Two major negatives

Full Text
Ordeal by Fire in the Killing Fields of Gujarat
Editors Guild of India Fact-Finding Mission Report

Two major negatives  

Much has been said one way or the other about the media’s role in Gujarat. This Report, among others,addresses these issues. However, two glaring negatives stand out. 

Ever since Independence, whenever there has been a national disaster or emergency, natural or manmade,there has always been an appeal for funds – from the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, Governors, chambers ofcommerce and industry, Rotarians, NGOs and, above all, the newspapers. Such an appeal serves two purposes. Ithelps raise sorely needed money for relief and rehabilitation or to meet the emergency in question. More thanthat, it provides opportunity for thousands and millions of other citizens to reach out to the victims orthose in distress in a gesture of fraternal solidarity and sympathy and to mobilise support. Newspapers haveoften vied with one another to lead the field. 

This time there was not a single appeal from any quarter, anywhere in or for Gujarat, some small localgroups excepted. The silence was deafening. On being queried about their strange reticence on this occasion,newspaper editors and others gave the same reply. On further consideration it was felt that few contributionsmight be forthcoming and if this did indeed happen, that would send out a wrong message.  Not all willagree. The relief camps in Gujarat, all basically privately run with no more than rations being supplied bythe government, need funds. The media has covered the distress but has unfortunately found itself unable orunwilling to help reach out. 

We recommend that that the Guild issues an appeal for a Fund for Gujarat through its members.  

Some in high authority have chastised the Indian media for its role in Gujarat, contrasting this with themanner in which the American media covered the events of September 11. Then two situations are not comparableand the reasoning underlying the homily is specious. What was notable about September 11 was the alacrity withwhich the US national and state leadership, led by the President and New York Mayor, used the mediaimmediately and repeatedly to offer words of comfort and reassurance and make known their steadfast resolve todeal resolutely with the crisis. Attacks on some individuals by bigots were immediately condemned andprosecuted. 

In India, the Prime Minister did not consider it fit to broadcast to the nation, though he was advised todo so; nor did any senior Government leader. Neither did the Governor of Gujarat. The Chief Minister didcertainly broadcast one or more peace appeals and met the press for routine briefings. But none of thesefunctionaries reached out to the bloodied, fearful, tortured people of Gujarat to give them solace and asolemn assurance that all criminal elements and their mentors would be put down with a stern and even hand andthe guilty brought to book. 

Two most potent means of rising above the storm, binding India, healing the wounds and rallying the nationto live by the cherished ideals of the Constitution were pointedly ignored. In this, the leadership failed themedia and the media failed the people.  

The Prime Minister did, however, speak at a public meeting in Goa on the occasion of a BJP conclave. It wassaid his remarks were not fully reported and misinterpreted by the media. A clarification followed. The fulltext of his remarks are with us. It is true that Mr Vajpayee did indeed refer to two facets of Islam, thecompassionate and the militant jehadi. But he too spoke of cause (“the Godhra”conspiracy”) andconsequence (“the subsequent tragedy”). The latter was “no doubt condemnable but, he asked, who lit thefire? How did the fire spread?” 

At other points, the Prime Minister spoke of “we” and “they”. He said, “India was secular evenwhen Muslims hadn’t come here and Christians hadn’t set foot on this soil”. “They” came with theirown modes of worship and “they” too were given a place of honour and respect. No one thought of converting“them” with force, because this is not practised in “our religion; and in “our culture” there is nouse for it. (Annexure 25). 

This is not the language of a prime minister and certainly not the language one is accustomed to hearingfrom Mr Vajpayee, who spoke with genuine anguish at the Shah Alam camp in Ahmedabad some days earlier. Thewords were possibly inadvertent, but the occasion and the context were certainly misplaced. 

The BJP President spoke of “the provoked and the provoker”, later that same evening when Mr NarendraModi’s handling of the situation in Gujarat was proudly acclaimed by the ruling Party. He appeared tojustify medieval vendetta, placing it above the Rule of Law. 

Happenstance perhaps, but on April 23, the Pioneer carried an article by Prafull Goradia, a BJP notable,suggesting what he thought would be a neat solution – that Indian Muslims migrate to Pakistan.(Annexure 26).