07-05-2008, 04:02 PM
<b>The Jaundiced Eye of the Western Media</b>
S. Shankar looks for the reasons behind the negative attitude of the Western media toward India
In the last two decades India has emerged as the worldâs top-most victim of international terrorism but if you evaluate the media coverage and analysis of the academic bodies of America and Europe about the problem, you will hardly find any positive or sympathetic mention of our country.
So much so that now they have started counting Pakistan â where a huge number of terrorist camps and their sympathizers exist â as a victim of terrorism but the name of India remains missing from the list.
In the last seven to eight years, there is hardly any terrorist incident in the world whose links cannot be traced back to Pakistan. This kind of country is declared suffering from terrorism by the Western analysts and reporters, but all the endless terrorist violence and mass killings of Hindus in all corners of India are said to be âallegedly due to terrorist activityâ implying that the real reasons may lie elsewhere.
When Jaipur blasts occurred, CNN covered these in a way that implied that Indian government was merely alleging that these were due to terrorist activity. With this type of attitude, CNN projected to the whole world that, first, it had no idea about the nature of the blasts and, second, that Indian governmentâs stance that the blasts were because of some terrorist activity did not look very convincing to its reporters. CNN throughout pretended to be confused about the nature of the blasts in Jaipur and what may have triggered them.
This kind of behavior is neither an exception nor limited to only one Western news channel. Indians of today remain buried neck-deep in cheap entertainment, Bollywood and circket. If they can spare some time from these fantastic pursuits to pay some attention to how Western media and commentators portray their country, they will find the scenario quite worrisomea and irritating.
Western journalists not only show indifference and unconcern to the terrorist incidents occurring within India. In their analysis of international terrorism, they only worry about organizations such as Al Quaida, Hamas and Taliban. There is almost no discussion about Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkat Ul Mujahadeen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Huji, Simi and so on, despite the fact that these organizations have many times shown to have deep international links.
Even huge terrorist attacks in India are either not registered by the Western media or they get buried in the inside pages of its newspapers. People who keep a track of Western media such as CNN, BBC, Time and Newsweek find that the kind of news chosen to be published about India and how these are presented to the audience reek of rampant hostility and arrogance of their editors.
These Western media outlets regularly publish sympathetic and soft articles full of goodwill for even absolute dictatorships such as China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to find an article or commentary about India that can be termed as positive.
Sometimes even in news stories related to Indiaâs impressive economic development or scientific achievements, there is such an undercurrent of negativity and hostility shown by the Western reporters that the readers and viewers end up sympathizing with Indiaâs supposed plight!
âTimesâ projected the dreaded terrorist Mohammad Sheikh who killed Daniel Pearl and who was involved in 9 / 11 attacks in a very positive manner, labeling him as ânice,â âhelpfulâ and a âsoft-talker.â To adorn his personality with such wonderful traits, the testimony of his brother was considered sufficient and irrefutable proof by the Times journalists.
What a touching and honest faith in the words of a terroristâs brother! These people couldnât comprehend that even if the said terrorist had these sterling personal qualities, they have absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand and it is stupid to drum these up to their readers.
When the Western media portrays Islamic terrorists, one can easily discern a very sincere and respectful attitude in the tone of the reporters. Even if one reviews everything that has been written and shown about Osama Bin Laden in the last ten years by the Western press, the personality that emerges of his is that of a respect-worthy man who has an air of authority around him.
The Nexus and Abrupt U-turns
There is an absolute and perfect match between the editorial policy of the American newspapers and TV channels and the foreign policy of the American State Department, both of whom seem to work as players of a single team with a single objective.
For example, when Pervez Musharraf captured power in Pakistan, âNewsweekâ ran a caustic story that highlighted how Pakistan had been in the grip of military dictators for much of its history and how these leaders have been suppressing the Pakistani people. Surprisingly, its tone abruptly changed in the very next issue. That issue carried a story about the âGentle Generalâ and projected such a golden image of Pakistanâs future with him at the wheel, that one could only stare in amazement at the U-turn. It was a delicious irony that the reporter and editor of both the stories were exactly the same!
Communist China was till 1979 projected as the mortal enemy of the Western countries by their newspapers. But when Richard Nixon attempted to pull China into the American camp against the Soviet Union and gave it the âmost favoured nationâ status, the Western media again made an abrupt U-turn. The American reporters developed a permanent goodwill for China.
Even today, China is treated with utmost respect by American reporters despite that fact that it is still the same country where the same Maoist leadership still rules which executed tens of millions of ordinary citizens, where there is a one-party dictatorship, where free press is banned, where there is a brutal repression going on in Tibet, where nuclear arms are proliferated to rogue states with impunity, where the Christian missionaries are strictly controlled and where the Pope is not allowed to set foot within its borders.
The Reason
The same Western media leaves no stone unturned in showing India in a bad light, ridicule and mock it and criticize it for various real and imagined failings. What is the reason for this attitude of the White journalists toward our country which is a free democracy with rights guaranteed to the citizens? Why do these people behave like this regarding India while they grovel in front of banana republics and absolute dictatorships?
The answer to this is quite sad. When the Delhi-based foreign journalists are questioned about their deliberately negative and hostile coverage about India, they say without hesitation that they write and show exactly the same things that our own intellectuals, journalists and commentators say about India. Then they start recounting the names of some well-known Indian âliberal and secularâ as well as communist propagandists and media men.
This means that it is our own so-called âsecular and liberalâ or communist Indians who provide the Western journalists with hateful propaganda about India that the latter then expertly use to badmouth our country and blacken our faces in front of international audience.
S. Shankar looks for the reasons behind the negative attitude of the Western media toward India
In the last two decades India has emerged as the worldâs top-most victim of international terrorism but if you evaluate the media coverage and analysis of the academic bodies of America and Europe about the problem, you will hardly find any positive or sympathetic mention of our country.
So much so that now they have started counting Pakistan â where a huge number of terrorist camps and their sympathizers exist â as a victim of terrorism but the name of India remains missing from the list.
In the last seven to eight years, there is hardly any terrorist incident in the world whose links cannot be traced back to Pakistan. This kind of country is declared suffering from terrorism by the Western analysts and reporters, but all the endless terrorist violence and mass killings of Hindus in all corners of India are said to be âallegedly due to terrorist activityâ implying that the real reasons may lie elsewhere.
When Jaipur blasts occurred, CNN covered these in a way that implied that Indian government was merely alleging that these were due to terrorist activity. With this type of attitude, CNN projected to the whole world that, first, it had no idea about the nature of the blasts and, second, that Indian governmentâs stance that the blasts were because of some terrorist activity did not look very convincing to its reporters. CNN throughout pretended to be confused about the nature of the blasts in Jaipur and what may have triggered them.
This kind of behavior is neither an exception nor limited to only one Western news channel. Indians of today remain buried neck-deep in cheap entertainment, Bollywood and circket. If they can spare some time from these fantastic pursuits to pay some attention to how Western media and commentators portray their country, they will find the scenario quite worrisomea and irritating.
Western journalists not only show indifference and unconcern to the terrorist incidents occurring within India. In their analysis of international terrorism, they only worry about organizations such as Al Quaida, Hamas and Taliban. There is almost no discussion about Jaish-e-Mohammad, Harkat Ul Mujahadeen, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Huji, Simi and so on, despite the fact that these organizations have many times shown to have deep international links.
Even huge terrorist attacks in India are either not registered by the Western media or they get buried in the inside pages of its newspapers. People who keep a track of Western media such as CNN, BBC, Time and Newsweek find that the kind of news chosen to be published about India and how these are presented to the audience reek of rampant hostility and arrogance of their editors.
These Western media outlets regularly publish sympathetic and soft articles full of goodwill for even absolute dictatorships such as China, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to find an article or commentary about India that can be termed as positive.
Sometimes even in news stories related to Indiaâs impressive economic development or scientific achievements, there is such an undercurrent of negativity and hostility shown by the Western reporters that the readers and viewers end up sympathizing with Indiaâs supposed plight!
âTimesâ projected the dreaded terrorist Mohammad Sheikh who killed Daniel Pearl and who was involved in 9 / 11 attacks in a very positive manner, labeling him as ânice,â âhelpfulâ and a âsoft-talker.â To adorn his personality with such wonderful traits, the testimony of his brother was considered sufficient and irrefutable proof by the Times journalists.
What a touching and honest faith in the words of a terroristâs brother! These people couldnât comprehend that even if the said terrorist had these sterling personal qualities, they have absolutely no relevance to the issue at hand and it is stupid to drum these up to their readers.
When the Western media portrays Islamic terrorists, one can easily discern a very sincere and respectful attitude in the tone of the reporters. Even if one reviews everything that has been written and shown about Osama Bin Laden in the last ten years by the Western press, the personality that emerges of his is that of a respect-worthy man who has an air of authority around him.
The Nexus and Abrupt U-turns
There is an absolute and perfect match between the editorial policy of the American newspapers and TV channels and the foreign policy of the American State Department, both of whom seem to work as players of a single team with a single objective.
For example, when Pervez Musharraf captured power in Pakistan, âNewsweekâ ran a caustic story that highlighted how Pakistan had been in the grip of military dictators for much of its history and how these leaders have been suppressing the Pakistani people. Surprisingly, its tone abruptly changed in the very next issue. That issue carried a story about the âGentle Generalâ and projected such a golden image of Pakistanâs future with him at the wheel, that one could only stare in amazement at the U-turn. It was a delicious irony that the reporter and editor of both the stories were exactly the same!
Communist China was till 1979 projected as the mortal enemy of the Western countries by their newspapers. But when Richard Nixon attempted to pull China into the American camp against the Soviet Union and gave it the âmost favoured nationâ status, the Western media again made an abrupt U-turn. The American reporters developed a permanent goodwill for China.
Even today, China is treated with utmost respect by American reporters despite that fact that it is still the same country where the same Maoist leadership still rules which executed tens of millions of ordinary citizens, where there is a one-party dictatorship, where free press is banned, where there is a brutal repression going on in Tibet, where nuclear arms are proliferated to rogue states with impunity, where the Christian missionaries are strictly controlled and where the Pope is not allowed to set foot within its borders.
The Reason
The same Western media leaves no stone unturned in showing India in a bad light, ridicule and mock it and criticize it for various real and imagined failings. What is the reason for this attitude of the White journalists toward our country which is a free democracy with rights guaranteed to the citizens? Why do these people behave like this regarding India while they grovel in front of banana republics and absolute dictatorships?
The answer to this is quite sad. When the Delhi-based foreign journalists are questioned about their deliberately negative and hostile coverage about India, they say without hesitation that they write and show exactly the same things that our own intellectuals, journalists and commentators say about India. Then they start recounting the names of some well-known Indian âliberal and secularâ as well as communist propagandists and media men.
This means that it is our own so-called âsecular and liberalâ or communist Indians who provide the Western journalists with hateful propaganda about India that the latter then expertly use to badmouth our country and blacken our faces in front of international audience.