The English papers - though more careful - also often throw caution tothe wind while reporting crucial events pertaining to minorities. The languagepapers, are (with honourable exceptions), much worse. They never observeany caution and often display crude prejudice in reporting about minorities.And there is yet another category, mouth organs of communal outfits likeSamna, who deliberately, and even maliciously, project distorted imageof minorities and thrive on this. In the north, central and westernIndia, the Hindi, Marathi and Gujrati papers, which this writer keeps onstudying from minority perspective, are the worst culprit. They often displaycrude prejudices against minorities in their reporting or the stories whichthey publish.
Samna, the Marathi mouth organ of the Shiv Sena, uses highly provocativelanguage against Muslims and Christians, specially against Muslims. Duringthe Bombay riots this paper openly called Muslims pro-Pakistani traitorsand wrote several highly provocative editorials against Muslims. The campaignwas so vicious that the ex-chief secretary of Maharashtra shri J.B.D'Souzafiled a public interest writ petition in the Bombay High Court to punishits editor under Criminal Procedure Act. It should be borne in mindthat the Samna is read by lakhs of Maharashtrian every day and their opinionis formed by it. Even the policemen read it regularly and form their perceptionsabout minorities from what appears in Samna. No wonder if they have veryjaundiced views about them.
And what is sad that the Samna is no exception though other language papersmay not be as crude. One thing which one feels after reading these papersis that they stereotype every minority community treating as completelyhomogeneous. A social anthropologist or even a discerning and consciousperson knows that the minority communities like Muslims, Christians, Sikhsor Buddhists, are not homogeneous at all. All these communities, like others,are quite heterogeneous. There are, among themselves, sectarian, linguisticand cultural differences and their political attitudes also greatly vary.
It is, for example, assumed by even well meaning scholars, that all Muslimssupported Partition in 1947. It is highly questionable assumption. Theprint media also frequently writes along these lines. The fact is thatthe Muslims too were polarised on this question. The partition projectwas supported, by and large, by middle and upper classes of Muslims fromU.P. and Bihar where Muslims were in minority. In these states also, alarge number of middle and upper class Muslims who were popularly knownas 'nationalist Muslims' were vehemently opposed to partition. And, inthese states, the lower caste and lower class Muslims like Ansaris andothers, who saw absolutely no benefit in creation of Pakistan, also opposedthe partition. The Ansaris were well organised and politically consciousand voiced their opposition to partition through public demonstrations. Many prominent Muslim theologians led by Maulana Husain Ahmed Madani werealso opposing partition and substantiated their stand from religious perspective.This is hardly projected in the media. Throughout the eighties when communalconflict was at its height, all Muslims were seen by the media as not onlysupporters of Pakistan but also loyal to it.
The other notorious example is of cricket. When Pakistan won and some Muslimsrejoiced at the victory of Pakistan, the media projected as if all Muslimsdid so. Unfortunately the cricket match which is deified by the media andprojected out of all proportions, became a holy war not only between twocountries but also, according to a section of media, between Hindus andMuslims. And this despite the fact that Indian Muslim like Mohd. Azharuddinwould lead the Indian team.
The minorities are often stereotyped as 'fanatical' and 'fundamentalists'and acts of few individuals would be seen as of entire community. Evenif a religious leader issued any appeal to the Muslims, it will be describedby a loaded word like 'fatwa' and as if fatwa is binding on all Muslims.Hardly any one will bother to find out that no fatwa, even if issued bya prominent theologian, is at all binding on all Muslims. There is no conceptof priesthood in Islam. And to describe a political appeal as 'fatwa' isalso very irresponsible.
The way the Shah Banu movement was projected in the media including thesecular media gave an impression as if only Muslims mistreat their womenand deny them their basic rights. Article after article was carried tothis effect. Suddenly the national press became champion of Muslim women'srights. It is true that some orthodox Muslims and particularly the Muslimleadership took rigid stand. The Muslim leadership was taking rigid standnot out of love for Islamic orthodoxy but, and it is important to note,to grab an opportunity to become 'towering leaders' and to project themselvesas 'champions of Islam'. This aspect was almost missing from media reporting.Also, there were many liberal progressive Muslims who were opposing thefundamenalist Muslims and upholding the Supreme Court judgement. This wasalso not adequately projected in the media. The media mostly indulged inMuslim bashing at the time, particularly, the regional press. There ismuch that is progreesive in Islam about women though it was not practiceddue to male-dominated values. This aspect that Islam treats women betterthan many other religious traditions or legal systems, was never broughtout in any media analysis. The only thing projected in the media was thatIslam meets out worse treatment to women.
The Babri Masjid-Ram Janambhoomi controversy is another example in thisregard. Undoubtedly, some Muslim leaders were trying to exploit the issuefor their own benefits. But there was much more than this in the way themedia was handling this issue. The language press particularly gave animpression that it is a settled fact that Babar had demolished a Ram Templein Ayodhya and now it is time the Hindus vindicated their honour by constructinga Ram temple by removing the mosque. The regional media, particularly theHindi media gave a distinct impression that it is ironical that Hinduscannot construct a Ram temple in their own country. The leading Hindi newspapers from U.P. published highly exaggerated reports of incidents in Ayodhyain 1990 when Mulayam Singh, the then chief Minsiter of U.P. triedto prevent kar sevaks from reaching Ayodhya. Highly emotional stories werepublished with an exeggerated account of the police brutalities. And itwas reported that hundreds of people were shot dead. This was all totallyfalse and even the National Press Commission reprimanded these papers forpublishing false account of what happened at Ayodhya.
The press also does not adequately project the positive aspects of IndianMuslims which can create a different image of the community. For example,Col.Wajihuddin laid down his life fighting in Kargil along with others.And on hearing the news his mother said with pride that my son has laiddown his life for the country and I wish I had more sons to give for thesake of the country. This was not carried even by the Englsih media. Iread this only in an Urdu paper Inquilab. The Asian Age did report theevent but did not project it properly and prominently.
Also, even committed secular papers who are sympathetic to the minoritiesdo not have reporters and commentators who specialize in minority affairsand have intimate knowledge of minority communities. Even these secularcommentators often homogenise these minority communities ignoring theirdiffering religious and political perceptions. When Punjab was faced withKhalistani movement, many papers wrote as if all Sikhs were supportingthe militants and stood for Khalistan. Even those Sikhs who complainedof serious human rights violations in Punjab were suspected of Khalistanisympathies. Even a cursory study of the Punjab problem could have shownthat a large number of Sikhs, particularly Mazhabi and other Sikhs, weretotally opposed to creation of Khalistan. It is only a section of Jat Sikhswho felt their political and economic aspirations were being thwarted,were supportive of the extremist movement. It was very similar to partitionplan. It was supported by upper class Muslims in minority provinces whofelt their aspirations in independent India will be thwarted by the Hindumajority and it was this fear, and not religious fanaticism, which inducedthem to support the partition plan.
Recently there have been attacks on Christian minority by the Sangh Parivar.The main issue was conversion. The Christians were also similarly stereotypedand the media projection, particularly the language media in north andwestern India, wrote as if every Christian in this country was for conversion.I have spoken to several Christians throughout India who are opposed toconversion as the focus of Christians in India. They favour dialogue ratherthan conversion. Today what we refer to as 'inter-faith dialogue' has beenpopularised by the Christian organisations in the contemporary India. ThoughAkbar had started it in medieval period but the tradition was lost andin our own times it was certainly revived by some Christian organisations.Thus it is wrong to describe all Christians as conversion-enthusiast. Somuch so that even an attempt was made by a section of language media toaccuse Mother Teresa of inducing conversions forcibly. Also, thissection of media projects as if all conversions are induced by 'coercion','fraud' and 'inducement'. Whatever communally inclined politicians sayabout minorities is carried by a section print media as if it is an establishedtruth.
When the Christian establishments and churches came under attack in theDangs by the VHP and Bajrang Dal activists the mainstream Gujrati mediaopenly wrote anti-Christian articles and published hostile news items.Not only views but he news was also generally biased. During communal riotsalso many language papers publish highly coloured stories about Muslimfanatics and rumours are published as if these were verified facts. Someriots in Ahmedabad, particularly in 1969 and 1985 spread like wild firebecause some Gujrati papers carried rumours in headlines as if these weretrue stories. Next day these items were contradicted in a small corneron inside page and that too when all the damage was dome.
In every religious community there are all sorts of people - liberal, secularand fanatical and fundamentalists. Neither all can be liberal secular norall can be fundamentalists. Yet when it comes to minority communities andfew vocal elements among them indulge in fanatical acts the entire communityis held responsible. The voice of liberal secular Muslims or Christiansor Sikhs is marginalised as some kind of exception. A vast majority amongthem which is voiceless for number of reasons, is thought to be fundamentalistor fanatical.
There is another aspect which also has to be seriously considered. Thereare very attempts to project positive contributions made or being madeby the minorities in the process of nation building. A large number ofMuslims made supreme sacrifices during the freedom struggle. Who can forgetthe sacrifices made by Pathans under the leadership of Khan Abdul GhaffarKhan and many other nationalist Muslims. This hardly comes through in ourmedia. Even today there are many Muslims in various fields - political,academic, scientific as well as social wherein Muslims are makingimportant contribution. It is hardly ever highlighted. There are quitea few academics from social science stream like Prof.Irfan Habib, Prof.Mushirul Hasan, Prof.Imtiaz Ahmad and several others (it is impossibleto name all of them) who have taken liberal secular stand on many controversialissues and have made seminal contributions in their own respective fields.But this is not adequately projected in media.
The Sikhs and Christians have also made very significant contributionsin the process of nation-building. The Christians have contributed maximumin the field of education. But for their institutions thousands of Indianswould not have acquired the educational attainments they have acquired.But when some politicians started controversy about conversions a sectionof the media also began to write as if all Christians are doing in thiscountry is to convert others to Christianity.
It should be born in mind that all communities in India are making contributionto the process of nation-building. It is certainly not the monopoly ofany single community or caste. Also, the problem of minority should beseen in a dynamic frame-work, not in static frame-work which media oftendoes. The behaviour of the community changes according to the newly emergingcontexts. The attitude of Muslims in north India, for example, hasundergone sea change towards Pakistan. The political developments in Pakistanin recent years have brought about tremendous change in their attitude.Also, today there is much greater enthusiasm among Muslims about moderneducation and they have realised that education is a must for them forbetterment of their lot. If they are behind in the race, it is more becauseof poverty than their resistance to education. The ground realities arechanging fast and these changes are being absorbed by all whether minoritiesor majority. The media should not see the minorities in a static frame-work.
It should also be mentioned here that there are several papers which aresympathetic to the cause of minorities and they defend them courageouslythrough projection of their cause. Many renowned papers like The Hindu,The Times of India, The Statesman, The Telegraph and some other paperscan be cited as an example. Even a small section of language media hasalso played a positive role in this respect. It is these papers which havedone journalism proud in India.
No comments:
Post a Comment