Buttering up Nitish government: Muslim journalists’ favourite pastime in Bihar

By Saroor Ahmed

Sycophancy has its limit. And when one crosses it s/he loses all the self-respect. But the journalists and opinion-makers, in Bihar, especially Muslims, are caring little about it and are indulging in bootlicking of a unique sort.

Not to speak of Urdu media, which even fear to publish the comment of the opposition leaders, Muslims working in English and Hindi Press are going to any extent to come up with fantastic stories about the so-called performance of the Nitish Kumar government.

Read these opening lines of the story filed by Faizan Ahmad, the Times of India’s special correspondent in Patna: “Sometimes incentives make a world of difference. Even when it comes to education. Take for instance the state government’s cash incentive to Muslim students: money sure has helped mint merit. The scheme has resulted in a record jump in the number of Muslim students securing first division in the Matriculation exams.”

Then in the very second paragraph of the same story published on August 13, 2009 he quoted Shahid Ali Khan, the minister of minority welfare in the Nitish Kumar government: “The increase is over 100 per cent and the credit goes to the state government’s policy of giving cash incentive to each Muslim student passing out with a first division.”

The news story goes on to state that “The Nitish Kumar government in 2007 announced a reward of Rs 10,000 to each Muslim student securing first division at the Matriculation exam. That year a total of 2,627 Muslim students had passed out with first division. In 2008, this number swelled to 5,800 and in 2009 the number shot up to 11,500.”

Wait a moment and read what Khan told the same newspaper in the same news-story: “Students of 2008 batch will be handed over the reward money very soon and applications are being collected from the 2009 first divisioners.”

May one ask Faizan Ahmad and Shahid Ali Khan as to how is it that the Muslim students performed so well and the number of first divisioners got doubled when according to them they have not got the reward money of 2008, not to speak of 2009?

The big question is if the Muslim students did not get a single penny how is it that the number of first divisioners got doubled. Both the minister and the journalist tried to cheat the readers by hiding a very important fact. The number of not only the Muslim first divisioners have increased, but the performance in general has improved because unlike in the past the Bihar State Examination Board has now introduced the CBSE pattern of questions. Earlier the pattern of question was subjective, therefore, the percentage of those passing the examination and securing first division was much less.

It needs to be mentioned that 19.60 per cent of the Muslim students who passed in 2009 secured first division. The general percentage is 19.53 per cent. It also needs to be made clear that when the scheme was announced by the chief minister Nitish Kumar on November 11, 2007 it was none else but the alliance partner the BJP, which publicly issued statement opposing it. Even the finance department reportedly objected to it. And then too the argument was that the percentage of Muslims securing first division is slightly better in Bihar than the general, therefore, why should they be given incentive or reward. How was the percentage of Muslim first divisioners better than general in 2007 when the examination was held in March of the same year and the chief minister’s announcement came in November?

But the minister shamelessly went on to state in the Times of India story: “This sense of competition has yielded good results.” He further said that the scheme will motivate Muslim children to join schools.

The minister and journalist tried to take the readers and Muslim community for granted. The fact is that the state government did not even publish the form for applying for the reward money. Not to speak about this so-called reward for the first divisioners the state government has not published a single form for the four central government scholarships for minority students though the Centre created a separate fund for it. Not a single form of Post-Matric, Pre-Matric, Merit-cum-Means and Professional Courses scholarship was published in the last two years. The Centre announced these scholarship after the recommendation of the Sachar Committee report.
It is the organizations like Al-Khair Charitable Trust, Students Islamic Organization and Bihar Rabita Committee which jointly formed the Alpsankhiyak Chatwirti Morcha (Minority Scholarship Front), collected donation from the people and published and distributed thousands of forms to the students. In 2008 the central fund meant for the scholarship was allowed to lapse on March 31, 2008. This prompted the Morcha to stage a sit-in dharna near Patna’s busy Income Tax roundabout on April 23, 2008. It was only after this protest that the forms of the students submitted in the state minority welfare department were sent to the Centre. And even when the cheques came from the Centre to the state government it took months to be distributed among the beneficiary students.

This year too all the forms were published by the Morcha. The state government failed to renew the scholarship of the students of Professional Courses who got money last year. They are supposed to get scholarship till their course is completed. As there was no announcement, no advertisement and no notice from the state government about these scholarship––though the Centre has earmarked separate fund for publishing forms, giving newspaper ads and other related works––according to sources out of total quota for Bihar in Pre-Matric scholarship only one-fifth could apply this year. The last date of submission of forms was August 15 and they would now be sent to the Centre for the release of amount. Sources said that though Bihar’s quota was 1,60,000 the number of applications received is something between 30,000 and 32,000.

This is just a tip of an iceberg about scholarships. The real story is known to both the minister and journalist. But they are true clever by half and are befooling none, but themselves. Shahid Ali Khan, being a minister, is paid for being loyal to his chief minister, Nitish Kumar. But can a journalist like Faizan Ahmad go to such an extent. He is paid to publish the real story not to butter up the powers that be. But in the name of journalism this is happening now in Bihar.

| | Read More »

Muslim Terrorists Manufactured by the Media

By Yoginder Sikand

It is not just the loony vernacular media, as many are given to believe, but even the respectable, mainstream, national English-language press in India that have sedulously cultivated the notion of Islamic terrorism, so much so that the image of Muslims in general being either terrorists or their sympathizers enjoys wide currency today. While it is true that some of the most dastardly terror attacks that India has witnessed in recent years have been the handiwork of some Muslims and this is something that the vast majority of the Indian Muslims themselves deplore it is also undeniable that Muslims have been unfairly blamed for many other attacks or alleged terror plots by the police as well as the media in which they have had no role to play at all. Many Muslims and others, too believe that these false allegations are not innocent errors, but can be said to represent a deliberate and concerted effort to defame and demonise an entire community and the religion with which it is associated.

That, precisely, is what a recently-released report, brought out by a team of secular, leftist non-Muslim activists from Karnataka argues. Titled Media on Terror, and issued by the activist group Column 9 [so named, the report says, because in a standard newspaper of eight columns, issues and perspectives that deserve a column of their own generally go missing), it is a detailed examination of the coverage and projection of terrorism in the state of Karnataka. It is based on an analysis of the reporting of terrorism in the Bangalore editions of leading Kannada and English newspapers over several months in 2008, supplemented with in-depth interviews with journalists, stringers and police officials in Honnali, Davangere, Hubli, Kalghatgi and Bangalore places where, the media had reported, terrorists all of them incidentally Muslims had been apprehended. This was a period when the media was awash with stories of Muslim terrorists allegedly plotting to take over the whole of Karnataka.

A striking finding of the report is that the media in Karnataka, both Kannada and English, dangerously seemed to pronounce judgments on those arrested, much before the due process of law was played out. In fact, the report says, there was no material basis to most of the news reports. The tone of their reporting was sharply jingoistic, and none of the standards expected of professional journalism seemed to be in evidence. Alleged terrorists in many cases innocent Muslim youths arbitrarily picked up by the police were subjected to media trials based simply on unsubstantiated police claims. The report speaks of the blurring of lines between police officials and investigative journalists, who seemed to preempt official investigation. The language and rhetoric used in the reporting reflected, the report says, an obvious and deep-rooted bias against Muslims, and a deliberate effort to create a sense of siege among Hindus.

Scores of sensational stories of Muslims being picked up for being suspected terrorists published in the Karnataka media were based on information allegedly received from what were routinely called highly placed police officials or intelligence bureau officials. Predictably, the report says, the names of these police or investigating officials were not provided, which meant that these stories many of which were patently fabricatedcould not be substantiated by these officials. In numerous instances, the reports were based on news wholly manufactured by reporters and stringers, as evidenced from the denials that emerged from the police officials themselves a day after these reports were published, which many papers chose to ignore. In almost all such cases, the newspapers did not bother to issue an apology despite irrefutable confirmation of their falsity. In most instances where the stories about alleged Muslim terrorists were based on information supplied by the police, journalists simply asked no questions at all as to the process of investigation that took place within the police stations despite it being common knowledge that torture is widely used by the police in such cases to extract information or else to force detainees to admit to crimes that they have had no hand in. Consequently, the arrested Muslims were uncritically presented in the media as hardcore Islamist terrorists, even without the courts having made their judgments. By presenting no version other than that of the police, the report remarks, the investigative aspect of journalism in Karnataka on the matter of alleged Muslim involvement in terrorism has in fact been reduced to what it calls stenographic reporting. The report adds that the few journalists who tried to balance the stories with the other views about reported incidents about Muslim terrorism or foiled terrorist plots rarely found space in the newspapers.

In this regard, it is significant to note that, as the report says, it was mainly at the lower-rungs of the police that journalists depended for their stories (often, for a price it suggests). The journalists interviewed by the team that commissioned the report confirmed that to sustain their relations with police constables they needed to keep them happy and desist from undertaking any steps to antagonize them. This, the report points out, greatly affected the credibility of their reports since they assumed the police version as valid and often failed to critique or to ask any questions about that version. The report adds:

Across the board, journalists specifically mentioned lower rung police officials, including constables and head constables within the concerned police stations, as sources of information. The journalists access to these police officials was determined entirely on the basis of their personal rapport and connections staked out within the police stations. It was fairly obvious that the journalists nurtured these relationships with the officials very carefully since the relationships were the base for a potential exclusive story. Despite the teams repeated questions seeking names of police officials who acted as sources of information, not a single reporter was willing to share these details.

Another alarming finding of the report was the arbitrary branding by both the police and the media of literature and CDs allegedly seized by the police from the Muslims who had been arrested as jihadi materials. These were presented as proof of those arrested as being behind acts of terror or even as would-be terrorists. In many cases, the police officials simply refused to share the material with journalists, at most showing them only photos of the covers of books seized from the arrested Muslims. Amazingly, the report relates, according to the journalists they interviewed, evidence of the books indeed being jihadi materials lay in the fact that most were books written in Urdu. In one location where alleged Muslim terrorists had been arrested and so-called jihadi material recovered from them, journalists interviewed by the team mentioned that the police had produced a panel of Urdu experts at a press briefing to confirm that the seized materials were indeed jihadi. Strikingly, none of the journalists had any clue about the identity of these so-called Urdu experts. A journalist in Honnali spoke about a particular CD that was seized by the police from an arrested Muslim, whom the police and the media had alleged was a terrorist. Far from being incendiary material, as was alleged, the CD, it turned out, was actually about an orphanage. Another journalist provided the team that had prepared the report a photograph taken on a mobile phone, where they could read the titles of two books since they were printed in English one of these was The Spirit of Islam and the other was the Holy Quran, books that, needless to say, are not proscribed and are readily available in the market. In this regard, the report rightly asks, How can possession of the Holy Koran be presented as proof that the people owning them are suspected terrorists? Why werent any questions or objections raised about this new tendency of the Indian police who chose to present the possession of the Holy Koran as proof of possible terrorism?. Thus, the report argues, It was very clear that the journalists had labeled books and other seized materials primarily on the basis of their interactions with the police and, to some extent, on the basis of internalized personal prejudice.

Yet another striking finding of the report is that not a single journalist whom the team met and who had reported on the arrest of alleged Muslim terrorists had received clear instructions or editorial guidelines pertaining to coverage of sensitive issues such as terrorism from their respective editorial chiefs. Many journalists spoke of the pressure to meet the evening deadlines for daily reports, and so, they admitted, there were several occasions when they did not have the time to verify the claims of police officials in cases of real or alleged terrorist attacks or plots, and merely carried police version without cross-checking. Equally distressingly, the report unveiled, reporters located in regions that usually received no print space or attention in the press found themselves catapulted to attention through the sensationalist, and often false, reports that they filed during the time of the arrests and got front page coverage. The reporters also mentioned the pressure exerted on them by the state bureau chiefs to file reports that were exclusive to the organisation. This conduced, the report says, to sensationalism and even to the fabrication of reports. As the report puts it, In the consequent one-upmanship created by the pressure to perform within the confines of a profit-driven industry, the journalists admitted to several compromises on the articles authenticity and their contents. Some journalists interviewed unanimously admitted that the reports they had filed were intentionally sensationalist in nature. According to them, what was of paramount importance was for them to prove that the arrested persons were in fact guilty, that they were in fact members of Islamist terrorist organisations, even much before the courts were given the chance to lay down their verdicts. Sadly, as the report says, these reporters saw their sensationalist reporting, not as a crime, but, rather, as a service that they were rendering to the nation they claimed that in this way they were exposing hardened criminals and potential terrorists who were capable of inflicting much harm to society.

One of the persons interviewed by the team, the reporter for the Kannada Prabha in Hubli, openly admitted that 60% of the reports that he had filed were false and inaccurate. Similarly, the Hubli reporter for the Times of India admitted to using a photograph of an unrelated dargah with his report about an alleged Muslim terrorist camp, and and falsely described the flag near the dargah as a Pakistani one. In fact, it so turned out, the correspondent himself had never been to the location. In an incident in coastal Karnataka, after two Muslim men were paraded naked and brutally assaulted in public by Hindu Yuva Sena activists for transporting cows, a Muslim protest rally was taken out in Udipi. Kannada papers falsely alleged that the demonstrators had unfurled a Pakistani flag and raised pro-Pakistan slogans and, without any evidence, accused them of being linked to Al-Qaeda and the Lashkar-e Tayyeba. Although the police denied these claims, the papers pressed on with their accusations. In another bizarre case, a Muslim man from Bangalore associated with the Muslim IT Association was wrongly accused by the Times of India of being linked to a terrorist organization. Despite these blatant falsehoods, the report notes with distress, in the overwhelming majority of cases the newspapers did not issue any apologies or acknowledge their (possibly deliberate) errors.

The team also met with senior police officials in Bangalore and Davangere. It found that they appeared to be less concerned and engaged with the prevention of biased media reporting and introspection into the role of the police. They argued that it was not the responsibility of the police to challenge inaccurate reports filed by journalists, and that this was also time-consuming. The SP of Davangere, the report says, readily acknowledged the leakage of information to the press through the lower rung officials though they were expressly forbidden from doing so. She admitted its continuance despite the issuing of a whip asking all police officials below the rank of SP to refrain from interactions with journalists, and suggested that journalists should depend on official press communiques released by SPs.

Among the many cases of false framing of Muslims as terrorists in Karnataka that the report highlights, one deserves special mention to indicate the deep-rootedness of anti-Muslim prejudices in the state machinery, particularly since the BJP emerged as such a powerful force in Karnataka. The team met with judicial officer Jinaralkar at the judicial magistrates first class court at Honnali, where two Muslim youths, Abdullah and Nasir, had been arrested on grounds of allegedly being terrorists. Jinaralkar defended his awarding of the two to police custody, although they were initially arrested and presented as bike thieves, a decision the media highlighted and lauded, crediting the judge with foresight in identifying the arrested duo as suspected terrorists. The judge explained his decision by stating that the material seized from them when they were arrested indicated that they might in fact have been terrorists, rather than bike-robbers as was initially claimed: duplicate identity cards, a dagger, a map of south India with red marks against Udupi and Goa, an American dollar, two pieces of paper, with the phrase www.com written on one and Jungle King Behind Back Me on another.

The judge told the team, When I looked at these materials in their entirety, several things were clear to me. I felt that these were definitely not just bike thieves why would bike thieves carry around duplicate identity cards and a map of south India? The fact that they had an American dollar seemed to indicate their international links, while the paper with www.com indicated that they were tech-savvy. Definitely enough grounds in my opinion to grant the police their custody to facilitate their further investigations .The report indicates that journalists in Karnataka (and this probably holds true for the rest of the country) typically see terrorism as a specifically Muslim phenomenon, and do not even consider the possibility of Hindu terrorists, although, as the report points out, in Karnataka today, particularly with the rise of the BJP, scores of incidents of terror against Muslims (as well as Dalits) by Hindu groups have been recorded. Predictably, the media does not describe these as instances of Hindu terrorism. This points to what the report terms as the dangerously marked internalisation of Hindu nationalism by media professionals in Karnataka, and the projection by the media of the Hindutva lobby as the presumed sole representative of the Hindus.

{Media on Terror can be procured from Column 9, No. 51, 29th Cross, 9th Main, Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bangalore 560070. Price: Rs. 25.}

[Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore. He can be contacted on ysikand@yahoo.com]

| | Read More »