Another strange event that the media sees as of little consequence... or so it seems considering that no one is making as much of a big deal as needs to be made of this (according to me):

Thursday, September 14, 2006 (Bhopal):Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister ShivrajSingh Chauhan has proven himself a true disciple of the RSS by revoking a ban imposed by the previous Congress regime that prevented government employees from being members of the RSS."It's a cultural and a social organisation that takes part in various creative activities and also imparts patriotic feelings amongst the youth. That is why everyone including the government servants can be a part of it," Chauhan said. The order, distributed to all government departments,commissioners, collectors, head of departments and CEOs of district panchayats reads: "The state government makes it clear that the Sub-rule 1 of Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965, is concerned, it is not applicable to the RSS. "Under this clause no government servants can join any political organization or participate in political activity. It was this clause that former Chief Minister Digvijay Singh had invoked on the RSS, citing it as a political entity supporting a specific political party. Any violation of the ban meant termination of services. And now the opposition is accusing the government of encouraging communal politics. “The Madhya Pradesh government is working as per the wishes of the RSS. The only motive behind lifting the ban is a deliberate attempt to destroy the fragile communal harmony in the state," said Manak Agarwaal, Spokesperson, Congress. The Madhya Pradesh BJP is a divided house and the chief minister has far from consolidated his position. But by
revoking the ban, Shivraj Singh Chauhan has ensured for himself a robust mention
in the book of favorites of the Sangh Parivar.

RSS is a political organization, more than being affiliated to a political party it promotes a specific ideology... and ideology that is against everything that the constitution of this country stands for. The RSS believes that we are a 'Hindu' nation and thus people with other believes have to be treated inferior etc... i could go on and on about RSS but maybe if people notice things around them one can see how the "cultural and social" organization has communalized our society to almost a level of no return.
And more than anything else they practice politics of hate that is absolutely of no use other than to the armament industry and the politicians and reconstruction companies... Yes it is true that they have not launched a large-scale carnage other than the fall out of Babri masjid that they take credit for... But it is because of the things they say and tell young people in their Shakhas (literally training camps, but ofcourse we do not recognise them thus even though they distribute trishules- tridents and give training in the name of ‘self defense etc) Gujarat 2002 were made possible.
There is video footage of big shots like Praveen Togadia etc saluting the RSS chief and flag... of course in the exact likeness to 'Hail Hitler'.... But lets remember they are a social and cultural organisation. Which also makes its members pledge "main yeh trishul Dharan karke, apni bharat mata ke raksha karonga... aur pakistan ke chalis tukre karwaonga” and similar things ("I accept this trident to protect my mother land... and will cut Pakistan into 40 pieces", the best I could do with all the agitation about our skewed heads)!!!
But the irony is that the organization does actually do work... they were the first ones to go and set up camps at Tsunami affected areas. They provide a lot of aid during natural disasters. But all on the premise of the needy accepting their ideology and belief. Once a senior journalist and activist told me that much of what happened during 2002 in Gujarat was made possible cause of the work our orange brigade (I like to call them that) did in the state after the earthquake the previous year... I don't know for certain how far that is true but from what I saw of the state a year after the carnage it is quite obvious that it was not a spontaneous mob reaction... Was rather a well thought out plan that succeeded (even today there are people who cannot go back to their villages, cause of threat to their lives, Muslims like auto rikshaw drives vendors etc who are in constant public view and access guise their identities in order not to raise suspicions, a journalist friend with a French beard is not spoken to till he gives his name cause 'he looks like a miyan')!
Lets remember its a cultural and social organization and lets wait till the next Gujarat to act.. Till then of course we can sit around and twiddle our thumbs, as the only harmful things they are doing are kin to telling middle school children that Hitler was great and high school children that one of the major sociological problems in our country is the minorities!!!

:)
PS I am reacting like this becuase this wa sthe only news item published about the great move.

"Merit"

Lucky
You are born rich
To say in your language
``Born with silver spoon in the mouth''
Your agitation sounds creative
Our agony looks violent
You are meritorious
You can break the glass of buses
In a shape
As symmetric as sun's rays
You can deflate the tires
With artistic elan
While indulgent police look on
With their jaws rested on rifle butts
You can tie 'Rakhis'
Even in
The dark chambers
Of a police station
You do not buy bus ticket
Not because
Your pocket is empty
That is practical protest
The beautiful roads
Are all yours
Whether you do a `Rasta Roko'
Or drive vehicles with `save merit' stickers
We are bare-footed
Sweat-stinking road rollers
What if we built the roads?
The merit of plan is yours
The credit of contract is also yours
Those exhilarating sixty days, what fun!
When your cute little girls
And their daredevil mates
Were going on a delectable rampage,
Everybody was delighted
Parents, their parents
Brothers and sisters

Even the servants
And reporting Newspapers?
Oh, absolutely thrilled!
Boys and girls
Hand in hand
In protest
Of buried merit and dashed future
Going off to a picnic
O Yaar,
How heroic!
You are the marathoners
In merit competition
Poor tortoises
Can we run with you?
If
You serve ``Chair'' in Chikkadpalli
Sell ``pallies'' in cinema hall
Polish boots in Kothi Circle
Stop a Maruti or Priya on the Tankbund
To demand agitation fund
Well
Media persons are `merit' creatures
Their camera hearts `click'
Their pens shriek,
``Youthful brilliance''!
We are drab faced duds
Sitting in the stink of dead animals
We make shoes
By applying color with our blood
And polishing them
With the sinking light of our eyes
However,
Isn't the shine different
When polished
By someone in boots?
We clean up your filth
Carry the night soil on our heads
We wear out our bodies
Washing your rooms
To make them sparkle
Like your scented bodies
We sweep, we clean; our hands are brooms
Our sweat is water
Our blood is the phenyl
Our bones are washing powder
But all this
Is menial labor
What merit it has?
What skill?
Tucked-in shirts and miniskirts
Jeans and high heels
If you sweep
The cement road with a smile
It becomes an Akashvani scoop
And spellbinding Doordharshan spectacle
We are
Rickshaw pullers
Porters and cart wheelers
Petty shopkeepers
And low grade clerks
We are
Desolate mothers
Who can give no milk
To the child who bites with hunger
We stand in hospital queues
To sell blood to buy food
Except
For the smell of poverty and hunger
How can it acquire
The patriotic flavor
Of your blood donation?
Whatever you do
Sweep, polish
Carry luggage in railway station
Or in bus stand
Vend fruits on pushcart
Sell chai on footpath
Take out procession
With `Save merit' placards
And convent pronunciations
We know
It is to show us that
Our labor of myriad professions
Is no match to your merit
White coats and black badges
Hanging over chiffon saris and Punjabi dresses
`Save merit' stickers
On breasts carrying `steth's (stethoscopes)
When you walk(ed) in front of daftar
Like a heaven in flutter
For EBCs among you
And those who crossed 12000 among us
The reservation G.O.
Is not only a dream shattered and heaven shaken
But also a rainbow broken
Yours
Is movement for justice
On the earthly heaven
That is why
`Devathas' dared more for the amrit
The moment
You gave a call for `jail bharao'
In the press conference
We were shifted out
From barracks
To rotting dungeons
Great welcome was prepared
Red carpet was spread
(`Red' only in idiom; the color scares even those who spread it.)
We waited with fond hope that
The pious dust of your feet
Would grace not only the country
But its jails, too
How foolish!
The meritorious cream
The future
Of country's glorious dream
How can they come
To the hell of thieves,
Murderers and subversives?
We read and rejoice
That function halls
Where rich marriages are celebrated
Became your jails
Ours may be a lifelong struggle till death
But yours is a happy wedding party of the wealth
If you show displeasure
It is like a marriage tiff
If you burn furniture
It is pyrotechnical stuff
If you observe `bandh'
It is the landlord's daughter's marriage
Lucky
The corpse of your merit
Parades through the main streets
Has its funeral in `chourastas'
Amidst chanting of holy `mantras'
But Merit has no death
So
You creatively conduct symbolic procession
And enact the mourning `prahasan'
In us
To die or to be killed
There is no merit
We die
With hunger, or disease,
Doing hard labor, or committing crime,
In lock up or encounter
(Meritorious will not agree inequality is violence)
We will be thrown
By a roadside;
In a filthy pit;
On a dust heap;
In a dark forest
We will turn ash
Without a trace
We will `miss'
From a hill or a hole
Our births and deaths
Except for census statistics,
What use they have
For the national progress?
We take birth
And perish in death
In and due to
Miserable poverty
You assume the `Avatar'
When Dharma is in danger
And renounce the role
After completing the job
You are the `sutradhar'
You are lucky
You are meritorious.

Varavara Rao (b. 1940) is a member of Viplava Rachayitala Sangham(VIRASAM —Revolutionary Writers' Association). He lives in Hyderabad.

Some thoughts that came up during the whole song and dance about Reservations-

The Constitution of our country describes OBC as Other Backward CLASSES and not Castes, so the whole debate and accusations about "the government should help financially backward people and 'say no to caste based reservation' etc etc" is pointless and only reflects our greed (will explain in detail later on, some patients will help).
I had a tough time through this debate because it was the time when I joined work and had to hear and see too much of it... There were people saying things like "we are not against reservation but it should be based on financial background and not the caste... If there is a poor Brahmin or higher caste he can't get the governments' assistance because of caste based discrimination..." Well shows how much they know about the whole issue.
The other disturbing thought is that if they do know what OBC is then they were actually only against the reservations provided for the SC/ST categories...?!

OR it just goes to show the depth and reach of discrimination in our society.

Class in all aspects is an economical concept therefore it is reservation based on financial background and not just caste background.
Although caste and class are strongly interlinked, especially in India they are still not one and the same thing… atleast in my understanding of the system.

The anti-reservation protests and demonstrations for most people signified a very important landmark, that of “so many people united together for a single cause”. A ‘cause’ that was for many a ‘great and just cause’.

Given that the states’ reaction (violent repression of protests, water canons and tear gas) were unjustified. And the violent attempt at suppressing the ‘voice of dissent’ (as I would like to call it) was not needed and just added fuel to the fire.

The Rang de Basanti (a big contemporary bollywood hit ) analogy drove me up the wall… from both the protestors’ side as well as the authority’s side… I did not see the connection between the movie and the happenings around me, or what the anti- reservation supporters were saying and what the movie seemed to convey. Other than maybe at a very superficial level, and that is scary because it shows how any attempt at expression can be misappropriated and turned on its head.
The lack of connection between the two messages (of the movie and the protestors’) could be because I heard ‘the voice of dissent’ as the voice of GREED. All I could see was these people screaming themselves hoarse in the guise of equality but actually only conveying “we have goodies that we will not share with others”.
For me the movie was about the need to articulate dissent and not sit with hands in your lap waiting for things to change and keep complaining till they do change... It articulated the apathy of my generation but also said that there are greater things than the self, that one needs to look at. A point that according to me was lost in the anti reservation debate.

There is a possibility that this was an unfair conclusion, maybe we are so unconnected and ignorant of our society’s reality (in its totality) that we actually believe fighting reservation is justified.
We seem to believe that there is no inequality other than the one created by the politicians. We also seem to be unable to look beyond are urban modernized cities and lifestyles to see what is happening to a larger section of our country… We of course do not see rapes of Dalit women, lynching of Dalit men, lower castes being shot point blank because they aspire for more than a life at the margins. We don’t take into account the Kalinga Killing- 13 Dalits shot because they refused to give up land that legally belongs to them, the unjust Panchayts in Tamilnadu where there is a provision in the state constitution of reservation for the posts of the head of the panchayat in certain districts to be filled only by lower caste people… but that is not permitted by the higher castes through spreading terror/ social isolation etc etc.

This ‘benefit of the doubt’ syndrome came about in me after having to spend long days at the admission counters of Delhi University as part of my assignments. Here there were numerous people enquiring about every possible reservation policy that they could avail off. People who really did not need these reservations either on financial background or social, they had a decent percentage, affluence and other required criteria for admission into undergraduate programs… But why not take the easy way out, I suppose.

Then the question arose as to “if people want reservation, what is all the hue and cry when reservation is announced?” Still have not find the answer, other than the deep discrimination and unwillingness to share privileges.

Despite all these ‘exceptions to the rule’ there is something fundamentally wrong with the anti-reservation protests… One thing that really baffles me is the group of protestors calling themselves “Youth for EQUALITY”…!!! Whose equality are we talking about?
Equality is not a random abstract concept; it is rooted in the socio- economic reality of the time. So how do we even begin to compare sections requiring reservations and the general category…???

We can afford private schools, tuitions and other resources to give us an upper edge over the others who cannot even afford more than two set of uniforms per year and whose houses do not get enough electricity cause the government has to ensure the air conditioners in our localities run 24*7.

Are we not automatically privileged?

(A poem sent to me by one of my Professors’ in the next post).

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 (Raipur): After fighting insurgency in Punjab and Assam, supercop KPS Gill has now zeroed in on Chhattisgarh to take on the Naxals. The man who became a household name across the country in the early 1990s is now the state's Security Adviser. At his headquarters in Raipur, security is tight. A CRPF team is on alert. But Gill says the only way to end the battle is by outsmarting the Naxals. "We are training the police. We are taking the help of the army and getting better equipment. We have posted young IPS officers to the affected districts. That's what I did in Punjab, soon you will see the results," said KPS Gill, Security Advisor, Chhatisgarh government. Part of the strategy is to consult the adivasis, already involved in an anti-Naxal movement. A local citizens group as the precursor to a civil war describes the Sulwa Judum but Gill is all praise for the adivasis. "Never in the history of India have unarmed people stood up to insurgents, not even in Punjab and even the Naxals say it is the biggest setback to their movement since 1972," Gill added.It is from the heavily fortified state police mess that Gill plots and plans the fight against the Naxals. It is not an easy task. The Chhattisgarh police are one of the most ill equipped forces in India, but the man who won back Punjab from the militants has taken the new challenge head on.

I don't know where to start with this because there is just so much in this small news item. But HOW CAN THEY DO THIS??? Do we not learn from our mistakes??!!!
I suppose there is always a larger design or as people would like to say "security/ safety strategy"... but some times it just amazes me how daft we can get... Especially the media, since we do go around flashing human rights violations on front page… or at least we used to in our whole self claimed avtar of being “the fourth pillar of democracy and upholders of democracy”.
All the Human Rights violations in Punjab are only now being brought to light… about the mass cremations and disappearances, rapes, molestations and harassment cases conducted by the cops, ten years after the militancy and efforts at curbing the militancy.
And a number of testimonies reinforce the belief that cops and army did as much if not more damage than the militants.

Ashok Agarwal is a Human Rights Lawyer based in Delhi and at present perusing the disappearance cases of Punjab, where randomly young men were picked up for an enquiry or questioning and predictably they never came home... I attended a lecture by him last year and one of the story still haunts me and frightens me regarding the brutality and insensitivity of the armed forces...
A young boy studying at Khalsa College Amritsar was picked up by the cops for questioning in broad day light in front of the neighbors and passer bys and did not come home for three days... The father filed an FIR, went looking for him all over the city to all the police stations etc etc but there was no word of him... One day he got to hear that the Police were cremating unidentified bodies at a cremation ground so he rushed there and pulled out the half burnt body of his son screaming "he is not an unidentified body... he is my son..." That is one such case but there are hundreds of others where "unidentified bodies " were cremated by the cops while families keep looking for them.

My father has lived in Punjab for the last 22 years, he has had friends, students and colleagues who have disappeared during the 80-90 period… And people, who do look beyond the jargon people like us in the media keep feeding them, strongly believe that the only reason they were able to undo the violence in the state was because the people stood up and said NO to both the army and the militants…
Or
Maybe the state was able to instill enough fear through violence and suppression that they succeeded… I really don’t have the answer but I do know that what the state does through supposed preventive acts and anti terrorism acts is not justifiable in any way. It is the local people who suffer the most, and the State gets the power to exercise unbridled authority that is harmful to itself in the long run… AFSPA, POTA and Patriot Act (USA) are enough proof of the fact that authorities only take away freedom and democratic rights on the pretext of Security.

And as far as the Sulwa Judams go… that is just another ball game altogether.
Will be writing about it soon, since I had gone to the areas that they are active in relation to a project earlier this year, have some interesting inputs from the villagers and adivasies that Mr. Gill has praised so whole heartedly… And it is not a pretty tale to tell.
And as usual after visiting the "naxal infested" areas I do perceive them a little differently... Theer are all kinds of complexities in the whole naxal movement but they are doing more than just "shooting innocent villagers" as we the media would like you to believe...
A small example- village in west Guntur of Andhra Pradesh is high security and tension cause it is close to teh nalamala forest where the naxals stay.. but villagers have evening markets and melas and see no danger to their lives other than being caught in the cross fire.. where as the cops live in constant fear and surrounded by electric fences and do not step out after dark... I wonder how that fits into the whole state discourse of 'naxals being a threat to the civilians'. A police post in a village called Durgi, even gets local villagers to spend the night at the outpost so that the naxals do not attack them, and it has worked so far...
Will write more later.

I am not so sure that the bodies being discovered in Iraq are the victims of factional strife... that could be and according to my way of thinking should logically be either just a way to increase the disturbances by the governments in order to hinder the unification of Iraqis as it existed before the occupation... Or how and why can't these just be bodies disposed by the Occupying forces...??!!!

The discourse of Shia- Sunni strife is almost beginning to sound like the supposed constant presence of Islamic militancy in India against the 'Hindus'!!! It does really seem like farce/ pretence or excuse for something deeper and greater and of course economical since that is what the world revolves around these days. (Of course I could just be a conspiracy theorist)

OR

Another possibility is that all the militancy and violence being attributed to Islamic Fundamentalist could have some truth in it... ( I am only hazarding far-fetched possibilities to try and understand what on earth is going on...! It troubles me to have to see (on TV), read and hear that all acts of violence around the world are the doings of the Islamic Fundamentalists. I don't believe it’s altogether true, anyway)... as the amount of alienation and discrimination the green sections of societies all over the world are being subjected to...
And since their identity/ belief/ being is always under threat or suspicion they have no other option but to challenge all that through becoming more secluded and closed up about their beliefs or taking up arms with the notion of protecting themselves forgetting Harper Lee's advice (author of to Kill a mocking Bird) "To have a gun is an invitation to get shot"...

Something I did during college, proud of it although there is lots more that could be dome with it. Starting point on media.

Introduction

To understand the issues surrounding journalists in conflict areas we need to define what conflict is. “Conflict is a state of opposition, disagreement or incompatibility between two or more people or groups of people, which is sometimes characterised by physical violence. Military conflict between states may constitute war.” [1]
There are different kinds of conflict that exist world over. The most commonly understood form of conflict is armed military conflict like the Gulf war, Iraq war and Kargil, where the armies of two or more nations come and fight to establish supremacy or territorial rights. But there also exists state and social repression within a nation, like discrimination of Dalits (lower castes), ethnic minorities and resistance against the State like the movements in Northeastern India, based largely on ideological differences. More recently we also have the global phenomenon, where Muslims world over, are considered untrustworthy or potential terrorists.
Ideological conflicts do become violent and the cause of armed conflict. But they are not as visible as ‘wars’ nor are they given too much media space or air time. They are common occurrences especially in countries as diverse as India. These conflicts tend to be more constant and continuous than a war. For example the Kargil war was an event, whereas the naxal movement, in India, is a process. Similarly the agitation against the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in the northeastern states is a product of a demand for independent states and protest against State brutality and like. The growing resistance in Iraq, against the occupying forces, is a process. Dalit repression is an age old song that has found little or no resolution even with the advent of the 21st century. Although these conflicts use violence or are subject to violence they are based on ideologies. The use of ideology does not justify the violence but it does create space for areas, where nothing is black or white, and ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’.
In such situations the role of the media becomes more significant and difficult at the same time.
The media is constantly accused of selling war, disease, famine and death [2]. “While we debate how to improve our health care system, build the information superhighway and protect the spotted owl, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse- War, Disease, Famine and Death- gallop… leaving behind scenes of unspeakable horror which occasionally burst onto our TV screens or momentarily claim our attention.”[3] There are accusations by the public and counter accusations by the media about why the coverage of conflict is lopsided or momentary. Media claim[4] is that they publish stories ‘on demand’ implying that the limited or momentary coverage of large serious issues is in reality reflective of what the public wants. As the attention span of the public reduces, the news bite or the news column reduces. Politicians, Activists, Philosophers and thinkers accuse the media of selling war, disease, famine and death while the media claims that war, disease, famine and death are what sell.
The ‘newsiness’ of a story is an important factor in the publishing and placing of a story. When prominent Manipuri women strip outside the Assam Rifles building, demanding the army to “come rape us”, the protest against AFSPA makes it to the front pages of the Indian national newspapers.[5] Whereas the Act has been in force for almost three decades and the atrocities of the army have been, and still are, as unbearable as on July 15, 2004 when the women marched to Assam Rifles. But that specific event had news worthiness and therefore got the attention.
This has a lot to do with the manner in which most news is deemed saleable only if it is sensationalized. And keeping in mind the financial viability of media agencies, it would be unjust to expect them to produce news that is not in demand. But the media has a responsibility, or has been given one by the public. Although the media cannot act as a parent, pointing out the rights and wrongs all the time, neither can they behave like the neighborhood kid who is a bad influence on the whole block.[6]
The media cannot provide solutions to all problems and neither can it become the last word. As Sadanand Menon said “the main problem with journalists is that they assume their word is the last word”. This is very problematic as news is an ongoing process and reflective of the dynamic society, therefore a continuous process that cannot have a conclusive final word.
Journalists are faced with many other limitations like the protocol or necessity of having to publish the official version. An apt example of this would be the ‘encounters’ in the Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh, India. Stringers for the regional dailies as well as reporters of national newspapers claim that most encounters in the region are either staged or created by the Police, to cover up custodial deaths[7]. But they never write so in their reports. They claim that their newspapers have to maintain certain protocol and the dominant policy is to publish the official version without necessarily questioning it.
As can be seen, the problems faced by media persons in conflict areas are not just of physical dangers, of getting hurt, getting killed or like in the case of Nepalese journalists getting arrested[8]. There are many problems faced by journalists, those who are covering conflict and even those who are not. Alan Rusbridger[9], the editor of The Gaurdian, pointed out news production is one of the faultiest processes, due to the lack of time, tight deadlines, cramped newsrooms, limited sources and resources, the list goes on.
But news is important and needed because it provides information that directly or indirectly affects our lives, from price rise to employment opportunities. The kind of information that comes from conflict areas is instrumental in shaping global and national politics. Therefore it is important to see where and from who this ‘dissemination of information’ takes place.
The globalization of the media is today largely understood as the concentration of political and economic power. In his book Media Monopoly, Ben Bagdikian[10] writes that once upon a time, 50 companies controlled the American media, now it is down to 7. Elizabeth, freelance journalist from Indonesia says “Now I don’t know what news we will produce, considering that armament agencies are financing newspapers and own large stocks in the company”.
And news continues to be generated and distributed.
*
Role of the Media

The media plays a very important role in generating and molding public opinion. It can act as an important instrument of intervention, to keep a check on state atrocities, and gain international support for external aggression. The media is so important because it is a public platform and can bring various issues under public scrutiny and discourse. It is considered the ‘fourth pillar’ of democracy[11] and thus has the self proclaimed responsibility of upholding that democracy.
The coverage of conflict is more vulnerable to bias and considering the sensitivity of such regions is more dangerous if biased.
The process of news generation is quite simple, which begins with a news release from a news agency or the official source. Next a reporter is meant to cross check the information, do some field work and write it or telecast it in a ‘layman friendly’ mode, simplifying technicalities and addressing the importance for the reader or viewer.
The main problem faced in this kind of reporting is that of ‘embedded journalism’. In a war torn region, a reporter has limited support and sources, the most eager and safest patron is the army. The problems with embedded journalism were brought under public scrutiny during the Iraq war, and were severely criticized. Embedded journalists are those placed or embedded in the army, by the State governments to cover the war. These journalists represent one side of the story, that of the victories and trials of the army, rather than the civilians or the opposing forces that the army is fighting.
When United States of America (US), embarked on their ‘war against terror’ in Iraq, to bring peace and democracy to the people of that country, the embedded news was the only news available world over. The only information coming out of the country was that which came from the US sources or the local Arabic news channels and newspapers that did not have as much reach as CNN or the New York Times. Months before the Iraq occupation started the US media started showing interviews and stories of Saddam Husain’s atrocities. The coverage also hinted at his connection to the 9/11 attacks.
This produced the consensus which was necessary to justify the war.

CASE STUDY 1: Dahr Jamail, Iraq.
Weary of the overall failure of the US media to accurately report on the realities of the war in Iraq for the Iraqi people and US soldiers, Dahr Jamail went to Iraq to report on the war himself. He made the ‘bare foot’[12] form of journalism popular and seem like a viable option for many, who feel that the mainstream news reporting is inaccurate or biased. Dahr started his reporting through the net, on a website called ‘Iraq Dispatches’, one of the first mediums in which the other side of the war was represented. The Dispatches were quickly recognized as an important media resource, his reports were published in The Nation, the Sunday Herald, Islam Online, the Guardian and the Independent. He is now writing for the Inter Press Service, The Asia Times and many other outlets.
According to him “Basically, independent journalists are the only trustworthy source in Iraq, among other places. For example-to embed means you literally have to sign a document allowing the military to censor your work...embedding is a program set up by the Pentagon as a means of information control, and it has been extremely successful for them. When embedding fails, they just target independent journalists.” For the record, there have been an estimated 69-100 journalists killed in Iraq thus far, and 13 independent journalists killed by the US military alone[13]. He is very critical of embedded journalists and says “The primary difference is that unlike corporate/mainstream (C/M) journalists, unembedded journalists leave their hotels. C/M journalists rarely, if ever, leave their hotels except to embed with the US military or to go to the ‘green zone’ for press conferences held by the US military. Thus, unembedded journalists report from the field and tend to show the Iraqi side of things, whereas C/M journalists rely primarily, if not entirely, on US military as their source for information.” To elucidate on the difference between the coverage of Iraq by the mainstream media and independent journalists he recounts when he entered Fallujah during the April 04 siege… “C/M journalists reported that on April 9, 2004 there was a ‘cease fire’ in Fallujah, because that is what they were told by the US military. Upon entering the city I found US warplanes dropping huge bombs in civilian neighborhoods, US snipers shooting ambulances and civilians, and sporadic clashes around the city”. In Dahr’s dispatch titled, “Jubilation, grief, and sadness in occupied Baghdad”[14] he wrote, “The stories of peoples homes being stormed and searched for resistance fighters continue to pour in… just this morning I interviewed a woman who had her brother and sister taken to prison after a fruitless raid by Americans who had stormed her home at 10pm one night… The home was devastated, and two family members [were] taken to prison, for no reason.” These actions are in direct violation of Crimes Against Humanity. On December 16, 2003, Dahr reflected, “This is another reason, along with the catastrophic state of daily life for most Iraqis, that unless the US changes its policy here immediately, we are only seeing the beginning of a resistance against the [US] occupation.”[15]A month later, on January 20, 2004, CNN reported: “…new details from the Army’s criminal investigation into reports of abuse of Iraqi detainees… U.S. soldiers reportedly posed for photographs with partially unclothed Iraqi prisoners… the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division has focused on these pictures, which may depict male and female soldiers. … There are ‘credible reports’ that there may be photographs of alleged abuse.” President Bush, doing damage control from the CNN report, made a public apology from the White House Rose Garden to the American people. The following day, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld apologized disavowing the evidence before Congress, hoping to sweep the incident under the Pentagon veil of secrecy.Abu Ghraib became a big international story when CBS’ 60 Minutes broadcasted some of the inhumane images of prisoner abuse in April 2004. All this time, Dahr had been reporting not only the illegal arrests of Iraqi men, but the protests outside of Abu Ghraib by family members of the prisoners. Protesting Iraqi families were refused any information about reasons for arresting their relatives or any indication of their whereabouts. Dahr’s reportage went largely ignored by corporate mainstream media, although his dispatches sent out the truth well before American media recognized the gravity of the situation. “They addressed the matter with watered down fluff pieces claiming it was just a few bad apples in the ranks” says Dahr. He continued to report testimonies of abuse from Abu Ghraib inmates during the spring of 2004 such as: “The Americans brought electricity to my ass before they brought it to my house.” The ‘Iraq Dispatches’ site also has a section called ‘Covering Iraq’, dedicated to news as covered by the mainstream, or the embedded journalists, and news as covered by independent sources like Dahr Jamail. This section makes it possible for the viewer to see the discrepancies in the manner of information dissemination. There are numerous such examples where, the mainstream media publishes or telecasts one version and reporters from the field bring in a different story. Covering war, disease, famine and death are is not an easy task. There are issues like, which sources to trust, whose version to write, how vivid should the war torn scenes be etc. To a great extent the media does not indict war, they show haunting images of dead soldiers, civilians and deserted houses, but do not seem to condemn war itself. The facts and figures of the casualties are mentioned without the condemnation of the act of war and violence[16]. Dahr Jamail strongly believes in representing it exactly the way it is, without toning down the horror or morbidity of the violence. “It is a grueling thing for me to cover Iraq. To smell decaying bodies, to see the blood and organs, the extreme grief, the rampant injustice of the occupation. But this is war and to humanize it is what my job is as a journalist. It is not my job to sanitize these things by making them easier for readers/viewers to accept. The occupation of Iraq is unacceptable, both to Iraqis and to humanity…so if as a journalist I portray the situation as something “nicer” or more “palatable” to readers than it really is, I’m a liar and a government propagandist. War is terrible. It stinks, it is disgusting, it shatters and ends lives, it is unacceptable. This is the reality on the ground and this is what I report. And I think it’s important to report on the grief the people affected are feeling-in a compassionate way so readers/viewers can understand and hopefully relate to this suffering.”
Dahr Jamail is critical and skeptical of mainstream journalists and believes that independent journalists are the only solution to the manner in which media represents conflict. Iraq coverage started tapering off once it became obvious (no Weapons of Mass Destruction were found) that the war was not going the way President George Bush had promised it will go. But Abu Gahrib still stands, and new information about it is brought in over and over again, the American army is still in Iraq, there is a growing resistance to the war and occupying forces both inside and outside Iraq. The stories have lost their importance for most media in the US except to highlight the soldiers’ death count from time to time. But the information is still there and the ‘unheard voices’ of the civilians, done injustice are still screaming, and people like Dahr Jamail are still reporting.


CASE STUDY 2: Elizabeth Inandiak, Indonesia.
Elizabeth Inandiak[17] is a freelance journalist of French origin, living in Indonesia for over 15 years now. She is a multi faceted woman with multi-lingual books under her name on the Javanese culture and traditions. Elizabeth is an independent journalist who believes that being part of the mainstream is very important, as a journalist. There are always different versions to cover and the job of a journalist is “to bring out the various perspectives”. According to her there are important things in the world to write about and these are not necessarily supported by large media agencies, “but if one stays committed and continues to fight the system from within, one does get the opportunity to write about what one wants to”.
She has been a journalist for almost twenty five years now and has covered various issues from the anti apartheid movement in South Africa to the ethnic conflicts in Indonesia. She says that the job of a journalist is to report and not provoke. “They should try to make the situation better” it is not always possible to resolve conflicts, but there is always a possibility of trying to help.
Her main dissatisfaction with present day reporters is the manner in which they “fly in one day, get one contact or source to tell them about the situation and fly out within two days if not the same day to file their stories”. This kind of approach does not do justice to the conflict situation and can more often than not spark of more unrest and violence. It can also create bias and is vulnerable to be incorrect as no one can grasp the in-depth complexities of a conflict zone with one version or a few hours. Trust worthy sources are only built over a period, and that is why for an understanding of the situation and to do justice to reporting one needs to be located in the region over a period of time. Sources are not always reliable or unbiased to do justice to a specific situation, according to Elizabeth “you should put in all the different versions, even if they are contradictory, because that gives amore accurate picture than one person’s perspective”.
The Malaku conflict of 1999 has been an important landmark in the manner of reporting a conflict zone for Elizabeth. From 1999 to 2000, a violent conflict took place between Christian and Muslim communities in North Maluku Province, in eastern Indonesia after the fall of Suharto, the dictator. It was a very violent conflict where many civilians lost there lives, similar to the bursts of ‘communal rioting’ that takes place in India, from time to time. There are many reasons cited for the beginning of these riots, but in retrospect most people agree that they were caused by the army’s attempt to take over. The communal colour was mostly added by outside provocation to destabilise the public.
“But it was almost never covered by the press. Or if it was covered it was always one sided, if it was in the western press then it was the ‘Muslim fanatics killing the poor Christians’, says Elizabeth. She was personally able to speak to priests and important people in the villages who said that the media coverage was biased and that the actual situation was ‘half and half‘, just the technique of warfare was different. “Finally there were as many deaths on both sides, in fact there were more Muslim deaths, if you count“, according to Elizabeth.
During this time she got the opportunity to cover a remote village in the Malaku region that had not been touched by the violence. In this village both Christians and Muslims were cohabiting without cutting each others throats while in the rest of Malaku neighbours were killing neighbours. The village banned outsiders, especially foreign press from coming in and even kept watch so that no outsiders enter the village. Although this might be termed as an extreme step, it did achieve its purpose of maintaining peace in that village. The villagers used their old traditions and rituals, established long before the advent of Christianity or Islam, followed by both the communities to bring them together.
“I wanted to write so much about this because everyone was saying this is inevitable, Muslim and Christians cannot live in peace together. They said ‘war is a fatality’. Its not true, look at this village, it’s very poor and they have no books, etc but they kept peace. This shows that it could have been avoided all over the Malaku. It was not some thing fatalistic”, said Elizabeth.
Without denying the conflict, through this story on a small peaceful village she managed to bring out the indictment of war and violence as well as the alternatives to violence. Her main focus in the story was “to show that if you have the will you can avoid war. And the fact that, we all think remote people are stupid, but you see here that they are very clever”.
Elizabeth happened to be in France during October- November 2005 violence[18]. She was visiting friends and family and at the tail end of her visit when the violence broke out. “I did not want to get involved, I was thinking, I have to leave I cannot write about this.” Her involvement in the 1981 march for peace from South of France to Paris, and the media coverage of the incidents she felt compelled to write about what was happening. “I refused to talk to the young people because you know what the press was doing, they were nothing those young people and suddenly they become heroes on TV on CNN, BBC. So of course they burn more and more cars. When the reporters came the rioters actually said ‘ok, we’ll burn a car for you’. Or some channels gave money to the youngsters to perform rioting acts for the camera. This made the conflict even bigger”, recalls Elizabeth.
According to her there is not much that the agitated youth could have said that would help resolve the situation. That is why she decided to cover the story from a different perspective and tried to trace the roots of the agitation. She spoke to the parents, some of them who had marched with her in 1981. She was aghast at the manner in which the government and intellectuals of France were treating the situation. The common perception was that these were just acts of ‘barbarism’ and had to be addressed as a law and order problem. The Government even re-invoked and abolished law to contain the violence; this is an emergency decree that was first used during the Algerian struggle for freedom and enforces emergency situations. Similar to the AFSPA, where all people need to inside the house before dark, and Police can make arrests without warrants etc. “They did not say so in so many words but even my colleagues, who had participated in the 1968 student revolution, were being racist towards these young people”, said Elizabeth.
This conflict was greatly covered by both national and international media, but they were all implying the same thing “about the children being from suburban areas, where mostly Algerians stay and as most of them are Muslims they are terrorists”. So I tried to bring in different perspective.
She wrote a report for an Indonesian weekly magazine, similar to the Time magazine. “I went back to the very roots that show that the worm of the colonial war is not finished.” In her article she focused on the existence of racism in France based on the enforcement of the abolished decree used by the government. According to her the violence could have been curtailed by any other means, by the police, other laws etc, and they did not need to use this abolished law. Elizabeth does not support the violent acts of the youth and at the same time she questions the manner of containment.
She thinks that although the Government was able to stop these riots, the dissent among the people is growing and will re-emerge. “Its almost as if people don’t want peace, they seem to like war, games for children are all about guns and bombs, images of violence and gore are more in demand than those of peaceful meadows.”
Media cannot provide resolution for all difficult situations, but it has a role to play considering its reach and influence. Elizabeth says “I don’t think I have a mission, but I try to give different perspective and not to make the conflict bigger”.
*

Media’s Influence

The way in which the media plays on glorification of war is an important aspect of conflict reportage, keeping in mind the role of media as an opinion molder. Media's participation in coverage of conflict is always judged through the lens of nationalism[19]. This is evident from a large part of coverage of Iraq by the US media, coverage of the various civil movements in India like the Naxal movement, the various India- Pakistan wars, movement against the AFSPA, by reporters. The voice of dissent is more often than not labeled the voice of a militant.
There is nothing wrong with being nationalistic but how is nationalism itself judged? There has been very little debate within the media about when nationalism is bad or when nationalism is good. “You see that the media can actually play a terrible role when nationalism is hijacked to serve narrow interests and the media persons seem to support it uncritically”, says Anant Krishna.

CASE STUDY 3: The Kargil War, 1999.
The Kargil War was known to the Indian side as Operation Vijay, and Operation Badr to the Pakistani side. It was the first ground conflict between India and Pakistan after both acquired nuclear capability. It lasted 70 days between April and June of 1999. It was fought in what is considered the highest war theater in the world, posing serious logistics problems for both sides.
The cause of the war was the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants into areas on the Indian side of the Line of Control (LoC)[20]. Pakistan blamed the fighting entirely on independent Kashmiri insurgents. But evidence recovered by the Indian Army showed involvement of Pakistani paramilitary forces. Eventually Pakistan withdrew behind the LoC.
The conflict was used to whip up patriotic sentiments for political and commercial interests and even for advertisements.
Indian and Pakistani media were active participants in the conflict. As the war progressed, media coverage became more intense in India compared to Pakistan. Many Indian channels were showing images from the battle zone with their troops in a style reminiscent of CNN's coverage of the Gulf War. The images of Barkha Dutt[21] on NDTV have become the symbol of ‘brave journalism’. Most young journalists aspire to reach her kind of fame; she has become the role model for young journalist[22].
One of the reasons for India's increased coverage was the boom in the electronic media with numerous new privately owned channels coming up, compared to the Pakistani electronic media scenario which was still at a nascent stage.
Indian government banned Pak TV, the national Pakistani channel available in large parts of north and west India. They even ran advertisements in foreign publications like The Times and Washington Post detailing Pakistan's role in supporting extremists in Kashmir. The print media in India and abroad was largely sympathetic to the Indian cause, editorials in newspapers based in the west and other neutral countries accused Pakistan for the war.
Analysts believe that the power of the Indian media, which was both larger in number and assumed to be more credible, might have acted as a force multiplier for the Indian military operation in Kargil, and served as a morale booster. As the fighting intensified, the Pakistani version of events found little backing on the world stage, helping India to gain valuable diplomatic recognition for its position on the issue[23].
The reportage of Kargil, began with the valorization of the soldiers who ‘died protecting our mother land’, the theme of most articles[24] during and after the war. These articles mentioned the plight of the soldiers, the hazardous conditions they faced and the great sacrifice they made. But no where did it seem to hint at the futility of war itself. They may not have been propagandist in nature consciously, but the lack of indictment of the violence is rather disturbing. In India Today, one article[25] even includes a story about some Budhist family who did not want their son to join the army, but the article ends with how happy the parents are after their son was sacrificed, because that brought honour. [26]One wonders how long will it be before a mother camps outside 7 race course road[27], demanding her son be brought back, because we want ‘no war only peace’.
The other theme[28] was the political party accusations and counter accusations about whose fault the soldier death count was. Here the Congress used the same patriotic theme, of the ‘jawans becoming martyrs, to save our mother land’ because the ruling party, Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) was careless in its defense strategies. The inadequate facilities and equipment were being discussed rather than the futility of the high expenditure.
A smaller section of the press also critiqued the war, but only because of the corruption of the officials that was later revealed through various reports, like that of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG). An article[29] by Dilip Dsouza explores how the CAG investigation found extensive corruption during the conflict. He lists out the details of the deals signed by the army for provisions and the delivery of those provisions, and uses the report to substantiate his point. An extract: [30] “Nearly all the supplies' -- Rs 21.5 billion worth, the overview says -- 'were [received] well after cessation of hostilities and therefore in no way supported the operations.' Worse, Rs 17.6221 billion worth was received after January 2000 -- six months after the fighting ended. Besides, the government 'knowingly' paid Rs 442.1 million more for some items, bought Rs 918.6 million worth of 'shelf life expired ammunition' and imported Rs 3.4237 billion more of ammunition even though our own ordnance factories were producing the stuff. The overview ends with this stark observation: 'While critical supplies of clothing, ammunition and arms could not reach the troops during the operation, an amount of [Rs 10.46 billion], almost half of the total, entirely in foreign exchange, was spent fruitlessly, breaching established principles of propriety. ‘Fruitlessly.' Spent in the name of those suffering brave hearts, but spent 'fruitlessly.' And that's just the overview.”
An interesting article[31] by Sultan Hali[32], elaborates on the role of the media in war, from ‘who needs who’ vis-à-vis the media and the military, to media as a source multiplier, he discusses all the possible interlinks between the armed forces and the media. According to him “the revolution in information technology, from the transistor through widespread digitisation, deeply networked communications, as well as, the revolutionary changes in the employment of airpower have profoundly influenced analysts and planners and has completely changed the conduct of war.”
The most striking part of his article is where he compares the media coverage of Kargil by India and Pakistan, exploring Kargil as a ‘watershed for the Indian media’. An extract: “We must draw important lessons from the recent crisis in our own backyard, Kargil. A discussion on the strategic brilliance of the operation, the moral aspects, the efficacy of the move are beyond the scope of article. We must take cognisance of the brilliant use of media by India to salvage some pride from the mauling it received on the snowy peaks of Kargil. Kargil became one of the worst nightmares for India. It not only caught them napping, but also exposed their extreme vulnerabilities and resulted in very high casualties. Having said that, we must credit the Indians for their resilience and for their highly successful media and diplomatic campaign.
The way Indian media responded to the crisis, mobilized its resources and organized Television programmes, newspaper reports, analyses, discussions, features, the famous “rogue army” posters and a wide array of coverage convinced the world that Pakistan was on the wrong foot and the Indians were the aggrieved party. The Chanakyan principles of deceit and lies were fully exploited to dupe their own countrymen. To enhance their lies and sanitize the Indian public from the truth, PTV was banned from Cable networks in India and Pakistani newspapers were blocked on the Internet.
They also made a very intelligent use of the Internet and dedicated an exclusive Website www.vijayinkargil.com to spread their propaganda. Trained PR officers manned chat sites on the web. We on the other hand, could not launch an adequate counter attack on the media front. Even their very obvious lies and claims of Vijay or victory could not be exposed. India did not permit media personnel to visit Kargil, Dras or Batalik sectors. Zee TV and the 32 Indian Channels continued to spew venom against Pakistan but we lacked the wherewithal and the will power to tackle them on this extremely volatile front. Obvious lies like Tiger Hill, the use of Mirage-2000 HUD displays with doctored information were continuously being telecast with serious TV News Channels like BBC and CNN re-transmitting them”
Although we can debate about the authenticity of his claims, we need to look at the larger issue of what the Indian media was able to achieve, both on the national and international grounds, which the Pakistani media failed to do. And when we see that, the media seems to have played as important a role in winning Kargil as the Indian Army, we can see the influence and impact of media and to the extent it can be used.

Conclusion

"The pattern underscored what Napoleon meant when he said that it wasn't necessary to completely suppress the news; it was sufficient to delay the news until it no longer mattered," media critics Martin A. Lee and Normon Solomon wrote, while referring to the manner of media coverage during the Gulf war. But the statement seems to hold good for all governments and all conflict zones. News is not necessarily suppressed; it is just brought out a bit too late.
Is it that media conforms to norms and does not want to questionbecause of larger things at stake? Or is it the need to not see what ishappening, because it is problematic?
There are various takes on the corruption, misrepresentation, bias and harmful effects of the media, from within as well as from outside. There are people who believe that the only option left is to break out of the mainstream and create alternatives.
This is so because the problem in the history of representation has largely been the relationship between war and media. An example could be September 11th and the subsequent "War on Terrorism." It showed the “convergence and temporal simultaneity of the war event, the representation of the event, and the dissemination of this representation”[33]. September 11th, the invasion of Afghanistan, and the second war in Iraq were not isolated events. Thus would have been incomprehensible without the media that represented and disseminated them.
In an era where the economic and political power of the global media is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few multinational corporations, critics like Danny Schechter[34] have cynically labeled the times as “the post-journalism era” where “the global media is unfortunately all too honest – honest about its real objectives—ratings and profits”. There is no room left in the mainstream, he feels, for truth, for analysis, for substance, or for content. For that matter, there is no room left in the mainstream for the real expression of democracy.
Chomsky sees a propagandistic purpose underlying the global concentration of media. He calls it the “manufacture of consent”[35]. In a democracy all people have the right to vote, to express their opinion, and to give their consent to the leaders they elect to carry out decisions made in the best interests of the people, in theory. But the media, according to Chomsky, conspires to manufacture consent, “to make sure that their choices and attitudes will be structured in such a way that they will always do what we tell them, even if we have a formal way to participate.”
Chomsky[36] cites The New York Times and CBS as examples of this type of elite, agenda-setting media. These are both major, profitable corporations who are in turn either owned by, or closely linked to, even more powerful and profitable corporations. Such mainstream media sources are found at the pinnacle of economic power and influence. As Chomsky explains, “what they interact with and relate to are other major power centers – the government, other corporations, or the universities”
These critics support alternative media,[37] which mainly comprises of agencies that do not try to maximize profits, don’t primarily sell audiences to advertisers, are structured to go against the hierarchical social relationships, and are independent of Corporate Companies and other institutions. This kind of media needs to be interested in new ways of organizing social activity.
There are other possibilities of combating media bias for example Danny Schechter says to combat the manufacture of consent “globalization from below” is needed. He is talking about a media and peoples’ movement that evolves from the grassroots to apply pressure on the mainstream to ultimately reform the media landscape. In some ways this has already begun with people like Dahr Jamail and others who have opted out of the mainstream to disseminate information, through other means that corporate companies, the ‘mainstream’.
In Manipur, the violence against civilians is a constant reality and most of the news is so common that it barely finds any place in the national papers or channels. But at the same time information is being collected and distributed within the state, ‘one can see youngsters all over the place with digital cameras (most of them smuggled from the Burmese border) recording the encounters on the streets with the army. These are telecast later in the day over the local cable network channels all over he sate”, according to Pranab Mukherji[38], Reuters. It is an innovative and interesting manner of letting out information when it is being suppressed by the larger media.
But then most alternatives have lesser reach than the mainstream and that is why it is important to stay within the mainstream to be able to combat it or change it. As Elizabeth said, ‘if something is important enough and you really want to write about it, never compromise on that. Keep fighting and you will get the chance to write about it’. The reach and impact of the mainstream make it absolutely essential for the ‘dissent’ to be articulated there. [39]One does not need to directly question whether or not the ‘encounters’ are real or fake, but since the reporter does not see the event taking place, or get the opportunity to investigate he can always put the encounter in quotes or present it as an alleged encounter. This does not break the protocol, nor does it claim some uncertain truth without proof.
The misuse of information can have deadly consequences in armed conflicts, just as information correctly employed can save lives.
*
References
Primary sources:1. Dahr Jamail, journalist covering Iraq, founder of the website Iraq Dispatches.2. Elizabeth Inandiak, freelance journalist of French origin based in Indonesia. 3. Anant Krishna, PhD scholar in Social Geography, University of Minnesota, and a social activist.4. Pranab Mukherji, one time Reuter’s correspondent from the Northeast, theater activist. 5. Jayraj and Jani Basha, journalists from Guntur District Andhra Pradesh.
Secondary sources, books, articles and websites:
1. J.R. Bullington, “No easy Solutions to End Suffering”, The Virginian-Pilot, September 4, 1994.
2. Articles on Iraq Dispatches.
3. Wikepedia on numerous occasions.
4. The complete coverage of Kargil in India Today
5. http://www.fair.org/index.php articles on how the media manipulates data and information. This site is about an media watch organization based in America.
6. http://www.prwatch.org/, similar to the above site.
7. http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jan/25dilip.htm, article by Dilip Dsouza on the military laxity during Kargil.
8. www.vijayinkargil.com, website for the war, to win support and relief.
http://peacejournalism.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=779510. http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/specials/161_fairness/page8.shtml
11. Giovanna Borradori, Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida; www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago.
12. Compassion Fatigue by Susan D. Moller.

1] wikipedia.org
[2] Susan D. Muller, Compassion Fatigue, Published by Routledge in 1999, Great Britain.
[3] J.R. Bullington, “No easy Solutions to End Suffering”, The Virginian-Pilot, September 4, 1994.
[4] Kingshuknag, Resident editor, Times of India, Hyderabad.
[5] July 2004 protests against Manorama Devi’s custodial killing in Manipur.
[6] Susan D. Moller, Compassion Fatigue
[7] Based on interaction with journalists working in guntur, during the college deprivation trip, December 2005.
[8] April 12 2006, 25 journalists staging pro-democracy protests were arrested in Kathmandu, Nepal. These arrests are not new to Nepal; the monarchy has repressed freedom of speech very severely over the last decade.
[9] At a lecture in Asian College of Journalism, early 2006, talking about the need for a reader’s editor.
[10]Author, Journalist and media critic; He was a member of a group that won a Pulitzer Prize for local reporting, has been a Washington Bureau Chief, an Assistant Managing Editor for National News of The Washington Post was ombudsman for that newspaper. National Correspondent for The Columbia Journalism Review, commentator for CBS TV, former Dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California at Berkeley.
[11] Shashi Kumar’s lecture on Media in Perspective at Asian College of Journalism.
[12] Bare foot journalism is a kind of free lance journalism where the journalist is not part of an agency or large media organization, with no media giant backing; an independent journalist who reports news without selling it.
[13] As in February 2006, according to a survey done by the Iraq Dispatches team.
[14] December 15, 2003, Iraq Dispatches.
[15] Iraq Dispatches, Covering Iraq
[16] Dealt with in further detail in the case study of Kargil; chapter 4.
[17] Information and quotes based on a personal interview, during her trip to India March 2006.
[18] The 2005 civil unrest in France of October and November was a series of riots and violent clashes, mainly involving mainly the burning of cars and public buildings. Events spread to deprived housing projects in various parts of France. The violence predominantly involved second generation immigrant youths from underprivileged neighborhoods and led to strong debates about integration and discrimination in France. (wikipedia.org)
[19]From Anant Krishna’s papers, PhD (Social Geographies) scholar in the university of Minnesota, US.
[20] which serves as the de facto border between the two nations
[21] Barkha Dutt is a popular Television journalist with NDTV, India. She rose to fame due to her excellent coverage of the Kargil War in 1999. She is hailed as the "Indian Christiane Amanpour”. (wikipedia.org)
[22] Except those, students of Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), who saw her coverage of Tsunami where all her concern and compassion is focused on her eye liner and cell phone, off camera. While world over she got acclamation for her Tsunami coverage, some candid shots of her, recorded by an ex-student of ACJ, show that she did not even feel the need to talk to the people she was reporting about.
[23] From Anant Krishna’s papers, PhD (Social Geographies) scholar in the university of Minnesota, US.
[24] Example on India Today, STORIES OF THE WAR- Legacies of Kargil: As India's most gallant soldiers are honoured, the legacies they have created transcend their deeds in battle.(August 30, 1999)
[25] ‘Legacies of Kargil’ As India's most gallant soldiers are honoured, the legacies they have created transcend their deeds in battle. By Samar Halarnkar (August 30, 1999)
[26] Parallel drawn from Cindy Sheehan, anti war activist, US, after her son was killed in Iraq.
[27] Prime minister’s residence, in Delhi.
[28] Example on India Today, War of Words-The controversy over the failure to prevent the Kargil intrusions has taken a political tone. (August 9, 1999)
[29] January 25, 2003, Rediff.com, news
[30] An extract from the above stated article.
[31] Available on http://www.pr-society.or.id/artikel4.asp, a website of the PR society of Indonesia.
[32] Pakistani freelance journalist.
[33] Professor Todd Samuel Presner, University of California, Los Angeles; WAR AND MEDIA THEORY.
[34] Former producer at CNN and ABC news; “Prevent Mass Distraction in a World of Potential Mass Destruction”
[35] Noam Chomsky, ‘Manufacturing Consent’.
[36] “Towards a Definition of Mainstream and Alternative Media: Swimming in the Mainstream” article on Chomsky by Christina McKay, media theorist.
[37] ‘Alternative Media- What makes alternative media alternative?’ By Michael Albert
[38] Theatre activist based in Delhi, Master’s from Princton and a political correspondent for Rueters.
[39] Cross reference to chapter 1, about the Guntur encounters and protocol.