Comparing media

Mir Hasil Bazinjo, Javed Jabbar, Asad Qaiser, Mian Mehmood-ur Rasheed, Rana Afzal, Gen (r) Abdul Qayum, Senator Saud Majeed, Munzza Hassan, Mehtab Rahidi, Senator Nauman Wazir, Shehryar Afridi, Dr Shoaib Saddel, Muhammad Ali Nekokara, Mujeeb-ur Rahman Shami, Arifa Noor, Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, Asia Riaz, Faheem Ahmed Khan, Muhammad Saad, Shara Khan and me – this was the Pakistani delegation taking part in a dialogue between India and Pakistan, focusing on agriculture, tourism, policing and the media.

The dialogue took place in Delhi, Chandigarh and Jaipur. From the Indian side, representatives from the BJP, Congress and the Aam Admi Party, retired police officers, media persons and agriculture experts participated. The dialogue was arranged jointly by Pildat and its counterpart organisation in India. I took part in the sessions on media and the police in Delhi. A short summary of what I said during the sessions is as follows:

On the whole, the media of both countries is playing a negative role, but if I had to compare, the Indian media is far more negative than the media in Pakistan. The capacity, circumstances and limits of an institution or individual are important factors to take into consideration when forming an analysis. In terms of magnitude, the Indian media is huge and is trying to compete with the American media. Compared to that, the Pakistani media is considerably smaller in scale. The Indian electronic media has matured, while in Pakistan it is still in its infancy.

The Indian film industry is competing with Hollywood, while in Pakistan there is almost no ‘industry’ at the moment. If we look at social media, Modi’s Twitter account is one of the most followed accounts in the world, while our PM is never seen on Twitter. If the Indian media writes against the policy of the Indian establishment, it has full freedom to do so. But in Pakistan, after Imran Khan’s sit-in, the media has been pushed back to the 1980s. In India, the judiciary and parliament protect the media; in Pakistan, the media has no such luxury. Hundreds of journalists have been killed in Pakistan and not a single killer has been arrested so far. The judicial commissions formed to investigate some of these cases have only proved to be futile.

Thus, if the Pakistani media at times acts immaturely about India, it does so about internal affairs, which at times proves equally damaging for Pakistan. The Indian media, in contrast, is very mature regarding India’s internal affairs. On every issue, including the harassment of Muslims in India, reports about untouchables, Kashmir and the recent JNU protests, the Indian media reports keep in mind national interest. It is only on the issue of Pakistan that the Indian media loses its balance in reporting.

In Pakistan, we have six or seven big media houses and none of them promote anti-Indian sentiments as policy. Rather, the media house that I belong to – the Jang Group – was punished for its policy towards India and was accused of being an ‘Indian agent’. In the past, the Nawa-e-Waqt Group was known for creating a negative attitude towards India, but the new generation heading the group has neutralised the policy. In India the story is entirely the opposite; not a single media group spares Pakistan. In fact, Indian media groups actively contribute to hostile sentiments against Pakistan.

There are a few famous media anchors in Pakistan that are trying to sell anti-Indian sentiments. But then there are also many famous Pakistani anchors who actively advocate for positive relations with India. These people too are at times labelled Indian agents. If we care to quantify – in Pakistan, twenty percent of the TV anchors, at most, speak against India; but in India there is not a single TV anchor putting in a good word for Pakistan. If we look at the working atmosphere, at least ninety percent of Indian anchors ought to have a positive tone on Pakistan, but unfortunately they are less than five percent. Surprisingly, in Pakistan, where we have every reason to be anti-India, less than twenty percent of anchors can be called anti-India.

If we compare intellectuals and writers, more than 50 percent of those on the Pakistani side openly express balanced views on India (on this point, Hasil Bazinjo added that the number is not 50 but more than 80 or 90 percent). But in India we do not see – apart from two to three authors – those guilty of the sin of saying anything positive about Pakistan. When Bollywood released a positive movie ‘Bajrangi Bhaijaan’, we screened it in our theatres. India seemed to take advantage of that and sent across a movie like ‘Phantom’, based on anti-Pakistan sentiments. Bollywood also produces movies in which all Pakistanis are shown as mere mere worms born in the gutters of Lahore.

If the media of both countries is guilty, the Pakistani media is far less so than that of India. When it came to efforts at reconciliation, it was again Pakistan’s media that took the lead, when it should have been the Indian media, with its ninety percent push. If they do not push according to their weight and size and role in these efforts, the common man will continue to suffer on both sides of the border.

Hatred and extremism will grow proportionately in the region according to the channel ratings that are being targeted. People on both sides of the border are not in favour of war, but it seems that the media may just compel both countries to go to war.

The writer works for Geo TV.

Email: saleem.safi@janggroup.com.pk