No outrage over train, police station burnt in Andhra Pradesh: West Bengal remains BJP, right-wing's target till Assembly elections

This photo on the left shows a train in flames.

That's Ratnachal Express, which was set afire at Tuni railway station in East Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh.

The videos are even more scary. Not just the coaches were burnt, police station and police vehicles were also set afire but there has been 'NO OUTRAGE'.

I am forced to write this because an incident in West Bengal--ruckus at a police station and attempt to set it afire, is blown out of proportions and treated as the single biggest threat for national security, for weeks.

LINKS: Train, police station set afire in AP and VIDEO of police station being set afire

But an incident of much higher magnitude--an entire train burnt is not, and is simply ignored. There is no round the clock reporting, no reporters sent from Delhi, no political delegations visiting AP, unlike what we saw in West Bengal.

The number of policemen injured is also many times more, than in Malda. However, Arnab Goswami is not at all agitated. So is Rahul Kanwal. Hindi TV channels are also silent.

The aim of this post is just to show how a pin that drops in West Bengal would be a national security threat, but if a pole falls elsewhere, it would be ignored. The reason is that BJP wants to win election in 'West Bengal'.

It [the BJP] just knows one way to win election--by communal polarisation, riots and creating religious divide. It has perfected it in the last three decades. So official machinery, its IT team, its online army, everybody is out to blow things out of proportions in states that are going to polls--Assam, West Bengal and later, UP.

Also, states where BJP or its allies rule, won't see negative reporting. So governments in states like Bihar would be the target. There will be no outrage over Manawar [Dhar] in MP but there will be national outrage over 'Malda' and 'Burdwan'.

READ: Manufactured rage, BJP's Project WB: From Burdwan to Malda, selective outrage

Media disinterest, silence on Jhabua blast: Why it was not considered a major news, extremists' links not probed?

It may seem a bit late to comment on the deadly blast in Jhabua district of Madhya Pradesh that resulted in death of 104 persons.

But, it is still pertinent to ask why an explosion that led to such a large number of deaths apart from injuries to hundreds, was not considered a breaking, national news?

The fact as we all know is that the explosion took place at the restaurant of Rajendra Kaswa in Petlawad town in Jhabua (MP) on September 12.

Here are certain points about the incident that comes to one's mind and the questions about role of investigative agencies and media.

Reflections on Petlawad explosion in Jhabua

1. Such was the severity of the explosion that the bodies were blown to pieces and victims' couldn't be identified. The body parts were found strewn into the area. Yet most of the TV channels ignored it, and it was not carried as first lead despite the number of deaths.

2. Jhabua is located in Western part of MP, on the border of Gujarat. Western MP and Malwa region (around Indore) are known for habouring extremists of both the religious communities--Hindu and Muslim.

3. Not just right-wing radicals involved in Samjhauta Express strike, Mecca Masjid Hyderabad blast, Malegaon blast and Ajmer Dargah terror strike, belonged to this region of MP, the region produced radical Muslims too.

4. Strangely, the 'terror' angle was not discussed at all. Our security experts and top journalists on 'national security beat', who rush to 'conclusions' minutes after a minor blast, didn't pay any attention to this incident, and none bothered to visit MP.

5. Such was the neglect that even after 24 hrs, certain top media groups kept running the story [report] as 'deaths due to cylinder blast'. It was assumed initially that it was LPG cylinder blast [despite the enormity of the mishap]. Can cylinder blast leave such destruction and devastation across a vast area?

6. Even though it became clear that this was because of huge quantity of explosives stored that included gelatin rods and detonators, there was no attempt to correct it.

Actually, the so-called national media was mostly not following it up, at all. There was no attempt to even look into the possibility that such a huge cache of explosives was kept for any disruptive purpose? Everyone seemed to already made up their mind, that it was for 'illegal mining'.

7. Jhabua was not TRP though another town in faraway West Bengal where none had died in a blast had got TRP a few months back. The 'all-knowing sleuths' in law-enforcement agencies that tip journalists were also missing in action.

8. Neither NIA or ATS teams seemed to be interested in even looking at the case despite that it was the worst explosion in terms of deaths in central India ever, and also among the worst in India. In a case like Burdwan (WB), top security experts were ready to rush there.

9. In the past, when there was no blast, and no death, still, just recovery of explosives from 'Muslims' led to immediate conclusion that it was 'terror plot' that was unravelled. But here, even after 104 deaths, there was no interest in investigating.

10. Even UAPA was not invoked on the absconder, when the FIR was registered in this case. Was it because the person owning the restaurant doesn't have a Muslim name? If this is true, then that's a very sad situation for this nation, the media and the society.

Role of 'national media' in covering the tragedy at Jhabua

How long will Muslims suffer and face suspicion just because of their religion, while others get away for the same reason. Rajendra Kaswa is the main accused and remains absconding even though ten days have passed after the huge explosion that ruined lives of more than 100 families in Madhya Pradesh.

No wonder, people question media credibility, and ask how media can be so biased, one-sided and show such double standards?

Media has responsibility towards people, as it helps in forming opinions.

The local newspapers, specially, Hindi press in Madhya Pradesh, comparatively focused much more on the incident, as it was a local issue.

But for national media it was not even the lead news for a day.

But the local media too didn't at all consider it as 'terror angle', and for them it was just a 'mishap' that was a result of irregularities--availability of explosives for mining, and storing them, in violation of norms.

When there are clearly different sets of reporting standards in newspapers and TV channels, people do have the right to question its fairness. Will Indian journalists look inward, do introspection and take corrective measures? Any chance!
[Photos: Courtesy Patrika newspaper website]

When media terms a Terrorist attack as 'ambush' : Criterion for terming a violent attack as terrorism, another more severe attack as 'ambush'

When 20 armymen were killed in attack by banned 'militant' groups in Manipur, the TV channels and newspapers termed it as 'ambush'.

Despite the fact that it was the worst attack on army in decades, the word terror wasn't used.

In fact, many reports didn't mention early in their reports, that who was behind the attack.

1. The headlines and sub-headlines were just about 'armymen killed', not about those who committed the act.

2. No one showed photos of wanted NSCN-KCP-KYKL chiefs or security experts talking about their modules or other past crimes by them.

3. For our media, which is quite sensitive about army, this attack was not enough to cause any OUTRAGE.

No live reports, no flash and no special panel discussions. The next morning, newspapers also carried the story just like a routine report, sans any emotion or information about the 'killers'.

4. In follow-up stories in many papers, words like 'rebel' were used, not terrorist or militant. So what exactly is terror? Does the identity of the 'shooter' or' attackers' lead to sudden decision that word like 'Terrorist' would not be used and it would be termed as 'Ambush'. How this happens, who's behind it?

5. After all in incidents, when there is no casualty and a person who may not belong to any banned group and is killed in an encounter by police, he is quickly termed terrorist, just for carrying a gun or firing a bullet. Is it because the person has a different name!

6. Let's be straight, it is about having a Muslim name. So how does it occur? Knowingly or Unknowingly. No norms or internal system to decide. Or it is so deeply engrained in minds, that as soon as the report comes or story develops, the differentiation of words is there.

7. Any attack, anywhere [not just in North East, Chhattisgarh or any other part of the country by any banned outfit, howsoever dreaded or big in magnitude, will never be termed Terror attack unless the suspect is a Muslim.

8. If a Muslim is killed in encounter and police says that he was trying to fire, he is termed 'TERRORIST', but those who belong to banned militant-terror groups, and commit such gruesome killings, aren't termed even extremists or radicals.

9. By use of words like 'ambush', the severity of the incident is diluted and the image continues to be reinforced that Terrorist can only be a CERTAIN PERSON, belonging to a certain group. Isn't it absolutely unfair and unjustified.

10. Religious is a factor. There is a clear bias. Let's face it. A non-Muslim can commit crime of any magnitude but won't be termed as Terrorist. And a Muslim can always be implicated and termed Terrorist even if he hasn't commit any violent act.

If youths who shot a Delhi cop who had raided their home in Batla House locality were termed terrorists by all, then why those who killed 20 armymen NOT called terrorist? Define terrorism or accept your biases and double standards. Accept, that you are not naive, but doing it purposely to defame Muslims. That it's Islamophobia--crime to malign an entire religion.

11. The result is that in a country where Armyman is treated in utmost respect and injury or casualty can lead to media affecting relations with other countries, the terrorist attacks like in Manipur, are simply treated as 'just an unfortunate happening' and is forgotten.

12. On the contrary, individuals can be framed, termed 'Terrorist' without even firing a bullet, and made to rot in jails for the rest of their lives, because if someone is termed Terrorist, everyone parrots the line, he is branded and he is destroyed--from lawmakers to courts, he is seen as one.

So does anyone has answer that why such unfair attitude in media persists.

Aren't Muslims justified in feeling that they are being targeted and wrongly portrayed. Why it continues? Is it because there is no strong voice raised till now by Muslim leaders, politicians, thinkers and community jointly? 

Ten recent terror attacks hushed up in media: Double standards, glaring biases in reporting acts of terrorism

It is unbelievable but true. At least, ten major acts of terrorism occurred recently that were either ignored or hushed up in media. At the end of this post, there is a list of all these incidents.

None of them were carried prominently in newspapers and TV channels. Forget, hours of debates in studios or follow-ups for days in print media, some of these cases were not considered to be worth a 'flash' in Electronic media.

It is not just about news from North East getting neglected. Some of these incidents occurred in big states like Maharashtra, Bihar, Tamil Nadu and Chhattisgarh. In fact, one of the incident was near Chief Minister's bungalow. But did you even see a 'ticker' on your TV screen?

Six persons were killed in blasts near Nuclear plant at Koodankulam. Imagine, what can be bigger in terms of threat to national security? But it failed to interest TV channels. Papers didn't carry it on Page 1. Further, more explosives were found during the search later. 

But there was attempt to even report this news. For a country that has witnessed horrors of an industrial disaster like Bhopal gas tragedy, it was surely very serious. But the few papers that carried news on inside pages, diluted by terming bombs as 'low-intensity' even though six persons had been killed.

Often incidents in which no one has died is termed 'terror attack' but these incidents were not dubbed as 'aatanki hamla'. In the reports in newspapers, the words were carefully chosen. Often words like 'militant' were also missing.

Instead, one could find 'rebel' or 'insurgent'. In sharp contrast, there are incidents, when even 'suspected persons' were arrested for a possible crime, but they were termed Terrorist. Why? Just because in these cases, none of the extremist outfit had any Muslim connection? These are double standards in media that are really worrying.

Unfortunately, other incidents in which a Muslim person is either involved or suspected to be involved, are repeated for day. There is immense speculative reporting, followups and so much coverage--real and imaginary about links of suspects, that it creates scare in the mid of citizens.

No wonder, the image of one community is affected badly. Propaganda does a lot of harm. It injects hate in society.

The majority of the people form their opinion on the basis of what they see.

All terror acts must evoke similar reaction, should be treated with the same contempt and stern action.

There should not be any differentiation in reporting on 'blasts'. But this practice of not calling an incident as 'terror' and not the other even if the magnitude of latter is similar or higher, is unfortunate.

The stereotype of a particular group or section being terrorist is reinforced.
Can our media introspect? Will citizens realise it?

If an incident is repeated for days on TV and a scare is created, [while others hushed up] then it is also wrong. It helps the terrorists as their aim is always to divide society and create panic.

Unfortunately, the politicians-executive-courts-activists haven't taken note of these dubious practices in Indian journalism. What gets reported is seen and is believed. When other destructive acts are diluted, hushed up or ignored, then in public perception is clearly being manipulated--knowing or unknowingly, I don't know.

THE TEN INCIDENTS IN LESS THAN TWO MONTHS IN INDIA

1. Five policemen were killed when the Garo National Liberation Army (GNLA) 'rebels' 'ambushed' a police vehicle in South Garo hills. A group of 25 militants lobbed hand grenades before opening fire at police. Now what was the headline: 'Cops shot dead in Garo Hills'. [November 5] See the LINK

2. Six persons were killed in Assam when 'militants' opened fire on a group of people on the day of Diwali. The incident occurred in Assam's Goalpara. The 'armed insurgents' swooped...and randomly fired with automatic weapons. The names of the victims is Bhola Nath, Amarendra, Jayanta, Puran, Kalpanath and L Rabha. [November 4]

3. Twin blasts occurred near Chief Minister's residence in Imphal, the capital of Manipur. Initial reports said that two persons died and seven others injured. Later, the figure of deaths went up to t hree These were IED blasts. The newspaper reports said that no 'insurgent' outfit has taken responsibility. [October 31]. LINK

4. Five persons injured in blast near a market complex in Manipur [October 30]

5. Seven persons were killed in a blast by suspected Maoists in Aurangabad in Bihar. A private vehicle in which they were travelling was blown up by a landmine. [October 17]

6. Three commandos killed and four others injured in a blats that was followed by indiscriminate firing by suspected left-wing extremists in Gadhchiroli in Maharashtra. [October 17]

7. Two BSF jawans and a civilian driver were killed when Maoists blew up their vehicles in Sukma district of Chhattisgarh

8. In an audacious incident, three GRP jawans were shot dead and two others injured, in attack on a running train in Bihar's Munger district [November 30]

9. SIX killed in blasts near nuclear plant at Koodankulam in Tamil Nadu. LINK

10. Maoists massacred seven police officials in a landmine explosion in Bihar [December 3]

There are many other incidents like Naxalites issuing open threat to kill BJP leadeship in Bihar. Just think, how other such threats or even anonymous emails get attention in media. LINK



[I have written a lot of posts on this issue earlier also on this issue, HERE]

Media black out of protests during Narendra Modi's visit to Karnataka signals bad for Indian media, opposing views must not be muzzled

BJP leader Narendra Modi was recently in Karnataka as part of his ongoing nationwide tours to address rallies in different parts of the country.

No doubt, there was enthusiasm among Modi's fans in Bangalore [now Bengaluru]. He does have a strong support among sections of the society.

Definitely, as a Prime Minister [PM] aspirant, he should get the due coverage.

But surprisingly, TV channels and newspapers turned a blind eye towards the demonstrations against him. These protests were also quite colourful. Some people had dressed in black as a mark of protest and some others had placards in their hands with messages in English [ like Modi, Go Back] and Kannada.

While his rally was reported at length in print and electronic media, the dozen odd groups and organisations ranging from farmers to Dalits, communists to Karnataka's local organisations, which held the demonstrations, were not shown at all.

That's not fair journalism. Ignoring protesters who are against Narendra Modi's politics or BJP, should have been given a few seconds in the TV coverage.

Even just a photo or a single column news in English or vernacular newspapers would have shown that journalists are showing both sides.

But this near total blackout raises serious questions. Its not healthy for our society either. Fortunately, among the 25-30 channels, there are still one or two which show the OTHER SIDE. Else, we don't get the view of those who are NOT IN LINE.

I must say that there were lakhs at the venue to hear Modi speak. But the hundreds or few thousands with an alternative voice should also be heard and seen. There was nothing in the news on the particular day about these protests.

I waited, even the next day, nothing came out in print or on TV. Journalists shouldn't take sides. They should report things and present both the sides of the picture. Already, there are disturbing reports about how owners in certain TV channels have told their employers to stop doing 'critical stories' about Modi.

At a recent rally in another state capital, the attendance was thin. Barely, 10% of the ground was full. Still, TV cameras just focused on the portion that had crowd. It was Narendra Modi rally and hence they didn't apparently want to show the lack of crowd.

Why? Isn't that a news? The next day some journalists did write about it on blogs and papers. But it was strange to see how cameramen didn't focus on the empty ground or talking about just 5,000-7,000 participants in the public meeting.

There is also clear instruction in this regard to Editorial staff in certain major TV channels.

If Indian citizens want to vote for him, they will surely do this. But media mustn't lose its objectivity. If there is a wave, it will be visible.

Journalists don't need to create it or stop reporting the opposing views. That's why media is considered a pillar of democracy. Isn't it?

[These are photographs of the protests against Narendra Modi in Bengaluri, Karnataka on the day of his rally]