Youth Presentations
Pavithra Narayanan
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio
In search of a good medium
There is a small body of exact knowledge,
which it requires no outstanding ability or training to deal
with. The rest is the journalist's own discretion. Once he departs
from the region where it is definitely recorded at the County
Clerk's office that John Smith has gone into bankruptcy, all
fixed standards disappear. The story of why John Smith failed,
his human frailties, the analysis of the economic conditions
on which he was shipwrecked, all of this can be told in a hundred
different ways.
Walter Lippmann
In
India, religion is like an axis that transforms as it turns history.
Bowing to religious schisms a Muslim state of Pakistan was carved
out of India, but since the partition, the two countries have
fought three wars, two of them over the disputed region of Kashmir.
The friction between India and Pakistan is relevant to the rest
of the world not only because of the nuclear capability of both
countries; but also because it affects the stability and economic
potential of regions that include more than a billion people.
There are no signs of the long-running enmity easing and the recent
fighting which began on May 10, has entered a dangerous phase.
What is really alarming is the increasing hostility between Indians
and Pakistanis. The loathing has become a way of life for many.
While claims of non-prejudice are thrown about, the hatred between
the two neighbors is welcomed, almost expected. At this time,
when politicians and religious leaders are exploiting national
sentiments, the media is not lagging behind. It is the role of
the mass media that is of central concern here as it occupies
a key terrain on which the political conflict is played out.
India's free wheeling press has long been seen as the symbol
of the country's vigorous democracy. But today, the Indian press,
free and raucous, is full of examples of communalism at its worst.
A recent article in the Indian Express begins with
the dramatic quote: "Our only fault is that we're Indian," referring
to the mass migration of Kashmiri Hindus and Sikhs who fled the
Valley. It insidiously reinforces the tendency to fuse all that
is Hindu with what is Indian. Highlighting targeting of Kashmiri
Hindus by the militants feeds this attitude while ignoring the
Muslim victims. War hysteria is being created and the media is
more than eager to fight a lasting war. The funerals of Indian
soldiers killed in the Kashmir fighting shown on television fan
the already flaming fires of hatred against Pakistan. What is
important is that in this kind of coverage it is not just the
images per se but their social implications and possible consequences.
The Internet is agog with letters and articles of individuals
and groups in support of a war.
In the present climate of patriotic jingoism, propaganda has
taken the place of news. Official spokesmen have become sources
of broadcast news. Quoting officials, India Today
reported the massacre on 21 January, of men, women and children
peacefully protesting, as "clashes in which security
men killed violent pro-Pakistani demonstrators." As Mowlana points
out, the aim of propaganda is not to address the individual's
intelligence but to make the individual cling irrationally to
a process of action (9). The image of the Kashmiri has now become
that of a secessionist-cum-terrorist-cum-fundamentalist traitor,
hiding behind a mask and brandishing a Kalashnikov assault rifle,
as projected in the 30 April issue of India Today.
Mainstream media has failed to appreciate the complexities of
the situation in Kashmir. Kashmir has been reduced to an Indo-Pakistan
problem. Journalists slavishly reproduce the assessment that "the
internal situation in Kashmir is the creation of Pakistan-supported
and assisted terrorists." This mindset ignores that Kashmiris
feel a genuine sense of betrayal in recent years at the sham democracy
of blatantly rigged elections. In addition to being weighed down
by corrupt puppet governments, they have also to shoulder the
additional burden of India's suspicion that Kashmiri Muslims are
traitors. Kewal Verma notes: "Kashmiri Muslims opted to join India
in the belief that this country would remain secular. They acceded
to Gandhi's India, Nehru's India, not to Golwalkar's India. …When
India is… turning communal that trust is betrayed. Only a
secular India can keep Kashmir within it democratically. A communalised
India can keep Kashmir only by force." S. Mulgaonkar, the long-retired
editor of Indian Express has a valid argument that Kashmir is
not simply a law and order problem, it is also a question of winning
back the hearts and minds of a people.
The international media has publicized the sullen and militant
alienation of the people, the breakdown of civil authority and
the repression and violation of Human Rights in the Valley. It
now has more to add to the macabre and negative images - the caste
system, kidney traffic, the slums of Calcutta, bride burning -
it already has of India.
By and large media focuses on violence and we are presented
with a series of decontextualized reports of violence. Most often
media fails to analyze and re-analyze the historical roots of
the conflict. Most Indians and Pakistanis have chosen to forget
that a little over 50 years we were one nation and we fought a
common enemy. It’s not about a flag or a religion; it’s
about a shared history, a shared heritage. And while there may
always be differing flags and religions, there will always be
that shared history which ties us together at the heart
The weeks of bitter fighting on the icy mountains of Kashmir
have almost killed the desire among the mass of ordinary Indians
and Pakistanis to build bridges and it did not help that India
banned Pakistan TV transmissions. A Pakistani newspaper Web site
was jammed and a scheduled cricket series between India and Pakistan
in Canada was called off. Of course, the cricket matches between
India and Pakistan have never been merely games. In fact, they
have raised the tensions between the two countries. Both countries
do not want to lose each other. Pakistan winning is looked upon
as Islamic superiority over Hindu India while defeat of Pakistan
enlightens the heart of every Indian. Even those, who have never
seen or played cricket, become interested in it. In the United
States, the headline in a newspaper was "Enemies battling
on the play field."
The BJP's omnipresent symbol, the traditional lotus blossom,
adorns the walls of every Indian city. No longer an emblem of
peace, it now stands as a rallying point for devout Hindus closing
ranks against non-Hindus. The growing cracks in Indian society
run not only between ethnic and religious groups but also through
them. Any talk on Kashmir only provokes a heated discussion. It
is time for Indians and Pakistanis to find a way to translate
that debating spirit into positive action. Indians, like everyone
else, want strides on the technological front and to progress
against poverty. We envision the glimmer of the silicon chip and
muck-free streets. We convince future generations that progress
is the key, but we have yet to convince ourselves that peace and
cooperation with Pakistan will get us much further. From whichever
angle you look at it, Kashmir has bled India and Pakistan. It
has not only economically debilitated the two countries but also
preempted tourism. Kashmir is a grave internal threat to India
as it compounds centrifugal strains in national politics. It vitiates
the internal politics in both countries as the opposition has
ammunition to criticize the government, while those in power are
baffled at the choice between unsuccessful or dangerous options.
It is imperative that Kashmir be first settled before an Indo-Pakistan
normalization is facilitated.
The countries’ historic disputes over Kashmir cannot be
resolved easily. The seeds for division were sown in their partition.
The Hindu ruler of the predominantly Muslim area of Kashmir acceded
later to India – an action that Pakistan never recognized.
The two countries went to war after which India retained two thirds
in an uneasy truce. Pakistan and India fought a second inconclusive
war over the Himalayan territory in 1965. Kashmir’s own separatist
movement has claimed thousands of lives. India accuses Pakistan
of supporting the separatists militarily, but Islamabad says it
only provides political support. Fueling the enmity, Indian troops
helped East Pakistan break away from West Pakistan during a civil
war in 1971, leading to the creation of the independent nation
of Bangladesh.
There is significant opinion in both countries veering round
the acknowledgment that partition was not the unavoidable lesser
evil as had been made out. When Pakistan looked like becoming
a reality, the Muslim minority left in India was banking on the
balance of hostages - Hindu and Sikh minorities in the new Muslim
state of Pakistan. However, what no one foresaw were the holocaust
killings of millions. Pakistan did not achieve national cohesion
around a shared faith - the East revolted against domination by
West Pakistan, and in the western half the minorities are not
subsumed. More significantly those who migrated from India are
still looked upon as foreigners. In India, the Muslims are defensive
and remain hostage to the majority's suspicion of their loyalty.
This retrospection is not to suggest unscrambling present political
frontiers, but to underline that both countries are enmeshed in
a plurality of religions and interdependence and that they have
to be prepared to effect a catharsis by acknowledging the penalties
of past misjudgments.
Immersed as we are in a media world, we look to the media to
fulfill certain functions - surveillance, correlation, socialization,
and entertainment (Wright). Our relationships with the outside
world are at least partly determined by the perceived utility
of the information we gather from the media. Therefore, media
representations play a powerful role in informing the ways in
which we understand social, cultural, ethnic, and racial differences.
As distributors of imagery and a vehicle for cultural identities
and religious entities, the media has a responsibility to veer
towards a constructive end. In India the media has a responsibility
to restore democracy, to defuse and not add to communalism, to
promote greater confidence in the Muslim minority in India, and
to not precipitate displacements and migrations abroad. It has
to help the masses rediscover that the lesser evil is to work
towards a climate which affords scope for the plurality of religions
and autonomy in Kashmir. A massive effort at political re-education
and re-orientation is called for to get out of this military,
political and intellectual bog, where each of the contending parties
is sinking deeper into an abyss. A new approach, a new perspective,
and a new diplomatic strategy are required.
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bryant, J and D. Zillmann (Eds.). (1986). Perspectives
on media. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Manchanda, Rita. (1990). Facts and propaganda. Far
Eastern Economic Review. Jul. 19, 25-26.
Mowlana, Hamid. (1997). Global information and world communication.
Sage:London.
Thomas, Raju G.C. (Ed.). (1992). Perspectives on Kashmir:
The roots of conflict in South Asia.
Westview Press: Colorado.
Wright, Jay B. (1975). Privacy and the media.
New York : Syracuse University.
