|
Magazine
MEDIA MATTERS
Alternative voice
SEVANTI NINAN
|
With restrictions on Pakistan newspapers and TV, the Indian media has become the surrogate platform for the Pakistani opposition.
|
Photo: AFP
Breaking news: Nawaz Sharif’s press conference.
Since March, the momentous events in Pakistan have made the Indian media a surrogate platform for Pakistan’s political opposition and its media. In that sense India has gone from being enemy to sympathetic neighbour, whose press is lending its
shoulder with some alacrity, though the government and the State media here have been circumspect. An unusual situation for a neighbourhood where the media in each country always viewed the other through a nationalistic prism.
The attacks on the judiciary and the press and the clampdown on the media earlier this year, followed by attacks on journalists right up to last week, have changed the situation somewhat. Enemy no. 1 today is not India but the good General whose government tries to tackle bad news by tackling the messenger. Sections of the Pakistani press, and its expatriate intelligentsia in the U.S., now regularly air their views on the pages of Indian newspapers and through live hook-ups on Indian news channels. Not just the press but Pakistan’s opposition as well. The Indian Express not only has a steady stream of op-ed commentary by Pakistani journalists and security analysts, it also has a regular column on its op-ed page on what the Pakistan press is saying.
For the opposition politician in Pakistan, the Indian media is now an extension of the Pakistani media without the restrictions which have been imposed on the latter. On the eve of his arrival in Pakistan last month, Nawaz Sharif was handing out exclusive interviews to anybody who asked on this side of the border. And when he did arrive briefly on Pak soil, the live breaking news on almost all Indian news channels went on for a while. Neither BBC World nor CNN however, saw fit to cover the event live. As for Benazir Bhutto, she may be a little circumspect right now, but has been freely available to the India media until now.
Changed equations
The net result of both developments is that the Pakistanis themselves have been telling Indians periodically over the last seven months just how bad things are in their country. While this may be gratifying to some ears it comes with a complaint. Every now and then the reporter or commentator or politician will also add that it is unfortunate that America and India continue to support Musharraf. As they see it, as long as this continues, Indian sympathy amounts to shedding crocodile tears.
As luck would have it, they could point to at least one newspaper here last fortnight, to prove their point. Wrote the Chandigarh Tribune, “For India, the good news if any from the controversial presidential election in Pakistan is that Pervez Musharraf, in whom New Delhi has invested so much political capital, is likely to be around for another five years.” The paper did qualify that statement by adding that, however, Musharraf was unlikely to remain as powerful as before. And Mehbooba Mufti chose to assert on NDTV India last Sunday that Musharraf has been good for the peace process and for Kashmir and whether he remained in uniform or not this would go forward.
The Indian media response has been to make stern judgements in editorials on Musharraf’s manoeuvres (always described as “desperate”) while assuming an unspoken “you poor things!” attitude to Pakistan’s media, polity and people. TV anchors editorialise freely when they present news coverage on Pakistan, usually continuing the practice of viewing events across the border through the prism of Indian self interest. Thus on the same NDTV India show: “Will it help India to talk to a man out of uniform?” “Will the tiger change its stripes? (With reference to the army.) Members of the audience suggested that democracy in Pakistan, if anything, had produced a hard line on Kashmir. Hamid Mir of Geo TV, hooked up to this show, was provoked to ask, “You guys have a problem dealing with people out of uniform?” He added that people in India should bet on a civilian government.
Former diplomat G. Parthasarathy, writing in India Today, thought that such media conduct would ill serve India’s interest. He advocated India keeping quiet, so that the U.S. and not India would be the subject of people’s wrath in Pakistan. “Our television anchors and scribes would be well advised to stop speculating on who is the ‘best bet’ for India, in Pakistan.”
The exception
Interestingly, the exception to the heightened television coverage has been Doordarshan. Whether in March when there were attacks on Geo TV’s offices, or in September when Nawaz Sharif was returning, the coverage on Doordarshan was hard to find. Is there a brief to play down Musharraf’s troubles?
Until democracy comes back on track in Pakistan, India’s media will continue to be a surrogate platform. To know what to make of events in Pakistan, the best bet is to listen to the Pakistani voices on it, more than the Indian ones.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
|
