactly this.

Actions of the media have consequences. Those consequences can be good – as when the media uncovers evidence of corruption or brings attention to pressing issues. Or they can be bad – as when the media causes confusion and distraction by placing more importance on sales than on research and facts. While we cannot control what discredited commentators like Selig Harrison write in the international media, we should not be fueling a cycle of misinformation and conspiracy theories. We should be setting an example of journalistic excellence that provides honest and accurate information at home and abroad.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Foreign Media | 1 Comment »

Serious Problems with Misused Aid Funds Report

Sunday, August 15th, 2010

Saturday’s edition of The Nation included an article that claims that President Zardari has been misusing foreign aid from the 2005 Earthquake. The story has now been picked up by Express Tribune, Dawn, and others. But where did this story come from, and is it reliable?

New Delshi based British reporter Dean Nelson

New Delhi based British reporter Dean Nelson

The story originated with Dean Nelson, the Telegraph’s South Asia Editor based in New Delhi, when he wrote for the British newspaper on Friday that Zardari ‘misused’ over £300 million in foreign aid for victims of the 2005 earthquake.

The first observation that must be made is that the Telegraph’s headline is so misleading that one must wonder if the newspaper is being deliberately untruthful for the sake of sensationalism. The idea that Asif Ali Zardari misused any earthquake relief funds is supported by absolutely nothing in Dean Nelson’s article.

Actually, what Dean Nelson writes is problematic on its own right.

First, Mr Nelson’s claim is based on statements by “senior Pakistani officials”. As if taking a cue from our own media, Mr Nelson does not reveal who these supposed officials are – not even what office they allegedly hold.

Second, nowhere in Mr Nelson’s article is there any evidence presented for misuse of funds. What the reporter writes is that some anonymous “officials” (and we’ve seen how reliable anonymous officials can be) have told him that their office suffered budget cuts.

But even Mr Nelson’s own article contradicts this fact when the only named official, Finance Secretary Salman Siddique explained that the issue is not foreign aid money being diverted, but that ERRA had requested extra funds that were not available due to the country’s fiscal deficit. As for foreign aid funds, “No cuts were imposed last year,” the Finance Secretary stated.

Mr Dean Nelson, who goes by the name, ‘DelhiDean’ on Twitter, is a curious fellow. His recent Twitter feed takes swipes at Pakistani politicians, saying Salmaan Taseer is “sucking up” and calling Zardari “toast”. Reading his off-the-cuff statements and the sensational headline that is not supported by his reporting, one one cannot help but think that Mr Dean Nelson has a political angle.

In fact, reading past articles by Mr Dean Nelson leaves one with the distinct impression that he cannot write objectively about Pakistan – certainly not about Zardari. Mr Nelson’s article of 5 August is titled, “Bilawal Bhutto Zardari: Born to rule Pakistan, but destined to fail” that repeats a string of anti-PPP talking points including the old story that Zardari “purged” Benazir supporters from the party leadership. Much like his Pakistani colleague Shaheen Sehbai, Mr Dean Nelson seems to have traded his press pass for a political badge and a crystal ball.

DelhiDean, as he calls himself, has a much different attitude towards India, though, writing that

To succeed, Britain will need to be reminded how much we already owe India, the part it played in making us what we are, and why the “shared history” we have is much more equally shared than those who obsess about immigration realise.

It is sad to see a reporter of Dean Nelson’s stature resort to blatantly political posturing in a nation which he does not live and has no connection. While he writes that the UK ‘owes’ India, he discourages people from helping flood victims in Pakistan because of a personal dislike of the nation’s president. He let his own political feelings cloud his judgment, and he called attention to unsubstantiated rumours with sensational headlines to ensure that he got more attention than those who are suffering.

But there is one thing more sad than this, which is that our own media has picked up this story and repeated it without asking the obvious questions. Who are these “officials” that claimed funds have not been released? Where are these funds that were supposedly misused? And why is a British reporter based in New Delhi writing sensational political articles to discourage humanitarian relief in Pakistan?

That’s the real story.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Foreign Media | 5 Comments »

‘Shoe Incident’ a Real News Story? Or Political Theatre?

Monday, August 9th, 2010

Shoe throwing gained global prominence as a protest tactic in 2008 when Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zeidi threw his shoes at the then-President of the US, George Bush. Since then, it has been a popular form of protest for many different nations. The same tactic has been used against Chinese premier Wen Jiabao in 2009, and throwing shoes at politicians has become practically a sport in India.

The strange part of this latest shoe throwing story is that the public rally was filmed and broadcast on television – and nobody saw any show throwing.

Anti-government commentators promise that video evidence will appear soon, but still no one has seen it. In the meantime, news media has been reporting the incident and airing interviews with the alleged shoe-thrower, substituting rumour and conjecture for actual evidence of the act.

Even the alleged-shoe thrower’s story is a curious claim. According to The News report,

Sardar Mohammed Shamim Khan, 57, said Asif Ali Zardari’s speech had incensed him so much that he spontaneously decided to unlace his size 10 leather shoes and hurl them at the bewildered Pakistani leader.

There are several problems with this man’s story that any junior reporter should be able to pick up on. First is the shoe size. Perhaps it is mere coincidence that Mr Shamim Khan reports that he threw a “size 10 leather shoe”, which is the exact same description of what was thrown at Mr Bush two years ago.

But Mr Shamim Khan’s claim that his action was “spontaneous” is even less reliable when it is learned, as reported by The News, that Mr Shamim Khan “managed to sneak into the invite-only political rally”. Was this really a spontaneous act? Or a carefully planned bit of political theatre?

There are several signs that perhaps it was the latter.

The day after the alleged incident, The Nation reported, an Internet game appeared encouraging people to throw the shoe at the president. What The Nation failed to ask, though, is how this game was created and distributed so quickly after the incident unless it was prepared before the incident even happened? And if the game was already in the works, how could Mr Shamim Khan’s act really have been spontaneous?

That’s not the only troubling aspect of this entire episode. Writing for the popular blog All Things Pakistan, Adil Najam reports that almost immediately after the alleged incident, someone began circulating fake photographs of the incident on media email lists.

And now there is the fiasco about the shoe hurling. It is still not clear what really happened. But the fuss created around it is huge. As is the embarrassment: not just for Mr. Zardari, but for Pakistan itself. If ever there was need for proof that we are all purveyors of tamashbeen politics, this is it. Within hours of the news a clearly fake ‘picture’ was being touted by a supposed ‘journalist’ on a media email list. Indeed, the supposed photo of Mr. Zardari being hit by a shoe was so clearly and nauseatingly a fake that one had to wonder about the deprivation of the mind which would even offer it in this age of the magic of Photoshop.

Adil goes on to offer a scathing criticism of Pakistan’s media which has been all too quick to report rumours and unsubstantiated claims around the alleged shoe throwing without doing the slightest bit of actual research.

But at some point one also starts getting tired of the relentless badgering by some in the mainstream media. Government actions, such as the reported closure of GEO and ARY in certain areas, are to be condemned and condemned unequivocally. But those in the mainstream media need to realize that even as they create public opinion, the media is itself being judged by public opinion. The line between news and entertainment has long been erased as has been the line between fact and opinion. Now we find ourselves trespassing into the realm of slander.

As one of the institutional that many Pakistanis – including this Pakistani – has been proud of in recent years, this slide is disturbing to watch. Vigilance and transparency for those in power – as for example on the fake degrees issue – is the media’s duty. But ultimately the media will be judged – within Pakistan and abroad – for its sense of balance and fairplay. A sense of media integrity is a precious commodity for any society. A society as precarious as Pakistan’s can ill-afford the embarrassment of that integrity being questioned.

As for shoe-hurling as a means of political commentary, there are still too many things that we do not know about the incident (including the government insisting that it never even happened).

If there are still so many unanswered questions, another question must be asked – Who is behind this, and what are their motives? In fact, certain media companies have been quick to re-frame the story from one of political protest to one of tension between “the media” and the government, with “the media” being the victim.

The News, which has been severely criticised for anti-government political bias, wrote 25 percent of its “Top Stories” accusing the government of targeting Jang Group and Geo (The News is part of this same Jang media empire) – the same as about the floods which have affected millions of citizens.

In effect, Jang Group appears to be using the claim of alleged “shoe throwing” as a means to create the perception of a more general “media vs. government” tension. This has resulted in the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, Syed Sumsam Ali Bukhari, issuing a statement assuring everyone that the government will not impose curbs on the media.

The reaction from certain sections of the media is both disappointing and deeply troubling. Whether or not someone threw a shoe at the president should be easily confirmed or denied. If the media cannot provide actual evidence beyond the claims of political operatives, it should not report the incident as having actually happened. What is more disturbing, though, is that these same news organizations continue to fail to provide answers to obvious questions about Mr Shamim Khan’s claims and the timing of things like an Internet game and doctored photos that appear to be pre-planned before the supposed “spontaneous” incident occurred, and instead have begun attempting to create the perception of government crackdown on media freedoms, despite lack of evidence for such a claim.

Whatever happened – if anything – should be investigated and reported by the news media. But journalists and media organizations should not be involved in creating or advancing political theatre.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Geo TV, Jang, The News | 12 Comments »

Media Double Game Against Bilawal?

Friday, August 6th, 2010

Last night Bilawal Bhutto Zardari released a statement about his immediate future. In short, he says, “I am currently looking into the possibility of studying law” and will not be jumping into politics as widely reported. According to his statement, Bilawal felt compelled to act out, “to counter some inaccurate information that has recently been reported”. While there was certainly much media attention to the alleged speech planned for Saturday, what is more telling is the way Bilawal’s future and his more immediate decision to open a donation center for flood victims has been treated in the news media.

On Thursday, Dawn reported that “Speech by Bilawal fuels talk of political career”.

But now he has finished his history degree at Christ Church, seen as one of the most aristocratic of Oxford’s colleges, speculation is growing about what steps he will now take towards his political destiny.

Bhutto, who is already chairman of the PPP, is expected to speak before several thousand of its supporters at an event in Birmingham, central England, alongside his father who is visiting Britain.

It was not so far fetched for media to report that Bilawal would be at the rally scheduled for Saturday since Waheed Rasab, the PPP’s coordinator in Britain, told reporters as much. But the truth is, this was mostly speculation.

As a result, Dawn reported today about Bilawal’s statment.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Thursday spoke for the first time in many months, only to categorically deny the prevalent impression created by a section of the media that he was to launch his political career over the weekend by attending a public meeting in Birmingham.

One has to wonder, with all the speculation about whether Bilawal will make a speech and enter politics, all the party coordinators and “anonymous sources” who were telling what was going to happen – why did no journalist actually bother to ask Bilawal what he thinks?

More disturbing, though, is that even Bilawal’s statement has not stopped certain media companies from continuing political attacks in their reporting.

The Nation’s report on the statement includes the following conclusion:

The sources said that PPP took decision not to launch political career of Bilawal Bhutto Zaradri due to severe criticism launched by the media and politicians that in tough circumstance, President Zardari has left for UK to launch political career of his son.

Nowhere in the article does it reveal who these “sources” are, or what their evidence is for this claim, of course. This seems like a pretty transparent attempt for the media to take the credit for something that Bilawal is doing. So, when Bilawal does something they don’t like, it is his fault. When he does something they do like, The Nation claims credit.

The News, however, is even worse. On 1 August, the newspaper wrote that Bilawal “would do well by stepping in to cancel the ceremony and instead setting about to prove himself a worthy leader through more solid action rather than flamboyant gestures.”

Upon the release of Bilawal’s statement, however, The News quickly changed its tune. This morning’s newspaper is actually critical of Bilawal’s move.

Chairman of the PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari dramatically declared last night that he would not address the Birmingham rally on Saturday, August 07, putting cold water on the plans that he would be launched as the party chief and adding a new sense of drama to the countrywide campaign against President Zardari.

In a dramatic climbdown, the 21-year-old son of Benazir said that he would continue with his studies and wanted to stay away from the media. The move comes as a humiliation to the party mandarins who were preparing for weeks for his grand entry into politics.

It is worth noting here that The News may have slipped in admitting that there is a “campaign against President Zardari”. Of course, this should not be a surprise to readers of The News, which has a sordid history recently of publishing unsubstantiated political attacks.

But it is especially important to note that the political bias of The News is clearly evident in their inability to give proper recognition to Bilawal even when he does something that the very newspaper says it hopes for! Rather than praising Bilawal for canceling his appearance and setting up a donation point for flood victims, The News calls the move “a humiliation”. This is a double game against Bilawal – damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

To their credit, Dawn, Daily Times and Express Tribune reported the development without infusing an opinion into their reporting. This shows that there are some journalists content to simply report the facts, and this should be encouraged.

Still, we must look at this episode as a part of the ongoing problem with media speculation, wishful journalism, substituting opinions for facts, and playing political double games. Bilawal aside, we all deserve better.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Daily Times, Dawn, Express Tribune, Jang, The Nation, The News | 14 Comments »

The Nation’s Article About ISI Report Filled With Factual Errors

Friday, June 18th, 2010

The Nation has published an article criticising a recent report published by London School of Economics (LSE) that claims the Taliban is working under direction of ISI. The article, by reporter Sikander Shaheen, is shameful as it is a hysterical conspiracy theory with a complete lack of factual basis. Actually, the only source that The Nation quotes even contradicts its own article.

The article we are examining, “LSE’s ‘research’ sole creation of a Zionist”, claims that the controversial report about ISI is the work of Jewish propaganda by the US government. This is not supported by any facts.

First, the entire premise of The Nation’s article is incorrect and easily proven to be so. What is shocking, in fact, is that The Nation appears to have published accusations about the author of this report without doing basic fact-checking.

The Nation’s reporter Sikander Shaheen accuses the author of the controversial report, Mr Matt Waldman, of being “an American author and a Jew by faith.” In fact, Mr Matt Waldman is neither.

These factual errors were confirmed by simply emailing to the author’s publicly available email address and asking. Below are his responses.

First, I asked, “Would you confirm if your faith is Judaism or not?”

You’re correct – my faith is not Judaism and never has been.

Second, I asked, “I suspect from your biography posted on the Harvard University website as well as your interview with Al Jazeera that you are also an Englishman – not an American – is this correct also?”

Yes that’s correct – I’m English.

Here is the interview with Mr Waldman on Al Jazeera that was the first clue that The Nation’s reporting was factually incorrect. How can anyone see this interview and say that Matt Waldman is ‘an American author and a Jew by faith’? Obviously they have not done even elementary fact-checking to publish this.

If The Nation cannot be bothered to verify such simple facts as the nationality and religion of a public person like Mr Matt Waldman, how can we trust any of their other claims? As it turns out, these basic facts are not the only problems with this article.

Sikander also claims without any evidence that the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University is a well-known ‘US Government propaganda outlet. Even this claim does not stand up using basic research and fact-checking.

In 2006, researchers from the Kennedy School of Government were criticised in the Jerusalem Post for a report that questioned the influence of Israel’s lobbying on US foreign policy.

Prominent Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz is taking on the authors of the study, which blasted the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, AIPAC. Dershowitz, one of Israel’s strongest defenders in the American public and academic arena, was mentioned personally in the study as an “apologist” for Israel, claiming he is one of those responsible for endorsing the notion that Israel pursued peace in the Middle East for many years. Dershowitz slammed the authors – Stephan Walt, from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago – and challenged them to a public debate at the Kennedy School. “You have to counter this article”, Dershowitz told The Jerusalem Post, “These are two serious scholars and you need to expose what they have done as ignorant propaganda”.

In fact, a Kennedy School of Government report from April 2008 praises the Hajj for building religion and tolerance.

We find that participation in the Hajj increases observance of global Islamic practices such as prayer and fasting while decreasing participation in localized practices and beliefs such as the use of amulets and dowry. It increases belief in equality and harmony among ethnic groups and Islamic sects and leads to more favorable attitudes toward women, including greater acceptance of female education and employment. Increased unity within the Islamic world is not accompanied by antipathy toward non-Muslims. Instead, Hajjis show increased belief in peace, and in equality and harmony among adherents of different
religions.

It seems that calling Kennedy School of Government reports ‘propaganda’ is simply an easy accusation for anyone that does not like the contents of the research. Or does Sikander Shaheen and The Nation believe that the US government is making anti-Israel and pro-Hajj propaganda also?

At the end of the article, Sikander quotes another article written by Raven Gale. This does not appear to be an article published in any newspaper, but a blog post from the website www.ZoneAsia-Pk.com. Even here The Nation fails to be honest because it only quotes part of the Raven Gale’s post that it likes. Actually, the conclusion of the post by Raven Gale contradicts The Nation’s article.

The US has spent US $ 300 billion in Afghanistan so far and it is spending US $ 70 billion annually. 1800 foreign troops of which 1100 are Americans have been killed in Afghanistan. Surely the US would not be doing all this if it was not completely sure of the alliance with Pakistan—if the ‘research paper’ seeks to undermine the US-Pakistan relationship then it is subversive for US policy and goals.

If you are to believe Sikander Shaheen and The Nation, you must think the US government is making propaganda to undermine itself.

All of this is hugely disappointing because there are real and pressing questions about Mr Matt Waldman’s report that can and should be asked without resorting to wild accusations and conspiracy theories. For example, The Nation article notices that,

The paper lacks any mention about the number of casualties suffered by Pakistan Army and public in American war against terrorism that caused irreparable setbacks to Pak economy.

This is an important and legitimate point. So why does The Nation only write this one sentence? Why does The Nation not make some actual arguments about Mr Waldman’s points like Al Jazeera does? Instead they are spending almost all of the article making accusations against the author Mr Waldman and hysterical conspiracies of Jews and American propaganda

This shameful act by The Nation is not only a waste of time, it also undermines any legitimate criticism of Mr Waldman’s report by making those who ask legitimate questions – not to mention Pakistan as a whole – look like crazy people.

Pakistan Media Watch calls on The Nation to publish a full apology and correction.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | 3 Comments »

The Nation’s Casual Propaganda

Wednesday, June 9th, 2010

Not all conspiracies or propaganda are obvious. Actually, that is what makes propaganda work. Sometimes, it is a subtle message the reinforces an idea in the subconscious. This is the ultimate form of propaganda, really – producing a message that is not so obvious to the reader so he doesn’t know he’s being influenced. A perfect example of this can be found in an article in The Nation about the Afghanistan war.

The article is very short, two paragraphs only. In fact, it’s hardly an article at all, but really just a quote from the American Defense Minister, Robert Gates. What is interesting is not the article, though, but the image that is posted along with it. Take a look:

The Nation's use of imagery as political propaganda

Do you notice anything curious about the photo? At first glance, you might not. After all, that is the face of Robert Gates, who is quoted in the article. But look closely.  Why they have Photoshopped in an Israeli flag.

What does Israel have to do with this article? Nothing. The point of the image is not related to the contents of the article except that it is meant to reinforce an idea that there is some connection between American military and Israel and Afghanistan. If The Nation has something to report about this, why don’t they report it? Instead, they only write a short article and give you the image to affect your subconscious.

This is a perfect example of political propaganda being pushed in the news media. It more sinister even than a misinformed article because it is intended only to affect the subconscious without his knowing it. You might read about Robert Gates and Afghanistan, but your mind will make a connection between American military and Israel, even though that is nowhere in the article.

The Nation is no stranger to conspiracy theories. Perhaps they should take a look at their own practices, though, if they want to find some really sinister propaganda.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Conspiracy Theories, The Nation | No Comments »

Where Is Pakistan’s Talat Hussain?

Saturday, June 5th, 2010

Talat Hussain’s recent adventure aboard the humanitarian flotilla bound for Gaza provides an important lesson about the potential for journalists to impact current events. It also raises an important question: why don’t our journalists risk as much for Pakistan as they will for some other country?

A Google search for the words ‘Talat Hussain Hero’ returned about 137,000 links. Pretty impressive.

To be fair, what Talat Hussain did – putting his personal safety at risk in order to get a first-hand account of what was sure to be (and certainly proved to be) a controversial story – was a commendable act, and one that serves as a model for other investigative journalists.

Where are Pakistan’s Heroes?

The first question that came to my mind when watching Talat Hussain’s story unfold, though, was where are Pakistan’s heroes? Whatever heroism may be deemed worthy of Talat Hussain, it was a heroism for Palestinians, not Pakistanis. Certainly the Palestinians are under siege and are need of some heroes. But are we not under siege also?

I was glad to see Wajahat S Khan’s recent article, I am an Ahmadi. But how disheartening that the discussion of religious freedom in our own country has all but been replaced with a discussion of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It seems there is something of a convenient double-standard, no? We are incensed with Israel’s brutality against Muslims in Gaza, but when it comes to religious minorities here…well, it’s unfortunate, yes, but nothing to miss tea over.

Palestine has its hero, Talat Hussain. Who will be Pakistan’s hero?

Treatment of Journalists in Pakistan

The next question that came to mind was another bit of hypocrisy that can be traced to certain media types. Talat Hussain is a hero for putting himself in the middle of a deadly fight in a country that is not his and trying to report the facts of the situation for an audience deeply sympathetic to one side.

It’s a good thing he did not try that here, or he surely would have been labeled a spy and had his home address published in The Nation.

While The Nation may be one of the worst offenders in this regard, receiving international attention for recklessly calling foreign journalists ’spies’, they are certainly not the only media outlet to ‘report’ this type of story. Why do certain media types feel comfortable with this hypocrisy?

We Must Not Miss the Important Lessons

If we are truly to consider Talat Hussain’s act a commendable one, we must not miss the important lessons. We must look at what our feelings about Talat Hussain’s courage say about ourselves when we are faced with similar situations in our own nation. Who in the media is willing to risk their lives for Pakistani Ahamadis? Why are our foreign correspondents ‘heroes’ while foreign correspondents here are ’spies’? What does it say about our media that the best and brightest minds in journalism cannot see this critical divide?

What Talat Hussain did took an amazing amount of courage. He very well could have been one of the unfortunate souls who died in that adventure. He put his very life on the line in order to tell the story of a people suffering. The Palestinians in Gaza have a good friend in him.

Who will be Pakistan’s Talat Hussain?

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Aaj TV | No Comments »

Drone Attacks And Roots of Terror

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010

Yesterday’s The Nation included an editorial that claimed to explain the root causes of terrorism and called on the goverment to ‘do more’ to solve the problem. The primary cause of terrorism, according to The Nation, is US foreign policy, including drone attacks. I was especially curious about one item that comes up every time terrorism and the Americans are discussed in the media: drone attacks.

Drone attacks are the targeted killings of suspected militants using what are known as Unmanned Arial Vehichles (UAV) or drones. These aircraft are flown remotely and the weapons aboard them are fired remotely are controlled by Americans working with Pakistani military.

The Nation, as well as many other media voices, are quite opposed to drone attacks due to their habit of killing not just the one person who was targeted, but some innocent people who might be standing next to the target. Now, some will ask how an innocent person finds themself standing next to someone like Hakimullah Mehsud – but, again, that is for someone else to argue about.

The Nation gives a fairly common argument:

…one of the major causes of post-9/11 terrorism in Pakistan has been the US policies in this region – which are increasingly revealing their anti-Muslim character. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, these policies have been and continue to be directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent Muslims – through military actions including the drone attacks.

My curiousity had to do with how bad these drone attacks actually are. So, I did a little bit of research and found this excellent web page that has a map of drone attacks from 2004 to 2010 examines the actual number of casualties.

Our study shows that the 135 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, including 39 in 2010, from 2004 to the present have killed approximately between 944 and 1,398 individuals, of whom around 654 to 1,011 were described as militants in reliable press accounts. Thus, the true non-militant fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 30 percent.

This is an interesting statistic. In the past six years, 70% of those killed by drone attacks were reliably reported as militants by the press. 

I also did some research to find out how many Pakistanis have been killed by militants. The results were a bit surprising. First, I had a hard time finding anything quite as comprehensive as the map of drone attacks and the research on militants killed by drones. There does not seem to be – at least as far as I can find – anyone who wants to create a map that tracks civilians killed by Taliban.

But I did find some interesting research. According to a report by Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies, in one year alone – 2009 – 3,021 innocent Pakistanis were killed and 7,334 were injured by terrorist attacks. According to the South Asia Intelligence Review, there have been over 7,500 civilians and 2,876 Pakistani troops killed by militants.

About 300 deaths by drone attacks have been innocents. In the same time period, over 10,000 innocents have been killed by terrorists.

Headlines from the past week have told that militant attacks killed 90 Ahmadis who were praying, 5-12 hospital workers in Lahore, and 3 or more people when Taliban blew up another girls school and health centre. Was this in response to drone attacks also?

Drone attacks are controversial, and this blog is not here to defend the practise. Not only The Nation, but officials with the UN have called for an end to the programme. But it is important to consider all the facts when discussing an issue as important as root causes of terrorism. The Nation asks a very important question:

“The question, though, for us is why in all instances, Pakistani citizens are vulnerable to being recruited as terrorists?”

This is a vital question, I agree completely. But to find the answer, we will have to look a little bit deeper than only drone attacks and American policies. That these practices are used by terrorist recruiters is no question. But The Nation is telling the same thing as terrorist recruiters – if drone attacks stop and Americans go away, terrorism will stop. I tell you, I wish it was so easy. 

The simple fact is, as bad as drone attacks might be, 300 deaths does not explain the 10,000 and more people who are being killed by terrorists in our nation. Ahmadis are not launching drone attacks. Drones are not being kept in girls schools. 

The Nation is asking the right questions, but it is avoiding the difficult truths.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in The Nation | No Comments »

The Nation Exploits Lahore Massacre

Monday, May 31st, 2010

The Nation exploits the Lahore massacre today by using the dreadful event as an opportunity to perpetuate a political agenda that has nothing to do with the actual facts of the case. Its editorial, “Bloodbath at Lahore,” suggests that the root causes of this massacre lie not within our own society, but outside. Of course, the usual culprits are responsible for everything.

There is certainly a time and a place for criticism of the US and its foreign policy. Whatever one’s particular opinion of American policy towards Pakistan, certainly intelligent people can disagree and have an honest debate about particular facts of that issue. But the murder of over 90 innocent people whose only crime was praying in a way the Taliban did not approve of has nothing to with the Americans, RAW, or economics. It has to do with our own problems that we must face and overcome. To try to make it appear otherwise only distracts from the real issues that created such a monster in our society.

And this is exactly what The Nation does – try to distract from the real issues by blaming someone else.

The incident should rouse the nation to seriously reflect upon the causes of such unfortunate events that keep recurring with frightening frequency. The massive inroads of intelligence agencies of enemy powers out to destabilise the country; the worsening economic conditions that make it possible for them to lure away the poor, hopeless youth to work for them and even resort to suicide for meeting the needs of survival of the remaining family members; the high rate of illiteracy that proves a fertile ground for breeding a mindset of militant fanaticism and readily accepts the logic of throwing away the gift of life; and, above all, a weak, inefficient and corrupt government that lets the above ugly scenario build up as a result of its policies, which promote foreign powers’ agendas to the detriment of national interests – these are some of the glaring factors that lie at the root of such bloody happenings.

I do not doubt the sincerity of the The Nation’s disgust at this murderous event, but like their employee Shireen Mazari, they simply cannot be bothered to face the facts. Are we honestly to believe that severing ties with the Americans would make the TTP less murderous? That it would solve the problem of anti-minority prejudice?  That the terrorists would stop recruiting, stop killing, stop their war on Pakistan? That all of the religious extremists would suddenly throw down their weapons and become democrats?

The Nation obviously blames RAW, USA, Zardari – everyone but the actual extremists. This was no drone attack; it was no conspiracy of the fabled Indian-Isreali nexus. It was the result of violent extremist teachings that are widely available across the country, and the brainwashing of our youth. Why does The Nation not speak out about this? Why does The Nation not condemn the people here in Pakistan who mislead our youth by infecting their minds with a virus of hate and violence?

Newspapers play a vital role in our country. They present information to people who are not present at the scene of a major event so that all citizens can better understand what happens in their country and make informed judgments about how to proceed. By exploiting the Lahore massacre to promote their specific political ideology at the expense of actually informing the citizens of the facts, The Nation has failed in its job.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in The Nation | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries